USA barely survives Italy: Americans' toughest World Cup game in nearly two decades
The United States women's national basketball team remained unbeaten at the 2026 World Cup in Berlin, but against Italy it was only one missed shot away from overtime and the possible end of one of the most impressive streaks in international basketball. The defending champions won 55:52 in a Group D game played on September 6 at Berlin Arena, earning their second victory of the tournament and securing direct qualification for the quarterfinals. According to official FIBA statistics, the USA shot only 29 percent from the field, made just one of 12 three-pointers and had to protect the result in the final minutes against a national team that had returned to the world stage after 32 years. Despite the defeat, Italy had a possession to tie the game, but Cecilia Zandalasini's three-point attempt as time expired did not fall. The Associated Press described the contest as the Americans' toughest World Cup test in nearly two decades.
With the victory, the USA extended its streak to 32 consecutive World Cup wins, a run dating back to the 2006 semifinal loss to Russia. The Associated Press notes that before Italy, only one national team during that period had finished a game against the Americans with a single-digit deficit: Australia lost by eight points in 2010. This time the margin was only three, and the outcome remained completely open until the final second. For a national team that has won the last four World Cups in a row and is chasing a fifth consecutive title in Berlin, such a finish was a rarely seen reminder that even enormous individual quality does not guarantee a comfortable evening. FIBA also points out that the USA has 11 world championship titles in its history, far more than any other national team.
From a 15-point lead to complete uncertainty
The start of the game did not suggest any drama. The USA won the first quarter 19:8, and according to FIBA's score tracking, the largest American lead was 15 points. Italy, however, did not collapse after the poor opening. It reduced the deficit in the second quarter, so the Americans went into halftime leading 30:24. After the break came a complete change of rhythm: the Associated Press reports that Italy opened the third quarter with an 11:2 run and moved ahead 35:32. The USA regained the lead at 42:39 by the end of the period, but could no longer establish the kind of control expected from the defending champions.
Italy's defense, particularly its 2-3 zone and aggressive rotations, took away the Americans' space for their usual transition rhythm and forced them into a large number of difficult shots. FIBA statistics show that Italy shot 31 percent from the field and the USA 29 percent, so the game remained at a low number of possessions and points almost throughout. The Americans shot 34.1 percent on two-pointers and only 8.3 percent from three. Italy was also very poor from the outside, at 13.3 percent from three, but that type of game suited the underdog because it reduced the number of opportunities in which the deeper American rotation could make a major difference. FIBA described the Italian defense as the key reason why the American offense could not find its rhythm.
In the final quarter, Italy went a step further. According to the Associated Press report, the USA trailed 50:48 with 4:29 remaining, putting the Italian national team directly on the threshold of one of the biggest upsets in the history of the competition. The Americans then responded with a 7:0 run. Breanna Stewart, who had missed her first eight field-goal attempts, made her first basket to give the USA a 51:50 lead. After drawing an important offensive foul on Italy, Jackie Young converted a layup, and Chelsea Gray then made a shot that put the USA ahead 55:50. Matilde Villa cut it to 55:52, after which the Americans failed to seal the victory with another basket, leaving Italy with the final possession.
Cecilia Zandalasini, Italy's leading scorer of the evening with 14 points, took responsibility in the closing moments. Her three-point attempt could have sent the game into overtime, but it missed, and Breanna Stewart grabbed the rebound that ended the game. FIBA says more than 9,000 spectators watched the contest; the official statistics record 9,232 spectators at Berlin Arena. The quarter-by-quarter score best shows how much the balance of power changed after the opening: Italy scored 8, 16, 15 and 13 points, while the USA scored 19, 11, 12 and 13. After an 11-point American advantage following the first period, the remaining 30 minutes belonged to Italy by an overall margin of eight points.
Fewest group-stage points since 1971
The number 55 is particularly striking in the context of American World Cup history. The Associated Press reports that it is the fewest points the USA has scored in a preliminary-round World Cup game since 1971, when it was held to 51 points against France. An updated report by the same agency also states that 55 points is the lowest American scoring output in a World Cup victory since 1967, when the USA defeated Australia 42:38. FIBA described the game against Italy as the lowest American score at a World Cup since the introduction of the three-point line in 1984. All three comparisons lead to the same conclusion: the game in Berlin was highly unusual for a national team that for decades has set the standard through offensive depth and physical dominance.
Jackie Young was the only American player in double figures and finished the game with 10 points, which led FIBA to name her Player of the Game. She was particularly important in the closing minutes, when the outcome was being decided possession by possession. Paige Bueckers had the best efficiency rating on the American team according to FIBA's box score, while the entire team offensively fell far short of the standard it had set only two days earlier against China. Caitlin Clark, who recorded 14 points and 11 assists in the opening-round game against China, did not make a single field goal against Italy and finished with one point. Nevertheless, the American defense and late-game experience were enough to avoid defeat.
The contrast with the first game of the tournament was stark. The USA defeated China 94:61 on September 4 while shooting 45 percent from the field, and Clark was among the standout players in her senior World Cup debut. Against Italy, the American offense scored as many as 39 fewer points. Such a difference in only two days shows how much the Italian approach changed the character of the game and how important adaptation to different styles is in a short tournament format. USA head coach Kara Lawson emphasized after the game that at a major tournament a national team must know how to win in different ways and admitted that her team had not played at its usual level.
Reuters reported Lawson's assessment that this is probably the most difficult World Cup to win because of the increasing depth and quality of opposing national teams. The American coach emphasized that more teams can now bring players off the bench who are capable of changing the course of a game. The contest against Italy provided a concrete example of that broader process. The USA still has the deepest pool of elite basketball players and remains the leading favorite, but the gap between the favorites and the strongest challengers can no longer be taken for granted in every game. That was also evident at the 2024 Paris Olympics, when the USA defeated France only 67:66 in the final.
