Brazilian defense is usually considered as the "Achiles heal" of any brazilian squad over the years. I have to admit that sometimes I feel frightened when I see some of its plays. But (there is always a 'but'...) statistically, brazilian defense is not that bad people wonder... Let's see some numbers. World Cup All-Time Table PL W D L GOALS AVG g. conced 1.Brazil 92 64 14 14 201- 84 0,913 (3) 2.Germany 92 55 19 18 190-112 1,217 3.Italy 77 44 19 14 122- 69 0,896 (2) 4.Argentina 65 33 13 19 113- 74 1,138 5.England 55 25 17 13 74- 47 0,854 (1) 6.France 51 25 10 16 95- 64 1,255 7.Spain 49 22 12 15 80- 57 1,163 8.Sweden 46 16 13 17 74- 69 1,500 9.Netherlands 36 16 10 10 59- 38 1,056 10.Russia *** 37 17 6 14 64- 44 1,189 11.Serbia ** 40 16 8 16 62- 56 1,400 12.Uruguay 40 15 10 15 65- 57 1,425 13.Poland 31 15 5 11 44- 40 1,290 14.Hungary 32 15 3 14 87- 57 1,781 15.Mexico 45 11 12 22 48- 84 1,867 16.Czech Republic * 33 12 5 16 47- 49 1,485 17.Austria 29 12 4 13 43- 47 1,621 18.Belgium 36 10 9 17 46- 63 1,750 19.Portugal 19 11 1 7 32- 21 1,105 20.Romania 21 8 5 8 30- 32 1,524 Source: http://www.planetworldcup.com/NATIONS/maraton.html If we consider the WC all-time table and its 20 first places, we can see that brazilian defense is the 3rd better, when considering the averege goals conceeded (please correct me if I made any mistake). It's not better only than England's and Italy's, but the difference from Italy's defense (considered by many the most efficient) is irrelevant. Another comparison is when we consider direct matches between Brazil and each one of the 10 fisrt places: Direct matches (includes only official matches) PL W D L GOALS Brazil x Germany 8 5 2 1 19-10 Brazil x W. Germany 12 7 3 2 18-11 Brazil x Italy 12 5 2 5 19-19 Brazil x Argentina 92 36 23 33 145-146 Brazil x England 22 10 9 3 30-19 Brazil x France 13 4 4 5 18-21 Brazil x Spain 8 4 2 2 11-8 Brazil x Sweden 15 9 4 2 33-18 Brazil Netherlands 9 3 4 2 14-13 Brazil x Russia (incl. USSR) 11 8 2 1 23-8 Source: http://www.cbf.com.br/confrontos So, the question is: why brazilian defense has this fame? The reasons I find are that the goals Brazilian defense conceed are so bad and the goals they not conceed are a luck matter...What is your oppinion? P.S.: Sorry for the text edition, but I hope the main information is clearly available.
It probably has to do with the type of goals they conceded. Brazil Italy 1970, Brazil U.S.S.R. 1982, and Rossi's second goal in 1982 stand out, but there were several like this.
That's also my oppinion... But, numbers never lie... If Brazilian defense conceed goals in a bad way (shameful, to be straight), these numbers are real due to very good luck!
That's also my oppinion... But, numbers never lie... If Brazilian defense conceed goals in a bad way (shameful, to be straight), these numbers are real due to very good luck!
That's also my oppinion... But, numbers never lie... If Brazilian defense conceed goals in a bad way (shameful, to be straight), these numbers are real due to very good luck!
That's also my oppinion... But, numbers never lie... If Brazilian defense conceed goals in a bad way (shameful, to be straight), these numbers are real due to very good luck!
Don´t worry the system´s screwed up today But I´m very confused about this, and I debated it with some other posters in the past. Many of the goals Brazil conceded were horrendous, and semi-pro teams wouldn´t have gave them up. Yet when you check the statistics(with a few notable exceptions,) they actually show Brazil being one of the stronger defensive teams. Puzzling.
Some of them have to do more with the goalies (Brazil never had real great ones, with few exceptions, and still some of those exceptions failed in Cups like Barbosa in 1950, Veludo & Castilho in 54, Manga in 1966, Valdir Perez (who was never a great goalie) in the 82 URSS game you mentioned. Others I think it had to do with a certain sloppiness (Alemão's sloppiness in 90 giving Maradona the chance to serve Caniggia, Cerezo's in 82 making Rossi's goal possible, as much as Clodoaldo's against Italy practically giving the ball to Boninsegna's equalizer in 1970). And finally a few simply out of lack of class as Lúcio's rocambolesque play in 2002 which gave way to Owen's goal. Sloppiness maybe resultant of the overconfidence also found also in good drivers who relax too much and end up involved in accidents in function of it. The underrating of Brz defenses though IMO comes from the fact that, most of the times Brazil plays, it has historically let its adversary also play, what can pass a feeling of fragility - and even cause instability.
