World Cup Preview - Brazil
Posted: Thu Dec 05, 2013 7:31 pmI thought with the World Cup now fast approaching and the draw to happen in the next 24 hours, it would be a good time to start the preview of the teams that will participate in the World Cup next year, starting with the hosts Brazil. A lot of expectation will be on the hosts this time round; with home field advantage Brazil will obviously approach this tournament as favourites. Yet the question marks will be whether or not Brazil have bridged the gap of recent years on some of their rivals in the European and South American game.
Brazil have gone through a recent lean patch of form in the last two World Cups based on their impeccable standards. Only in 1986-1990 have they performed worse over more than one tournament, and in the former tournament in Mexico they were the better team before losing on penalties(and they got all the way through without conceeding a goal), and in 1990 they lost to a dodgy red card giving Argentina the advantage.
The key to Brazil's recent failure has been abject tactical approaches combined with a failure to move with the times. When we think of Brazil we think of skill, flair and panache; of attacking players playing attacking football. Yet since the late 90's this vision of ultra flair, at the cost of defensive solidity, has troubled Brazil.
1994 was arguably the start of the modern phase of football, and the World Cup was arguably a boring affair of several teams becoming negativly dogged in their play. And while Brazil won that tournament, arguably because they held the most positive approach in a tournament with little "get up and go", it wouldnt be long before Brazil would be confronted with the face of change.
Not that this was noticed at all. When Brazil went to France 98 they took with them a team full of attacking quality, but struggled to deal with the power and rigidity of the way many teams setup. An own goal against Scotland scraped an initial win, and before breezing past a poor Morocco team, the physical Norwegian team would hand them a beating. They would also twice find themselves a goal down to Denmark in the knockouts, before a less than inspired penalty shoot out victory took them past Netherlands. In the final they would find that their tactic of two creative playmakers, matched with 2 wide forwards, two extremely attacking full backs, and two out and out strikers would be munched. Brazil couldnt match the power of a France team equipped with a mix of physical power and pace. Vieria, Deschampes, Karembu, Petit, with width provided by similar attack minded fullbacks.
Scolari would realise this shift in physicality was need, and he set about creating a squad for 2002 that would play "Bullyboy Soccer" as he he put it. Creative freedom was limited, the attacking fullbacks became wingers, with a bank of 3 centre backs playing behind them, and two defensive midfielders in front forming a rock solid tough base, with the flair limited to a forward three of the 3 R's... Ronaldo. Ronaldinho and Rivaldo. The tactic worked, and Brazil had both a physical platform to compete, and the flair to beat teams.
As brutal as Scolari's Brazil were, the lasting legacy on Brazilian football was to be quite mute. By 2006 Perrera's vision of his Brazil was symbolised by the "Magic Square", a formation high in expression and attacking names, low in rigidity and stability. They would be knocked out after a sombre performance in Germany by France, trying to match Makalele and Vieria's power and strength with lashings of ball control and flair. Kaka, Adriano, Ronaldo, Robinho, Ronaldinho, Juninho and Ze Roberto sometimes playing alongside Cafu and Robert Carlos, and then two centre backs. It was bold, but it failed miserably.
Perrera lost his job as a result, being replaced by Dunga, the former pass master playmaker who had won the World Cup as Brazil's captain in 1994. Contrary to his background as a footballer, Dunga would create a team that was much more direct, doing away with the "meia-armador", the midfield central focus for passing, and supplementing the midfield with tough tacklers, and at some point this manifested itself in a midfield and strike force with no width, and 3 central CM's who simply provided defensive brute power rather than any creative force. His Brazil become the Jekyll and Hyde of world football, sublime and ridiculous, mostly in the space of ten minutes. They were mostly ridiculous against Holland, and were knocked out early again.
By 2010 it was clear that, while Brazil had begun to sacrifice flair for rawness, the continued thread in their tactical approach has been the constant reliance on the width provided by their attacking Full backs. Dunga's philosphoy was based on the attacking impetous of these players, and the hoarding of Defensive CM's that had the ability to drop into the gaps left when Maicon and Bastos went roaming.... at one point, such was the reliance, Dani Alves played in CM simply to give Brazil a natural right back to drop in the hole.
Yet this fantasy in picking 3 CM's to shield the full backs advance has made Brazil one dimensional. There is often little to link the defensive and attacking phases of the team, the midfield a sad array of goal scorers and tacklers, with nothing to bind them together.