Italy confirms its return after 32 years is more than symbolic
For Italy, the defeat had almost the opposite effect from what the final score might suggest. The national team returned to the World Cup for the first time since 1994, and already in its first two appearances showed that it had not come merely to mark its return. In the opening round on September 4, it defeated the Czech Republic 63:54, which according to FIBA was Italy's first World Cup victory in more than three decades. Italy's last victory before Berlin had come in 1994 against Japan in the game for 11th place. FIBA states that this is Italy's sixth World Cup appearance, while its best result in history remains fourth place in 1974.
Italy earned its return to Berlin through the qualifying tournament in San Juan in March 2026. FIBA data show that Italy finished there with a 4-1 record and took second place behind the USA. In their head-to-head game, the Americans won 93:59, a margin of 34 points. Less than six months later, the difference had fallen to only three points, in a game in which Italy had the final shot to force overtime. That progress further explains why the performance in Berlin was seen as proof that the Italian national team can compete on equal terms with the strongest teams.
After the game, Zandalasini said she was proud of the team and that the Italian public would also have reason to be proud. In FIBA's report, she emphasized that the national team had waited 32 years to return to this stage and that against the USA it showed that it belonged there. The Italians combined zone defense, switching and different defensive matchups, but Zandalasini particularly highlighted their energy and togetherness. That approach was also visible in the statistics: although Italy was not efficient from the field either, it remained disciplined long enough to turn every American mistake into pressure on the scoreboard.
The context of Italy's rise over the past two years is also important. FIBA recalls that the national team won bronze at EuroBasket 2025 and then secured its place in Berlin in World Cup qualifying with a 68:56 victory over Spain. Players such as Zandalasini, Lorela Cubaj and Matilde Villa have been central to that continuity, while head coach Andrea Capobianco received confirmation against the USA that his team can control the tempo even against the deepest roster in the tournament. A three-point defeat therefore does not change the standings in Italy's favor, but it significantly changes perceptions of how far the team can go.
Americans already in quarterfinals, key game next for Italy
The outcome of Group D further increased the importance of the USA victory. Earlier on September 6, China defeated the Czech Republic 74:70 after overtime, so by beating Italy the Americans secured first place based on head-to-head results in every possible scenario for the final round and direct qualification for the quarterfinals. FIBA's competition system for the 2026 World Cup features four groups of four national teams. Group winners advance directly to the quarterfinals, the second- and third-placed teams play additional games for a place among the final eight, while the bottom teams in each group are eliminated.
The 2026 World Cup is being held in Berlin from September 4 to 13, and FIBA expanded the final tournament to 16 national teams for this edition. The knockout phase follows quickly: quarterfinal qualifying games are played on September 8 and 9, the quarterfinals on September 10, the semifinals on September 12, and the third-place game and final on September 13. The USA closes its group campaign against the Czech Republic on September 7, while Italy faces China on the same day. For the Americans, the final group game will be an opportunity to stabilize their offense before the knockout phase, while for Italy the result against China will determine its position and route through the remainder of the tournament.
The American roster in Berlin is also not the same as the one originally announced. Before the tournament, FIBA announced that Sonia Citron and Kiki Iriafen had been called up as replacements for A'ja Wilson and Kelsey Plum, who withdrew for health reasons. Despite those absences, the team still includes a number of Olympic and world championship medalists, along with a new generation featuring Clark, Bueckers and Angel Reese. That is precisely why the game against Italy is so significant: it did not show that the USA has ceased to be the favorite, but that even a national team with exceptional depth can be pushed to the brink when an opponent manages to impose a defensive rhythm, slow down transition play and force it into poor shots.
For the defending champions, the most important result remains the victory. In a tournament with no room for error, the USA survived an evening in which almost nothing worked offensively and handled the final possessions through the experience of Stewart, Young and Gray. For Italy, the game became confirmation that its return to the world's elite is more than a historical footnote. The gap between teams that had been separated by 34 points in March was reduced in Berlin to a single shot. If that trend continues through the rest of the tournament, 55:52 could be remembered not only as the toughest American World Cup victory in two decades, but also as one of the games that showed how much deeper the competition in women's basketball has become.
Sources:
- FIBA - official box score and statistics for the Italy - USA game, score, quarters, shooting percentages and attendance (link)
- FIBA - report on the USA's 55:52 victory and Italy's defense, Jackie Young and Cecilia Zandalasini's final shot (link)
- Associated Press / Local 10 - historical context of the 32-game winning streak, record-low scoring total and details of the finish (link)
- FIBA - Italy's return to the World Cup after 1994 and victory over the Czech Republic in the opening round (link)
- FIBA - 2026 World Cup format, knockout schedule and expansion of the tournament to 16 national teams (link)
- FIBA - USA - Italy 93:59 qualifying game in San Juan in March 2026 (link)
- FIBA - changes to the American roster before the tournament, with Sonia Citron and Kiki Iriafen joining in place of A'ja Wilson and Kelsey Plum (link)
- FIBA - official box score for the USA - China 94:61 game and statistical context of the American tournament opener (link)
- FIBA - Cecilia Zandalasini's reaction after the game against the USA and description of Italy's defensive approach (link)
- FIBA - Italy's path through qualifying and the 68:56 victory over Spain that confirmed its place in Berlin (link)
- Reuters / 101.9 Jack FM - Kara Lawson's comments on the growing competitiveness and difficulty of the 2026 World Cup (link)