The other aspect you need to remember is style of play. Brazil, when playing well, will normally have a lot of the game and in opposition territory. Opposition teams will therefore rely on trying to catch Brazil on the break. When you have most players in the opposition half, notably your two lateral defenders, then any quick break stands a decent chance of success. The sometimes suspect overall quality of the central defenders available for Brazil compounds the issue. It would be very interesting (but no doubt impossible) to look at the conversion rate opposition teams have against Brazil in direct relation to the other accepted big teams.
Brasil IS a strong defensive team, but they are as snakebitten with lapses in defensive concentration as they can be dominant when they're halfway ready to play. On one of Zidane's headers in the 1998 Failure, he was pretty much unmarked. Henry scored the French goal in the 2006 Failure while RC was pulling up his damn socks. The 1982 team should have simply possessed the ball until the final whistle. But they kept going forward wen all they needed was a draw. The offensive power seems to corupt players into thinking that beautiful atacking football will win the day. Most days, it does. On others, someone else lifts the World Cup.
I don't think that Brazilian defences are underrated (the USA 94 one being an exception). Usually Brazilian teams are weak in defence but that hasn't been a main concern for them. The abundance in attacking weapons is so huge that it doesn't matter. Having said that, I have seen Brazilians defend better than others, especially the Spaniards. Their defenders are crap! I also believe that most Brazilian defenders don't know the purpose of defending. Cafu and Roberto Carlos are great full-backs but that's due to their great attacking play. They're very weak defensively but where full-backs are concerned, we can't single out the Brazilians now. Even Italian full-backs these days are weak at defending.
The USSR goal was the goalie's fault ... not the defense. I would treat them separately although u may say the goalie is the last line of defense. All 3 Italian goals for me were poor defending.
Do not agree. In my opinion, it was nobody's 'fault': no goalie in the world would be able to defend that ball. The hole opened by Falcão's swerwe totally disarmed Dasayev (?): Éder shot was simpy undefensable. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3RB9ZeBvNXs"]YouTube - Ofutebol.com - Eder[/ame] Agree in part. Let's not take the merits away fom an inspired Italy that day though. The third goal was fruit of their relentlessness and Brazil's at that point totally shattered nerves.
Brazil often dominate possession and keep the opposition backed into their own half so they can't really attack them. When a team really manages to go at Brazil they can look suspect. I remember the Croatia game in World Cup 2006, every time Croatia got the ball they ran right up the other end unopposed and got a shot off. If they could actually shoot straight it may well have been 5-1 to Croatia.
Brazil 2006 was totally atypical and cannot historically serve as a standard for the Brz way of playing.
Geez, blunder !... Sure, Valdir Perez, que frangaço!... He even let his 'feet' in the Calçada da Fama...
Yeah...inspired and taking advantage of brazilian sleepiness defense... It should be Italy to have its nerves shattered instead... Maybe that is the most suitable reason for this historically underating... Maybe brazilian defensive players got used to see their midfield and attack partners decide the games, giving them this kind of sleepiness...("I shouldn' t worry...they will score more than we conceed" thought). Or maybe it's just a 'divine' gift, that didn't give the defensors the same ability and class than midfielders and attackers, which defines brazilian style...(dor02:"(...)weak in defence but that hasn't been a main concern for them. The abundance in attacking weapons is so huge that it doesn't matter.) Even brazilian players have learned (and needed!) to play defensively. And some times teams scape from its tradition... (kingkong1: "Brazil 2006 was totally atypical.")
I can go along with that. But, when you say...: ...one could argue that Italy had let all its nervous breakdowns behind after the huge fight they had the whole week before the game with the press & the public opinion of their country concerning polemical accusations of corruption (possibly correct) they'd be involved in, what probably worked on them as a catharsis. Which possibly had the opposite effect of psychologically strengthening them. They were simply enraged: and an Italian enraged is worse than a bull in front of a red piece of cloth ... I don't want to give that as an excuse, but maybe Brazil was not mentally prepared for all that 'fury' ...