To Scolari's discredit he has continued the legacy of Dunga. His 4-3-2-1 formation is still based on the full back obsession, with his two central based CM's dropping back to cover. It has lead to little defensive shape, as Chile proved when Brazil recently had no answer to the high tempo closing down that Chile employed. Brazil were such a reactive and ragged bunch they were moved around the pitch with ease, finding it difficult to be in the position to counter act Chile's movement, or press hard in their own zonal marking systems.The system has also meant that Brazil do little in the middle of the pitch, due to the lack of creative quality through the middle. When asked recently why Brazil had no "Xavi" type player anymore, Scolari simply answered they didnt have one because they didnt need one.
Without the ball it is also a compromised see-saw formation. As Brazil struggle to transfer between attack and defence, Paulinho becomes more and more committed to attack, meaning that huge holes open up in the centre. As Fernandinho and Paulinho are not the most mobile, this often means that the shielding two CM's often struggle to get behind the ball, caught up in the pitch, with the full backs also struggling to get back, and often Luiz and Silva on their own.... the system has made Thiago Silva, possibly the best centre back in the world, look very poor at times, especially when David Luiz, his CB partner, is also attacking in nature.
For all the problems however, it is key to note that in Neymar Brazil have a player who can beat anyone at anytime. In Oscar they have found a playmaker that can switch the ball and link the forwards with such pace, they tear teams apart. Hulk provides power, Fred provides a cool and collected finishing machine, and the sheer amount of quality players they can pick from leaves little gaps in the squad for poor players. They also have home advantage, so important when only one world cup has been won outside Europe by a European team, and when Copa America's and qualification often see high swings to the host countries.
Yet do I think they can win? Their form has been patchy recently, and they have had the competitive disadvantage of playing not a single competitive match in four years, also going through the worst ranking period (22nd) since they entered Fifa. They have lost or drawn to a few teams they were expected to beat, and have wasted too much time playing teams like Zambia and Hondouras instead of questioning their quality against better opposition... yet they won the Confederates Cup, played in an environment like a proper tournament.... yet how much the political unrest that dogged the tournament united the team and turned it into something major had as a factor is, in my opinion, very marked. many teams may have put the effort in, but many teams also played purposefully open in the tournament, a luxury that many teams will not gift Brazil in the World Cup.
In essence the question is tough. Brazil could, and maybe should, win it..... I just dont think they will. I could see them crashing early also, 2nd round or Group stages even.
Predicted Finish - Quarter Finals
Brazil have gone through a recent lean patch of form in the last two World Cups based on their impeccable standards. Only in 1986-1990 have they performed worse over more than one tournament, and in the former tournament in Mexico they were the better team before losing on penalties(and they got all the way through without conceeding a goal), and in 1990 they lost to a dodgy red card giving Argentina the advantage.
The key to Brazil's recent failure has been abject tactical approaches combined with a failure to move with the times. When we think of Brazil we think of skill, flair and panache; of attacking players playing attacking football. Yet since the late 90's this vision of ultra flair, at the cost of defensive solidity, has troubled Brazil.
1994 was arguably the start of the modern phase of football, and the World Cup was arguably a boring affair of several teams becoming negativly dogged in their play. And while Brazil won that tournament, arguably because they held the most positive approach in a tournament with little "get up and go", it wouldnt be long before Brazil would be confronted with the face of change.
Not that this was noticed at all. When Brazil went to France 98 they took with them a team full of attacking quality, but struggled to deal with the power and rigidity of the way many teams setup. An own goal against Scotland scraped an initial win, and before breezing past a poor Morocco team, the physical Norwegian team would hand them a beating. They would also twice find themselves a goal down to Denmark in the knockouts, before a less than inspired penalty shoot out victory took them past Netherlands. In the final they would find that their tactic of two creative playmakers, matched with 2 wide forwards, two extremely attacking full backs, and two out and out strikers would be munched. Brazil couldnt match the power of a France team equipped with a mix of physical power and pace. Vieria, Deschampes, Karembu, Petit, with width provided by similar attack minded fullbacks.
Scolari would realise this shift in physicality was need, and he set about creating a squad for 2002 that would play "Bullyboy Soccer" as he he put it. Creative freedom was limited, the attacking fullbacks became wingers, with a bank of 3 centre backs playing behind them, and two defensive midfielders in front forming a rock solid tough base, with the flair limited to a forward three of the 3 R's... Ronaldo. Ronaldinho and Rivaldo. The tactic worked, and Brazil had both a physical platform to compete, and the flair to beat teams.
