www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/nov/23/...k-coach-mano-menezes

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.

cantagalo wrote:


How on earth can you call that particular Argentina team one representing a 'major footballing nation'? At the very most one or two of those players are within a country mile of Argentina's real starting XI, and that's being very, very generous. Whereas the Brazil side, whilst not a full-strength one, was a lot closer to being so.

(This is just due to the organisation of those ridiculous friendlies and the economies of the two countries, of course, but it's worth saying. Mano's not beaten any side ranked higher than Brazil in the FIFA rankings, and I don't think a win a month or two ago over Argentina's Z squad should change that statement just because Argentina's A squad are ranked higher.)

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.

garcia wrote:


Your instincts are correct - the point I was trying to make is that the two years have been largely wasted.

The only 'bigger star' available to manage Brazil would be Felipão which just illustrates the paucity of options. Unless, of course, they try to get Guardiola.....

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:


No, just one.

And AB2, the problem with that might well be that they've gone too far down the road of building a team full of hulking giants who aim to just run their opponents into the ground. What didn't come across on TV during the Copa América, but did when one saw them in the flesh, is that almost their entire team are absolutely enormous. Cantagalo will know better than me, but I suspect the average Brazilian wants them to make sure they win, not to play pretty football. As it stands, of course, they're not going to do either. If you want pretty football from a team in yellow at Brazil 2014, you should probably be watching Colombia.

I just went to the FIFA site to check their ranking (I know, I know...). I knew they'd fallen way down, but I didn't realise they're as low as thirteenth.

It's been a long time since Brazil stopped being a national team and started becoming a showroom for dodgy agents.

Sam Kelly wrote:


Don't tell AB2 that, he ripped me a new one for putting €10 on Colombia at 200/1 2 years ago. Their odds now; 13/1.

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.

steveeeeeeeee wrote:


That's a bit silly, isn't it?

steveeeeeeeee wrote:


As in, clueless about football. The equivalents of the people who know nothing about horseracing but always have a little bet on the Grand National every April.

It's not a crime, of course (I myself know fuck all about racing but usually join in the Grand National sweep in my office). But this particular large segment of the public lumping on England is the main reason why their odds are shorter (in the British market) at World Cups and European Championships than teams who are realistically better than them.

Rogin the Kitten Minder wrote:


That's the kind of thinking that won New Zealand the rugby world cup. Few things would be more desirable than Brazil not winning the world cup.

There's a widespread cynicism surrounding just about everything concerning the national team. Brazilians are fed up with the CBF, Teixeira, Marin, Dunga, Menezes, over-hyped players. Those who follow football closely are far more concerned about the fortunes of their club teams. Of course this will change over the next 18 months as the media go into overdrive and the casual supporter 'gets behind the team'.

So I think there is a real hunger to see a Brazilian team win in style. Dunga, until the 2010 World Cup, was a very successful manager in terms of results but was widely despised, though he didn't help himself with his dour and irascible personality.

So there was some real hope that Menezes would change this and introduce a more attractive style of play. The early signs were promising but in his only competitive tournament the performances were as dire as anything under Dunga.

And none of the domestic alternatives - Tite, Muricy, Felipão, even Abel Braga from Fluminense - are exactly renowned for their expansive football. It's somewhat telling that if Brazil want to revive the style of play for which they're renowned (but hasn't actually existed for a long, long time) they'll probably have to employ a foreign manager to do it.