I came away from Rio’s Engenhao stadium in a confused state of mind last Wednesday.
I have been thoroughly enjoying this year’s Brazilian Championship, thinking that it had managed to combine a large dose of unpredictability with considerable quality. So what to think after watching one of the title contenders torn apart by a team from Chile in the Copa Sul-Americana.
The scoreline – Flamengo 0 Universidad de Chile 4 – does not tell the story of the match. The domination of the visitors was even greater than their margin of victory might indicate. No one could have complained had they won by seven goals. How on earth could this have happened to a team which at the time (ie before this last round of league games) were only three points off the top?
Disinterest in the Copa Sul-Americana? That was certainly present in the fans. Only 3970 went along to watch the match. But there was no disinterest on the part of coach Vanderlei Luxemburgo. Before the game he had been building up its importance, citing the fact that the Sul-Americana winners qualify for next year’s Libertadores. He had personal motives as well. Although he won the Copa America with Brazil in 1999, Luxemburgo has never won an international club competition, and would love to put such a title on his CV.
So he sent out a strong team. Right back Leonardo Moura was rested – an option that was easy to understand. With both Ronaldinho and Thiago Neves suspended for Sunday‘s league game against Santos, the roving right back would be Flamengo’s most important attacking outlet. Otherwise, Flamengo were at full strength. So how comes the easy defeat?
Styles make fights, as the boxing fraternity like to say. And this clash of styles worked entirely in the Chileans favour. Former national team coach Marcelo Bielsa has clearly left a mark on football in Chile. Coach of la U (nickname of Universidad de Chile) is Jorge Sampaoli, an Argentine who sees himself as a Bielsa disciple. His message, then, was clear. His team would seek to play the game in the opposing half of the field, attacking across the entire front line with two wingers and a central striker.
The problem that Bielsa’s teams have often suffered against Brazil is that they leave themselves open to the counter-attack. There is space behind the high defensive line.
Flamengo, however, could never hit the space. They are a side that places great importance on attacking full backs. Leo Moura, as we have seen, was absent and on the other flank Junior Cesar was kept at home by the presence of Eduardo Vargas, the Chileans’ highly talented striker.
At the other end, there is a deficiency with the front four in Flamengo’s 4-2-3-1formation. Striker Deivid, plus attacking midfielders Ronaldinho, Bottinelli and Thiago Neves are all players who prefer the ball played to their feet. La U’s high line squeezed their space – central striker Lorenzetti worked back intelligently to form an extra man in midfield .
La U marked aggressively, stayed so compact that the man on the ball had easy options for a first time pass and they broke at pace. It was a collective philosophy of play that on this occasion was far too good for Flamengo.
So this was just a one off? Flamengo on a bad night against inspired opposition? Perhaps there is something in this. But it also made me recall this year’s Libertadores campaign, and especially the night when almost all the Brazilian teams tumbled out. Cruzeiro fell to Once Caldas of Colombia, Fluminense were eliminated by Libertad of Paraguay, Gremio lost home and away to Universidad Catolica of Chile and Internacional were knocked out by Penarol of Uruguay. Even Santos, who went on to win the trophy, were lucky to get past America of Mexico.
This was a huge shock. It came at a moment when the financial gap was widening between Brazilian clubs and those elsewhere in the continent. Again, perhaps in part it was co-incidence. But in some of the clashes, specifically those with Once Caldas and Libertad, there was sense that the Brazilian team had found it difficult to cope with opponents who attacked with a front three.
Perhaps Flamengo were predictable victims to fall into this trap, in that Luxemburgo’s team is more dependent on attacking full backs that the other title challengers – and given enough set pieces close to the opponent’s goal, it is even possible that Flamengo might put up a good fight in the second leg.
But more than anything, that game last Wednesday night has whetted the appetite for next year’s Libertadores. In theory, Brazil should dominate – as indeed it was threatening to before last year’s debacle. And until I see how Brazilian clubs cope against the challenges posed by opponents from different countries I’m going to defer any definitive judgement on the quality of the 2011 Brazilian Championship.