As brutal as Scolari's Brazil were, the lasting legacy on Brazilian football was to be quite mute. By 2006 Perrera's vision of his Brazil was symbolised by the "Magic Square", a formation high in expression and attacking names, low in rigidity and stability. They would be knocked out after a sombre performance in Germany by France, trying to match Makalele and Vieria's power and strength with lashings of ball control and flair. Kaka, Adriano, Ronaldo, Robinho, Ronaldinho, Juninho and Ze Roberto sometimes playing alongside Cafu and Robert Carlos, and then two centre backs. It was bold, but it failed miserably.
Perrera lost his job as a result, being replaced by Dunga, the former pass master playmaker who had won the World Cup as Brazil's captain in 1994. Contrary to his background as a footballer, Dunga would create a team that was much more direct, doing away with the "meia-armador", the midfield central focus for passing, and supplementing the midfield with tough tacklers, and at some point this manifested itself in a midfield and strike force with no width, and 3 central CM's who simply provided defensive brute power rather than any creative force. His Brazil become the Jekyll and Hyde of world football, sublime and ridiculous, mostly in the space of ten minutes. They were mostly ridiculous against Holland, and were knocked out early again.
By 2010 it was clear that, while Brazil had begun to sacrifice flair for rawness, the continued thread in their tactical approach has been the constant reliance on the width provided by their attacking Full backs. Dunga's philosphoy was based on the attacking impetous of these players, and the hoarding of Defensive CM's that had the ability to drop into the gaps left when Maicon and Bastos went roaming.... at one point, such was the reliance, Dani Alves played in CM simply to give Brazil a natural right back to drop in the hole.
Yet this fantasy in picking 3 CM's to shield the full backs advance has made Brazil one dimensional. There is often little to link the defensive and attacking phases of the team, the midfield a sad array of goal scorers and tacklers, with nothing to bind them together.
To Scolari's discredit he has continued the legacy of Dunga. His 4-3-2-1 formation is still based on the full back obsession, with his two central based CM's dropping back to cover. It has lead to little defensive shape, as Chile proved when Brazil recently had no answer to the high tempo closing down that Chile employed. Brazil were such a reactive and ragged bunch they were moved around the pitch with ease, finding it difficult to be in the position to counter act Chile's movement, or press hard in their own zonal marking systems.The system has also meant that Brazil do little in the middle of the pitch, due to the lack of creative quality through the middle. When asked recently why Brazil had no "Xavi" type player anymore, Scolari simply answered they didnt have one because they didnt need one.
Without the ball it is also a compromised see-saw formation. As Brazil struggle to transfer between attack and defence, Paulinho becomes more and more committed to attack, meaning that huge holes open up in the centre. As Fernandinho and Paulinho are not the most mobile, this often means that the shielding two CM's often struggle to get behind the ball, caught up in the pitch, with the full backs also struggling to get back, and often Luiz and Silva on their own.... the system has made Thiago Silva, possibly the best centre back in the world, look very poor at times, especially when David Luiz, his CB partner, is also attacking in nature.
For all the problems however, it is key to note that in Neymar Brazil have a player who can beat anyone at anytime. In Oscar they have found a playmaker that can switch the ball and link the forwards with such pace, they tear teams apart. Hulk provides power, Fred provides a cool and collected finishing machine, and the sheer amount of quality players they can pick from leaves little gaps in the squad for poor players. They also have home advantage, so important when only one world cup has been won outside Europe by a European team, and when Copa America's and qualification often see high swings to the host countries.
Yet do I think they can win? Their form has been patchy recently, and they have had the competitive disadvantage of playing not a single competitive match in four years, also going through the worst ranking period (22nd) since they entered Fifa. They have lost or drawn to a few teams they were expected to beat, and have wasted too much time playing teams like Zambia and Hondouras instead of questioning their quality against better opposition... yet they won the Confederates Cup, played in an environment like a proper tournament.... yet how much the political unrest that dogged the tournament united the team and turned it into something major had as a factor is, in my opinion, very marked. many teams may have put the effort in, but many teams also played purposefully open in the tournament, a luxury that many teams will not gift Brazil in the World Cup.
In essence the question is tough. Brazil could, and maybe should, win it..... I just dont think they will. I could see them crashing early also, 2nd round or Group stages even.
Predicted Finish - Quarter Finals
