- Posts: 18749
Not a huge surprise after the Mexico disaster in London. Brazil were fairly wretched in the 2011 Copa America too.
A second spin at the helm for Big Phil? The 2002 side was the last watchable Brazil team.
Hang on a cotton-picking minute -- has Redknapp signed on the dotted line with QPR yet?
I think the consensus is that, as well as the disappointing performances in the Olympics and Copa América, Brazil is no further towards building a settled team to compete for the World Cup, let alone next year's Confederations Cup. In just over two years, Menezes used a total of 102 players (including 13 goalkeepers!) and no-one is any the wiser about who his best team contains. Neymar, Thiago Silva, perhaps Ramirez? After that, you're struggling.
The lack of competitve games and a series of tedious friendlies against the likes of China and Iraq haven't helped either and his only wins against major footballing nations have come against Argentina in the misleadingly-named SuperClassico. (Last night's was played with all the passion of an end of season testimonial).
As for his successor, there are three names in the frame. Big Phil who is fresh from laying the foundations for Palmeiras's relegation this season, Muricy Ramalho, who turned down the job before Menezes was appointed and Tite from Corinthians, who certainly has the best recent track record. The fact that the CBF are delaying the announcement until January, after the World Club Championship, suggests to me that it might be him.
Romário on Twitter:
'Guys, this is an historic day in Brazil. We should let off fireworks and have a party...'
He was also tipping Rai, who has (I think) zero managerial experience.
i probably couldn't identify menezes in a police lineup, even though he's been the coach of brazil for two years. maybe they think they need a bigger star for a home world cup. 21 wins out of 33 isn't bad, but there is still no clear identity to the brazil team - who's in it? you can see why people might be getting worried.
sure, my entire argument is based on my own ignorance, but if menezes had been doing a good job i'd know all about brazil.
I wasn't counting Wednesday's match as one of the wins - they lost the game! I was just slagging off the SuperClassico and agreeing with you that beating Argentina's Z team on penalties with what was basically a Fluminense tribute team was a pretty meaningless achievement. They should have called it a day when the lights went out in the first attempt.
They've got two friendlies lined up aganist England next year to boost confidence ahead of the Confederations Cup.
Brazil not winning the World Cup at home would be unthinkable, if not for the fact that it's happened before.
I was watching the Copa America last year and Brazil fielded a line-up where the central midfield consisted of Ramires and Lucas. They played like a grim-faced gang of workmen digging up a road at 5am.
Don't they have at least some basic responsibility to put on a decent show (in terms of playing nice football) at their own World Cup? The thought of them turning in yet another set of Dunga/Parreira-type performances, on home soil, is horrific.
Rogin the Kitten Minder wrote:
It's been a long time since Brazil stopped being a national team and started becoming a showroom for dodgy agents.
Sam Kelly wrote:
Hahahahaha. Oh man, not this yet again.
I didn't "rip you a new one", I just said I thought you were wasting your money. Colombia subsequently went on to be dumped out of the Copa America in the quarter-finals by, erm, Peru.
They're currently doing alright in the Conmebol qualifiers, but after eight games they're behind Ecuador, who beat them 1-0 a few months back pretty comfortably, and I don't see any big Ecuador bandwagon getting going.
Colombia might be 13/1 with some bookie somewhere (I googled it a second ago and got everything from 20/1 to 40/1 with all of the major British chains ), but England will go into the same tournament at probably 7/1 or 8/1 and they aren't gonna win it either.
Odds don't reflect how good or bad or indifferent a team is. They just show who's betting heaviest on what. That's why England's ones are so short when major tournaments are on (even though they've reached a grand total of two semi-finals since 1966), because every clueless fucker in the country is sticking a sentimental £10 on them.
Okay AB2, you know everything and all that I know is worthless.
"every clueless fucker in the country" - FFS.
Rogin the Kitten Minder wrote:
Just enter your email address