Carlo Ancelotti showed the way on the eve of the game against Croatia: “Brazil has won the last two World Cups due to a fantastic connection between talent and the defensive aspect.” When we understand what the coach is looking for, it becomes easier to interpret the team on the field. And against Croatia, and even against France, his ideas were well aligned with the team’s behavior.
Without meaning to, the Italian reminded us of the identity of Brazilian football: individual talent. This, combined with the organization, brought us the fruits we reaped. Brazil doesn’t have the short, engaging passing style of the Spanish players; it does not have the intensity and effectiveness of the Germans; the running and crossing of the English; or the defense of Italy. These stereotypes are more or less outdated, but they formed the game identity of rival countries.
We are the biggest champions because everything is kicked here. Crumpled can, paper ball, sock ball, doll head. This created players capable of improvising, adapting to various situations and surprising the world.
When Ancelotti took over Brazil, there was no legacy or path to follow. There were players like Raphinha, Vinicius, Estêvão, Endrick, Luiz Henrique and others capable of winning the game from the front. And there are defenders like Marquinhos, Casemiro, Bruno Guimarães, Gabriel Magalhães, Militão, capable of not letting the team lose the game behind.
That’s why the selector said “to win the World Cup, Brazil has to have talent, which we have”. “And you have to defend well. There is no other way. I am convinced that the World Cup wins whoever concedes the fewest goals, not whoever scores the most,” he said.
Ancelotti doesn’t have time to put together an intriguing team, full of passing, that will float on the field. He didn’t receive an organized job that needed someone to polish it. He got a lot of good players, front and back, without any organization. And your pragmatic bet seems quite right to me: defenders who defend, midfielders who protect the defense and connect the attackers as quickly as possible so that they can win games up front.
The idea is not to be exposed, steal the ball and attack with speed.
Against France, in the first half, Brazil recovered the ball two or three times in the offensive field, but finished wide. He won three in defense, and Casemiro quickly connected Vinicius or Raphinha with long balls. The moves didn’t end well, and the French, with more team awareness, took advantage of Brazil’s mistakes to kill the game.
Against Croatia, the same recipe: in the first half, the main chances came from steals in the attack, and the goal came from a counterattack that had everything one would expect from a well-made transition. In the second half, the defense remained well protected, with the exception of the rival goal, and the team scored again by counterattacking, to complete the victory.
That’s the plan, and I like it, taking into account that we don’t have midfielders who are good at combining play and no super playmakers. We don’t have cheerful and insinuating full-backs, so we’re going with defensive full-backs to ensure solidity. And there’s plenty of talent up front. Especially players who do well with space to play. Betting on transitions enhances their game.
At the World Cup, Brazil will be three weeks better trained. It may or may not be enough. We’ll know now. What I know today is that we have a good idea and good pieces to execute it.
LINK PRESENT: Did you like this text? Subscribers can access seven free accesses from any link per day. Just click the blue F below.
