Tim Vickery column

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/sport2/hi/football/7468656.stm

Version 0 of 1.

By Tim Vickery South American football reporter

<a name="top"></a> <a class="bodl" href="#questions">Read my answers to this week's questions</a> Real Madrid's Robinho was off the boil in Brazil's draw with Argentina

After Brazil's recent poor performances, a reader of the column called James Young wrote as follows: "In the time I've been in Brazil I can't remember seeing a worse relationship between a country's people and its national team.

"Brazilians seem to in no way identify with the Selecao and view them as money-grabbing mercenaries who legged it to Europe at the first opportunity and are willing to turn on them in the blink of an eye.

"I saw a local journalist sum it up well this week when he said 'they don't play for our teams and we see them play in Brazil once every year at best'. What do you think the Brazilian Football Confederation's (CBF) decision to play Brazil's friendlies in Europe has had on this relationship and how serious do you think the long term effects will be?"

I think James has correctly identified the mood in Brazil at the moment - at the end of last week's 0-0 draw with Argentina the Belo Horizonte crowd deliberately set out to irritate their own players by cheering for Lionel Messi.

With the way Brazil have been playing recently, the people are entitled to feel disappointed with their national team but I would argue that the form this disappointment takes has little to do with common sense and a great deal to do with outdated nationalism.

More than anything else it is the reaction to the process of globalisation by a people who have every right to be proud of their own football culture.

There is no doubt that a chasm exists between the Brazilian public and their European-based stars but the fact that the national team play so many of their friendlies in Europe has nothing to do with a decision by the CBF. Rather, it is part of a gentlemen's agreement between the European clubs and all of South America's national teams. It is almost impossible for any player to be considered truly world class unless he has starred for a major European club

The clubs will release their players for South America's marathon World Cup qualification campaign. In return, during the season they will only release them for friendlies played in Europe or nearby, such as north Africa.

This accord has its benefits - it reduces the travel burdens on players who are already overloaded with commitments. So the two recent friendlies that Brazil played in the United States could have been staged at home but not the others played through the year.

Even wider of the mark is the view that the European-based players are money-grabbing mercenaries who don't care about the national team.

Financial motives, of course, play a huge part in the exodus of players across the Atlantic but they are not the only reasons.

As Sao Paulo centre-back Alex Silva said this weekend about his desire to play in Europe: "I'm in no hurry to be rich but I am in a hurry to be respected."

These days it is almost impossible for any player to be considered truly world class unless he has starred for a major European club. However hurtful some people may find this process, it is the way of the globalised world.

And the point is that those South Americans who are based abroad make sacrifices to play for their national team that many European players would not be prepared to make - the travelling, the time away from their families, the problems it can give them with their clubs and so on.Brazilian fans are losing patience with their national team

There is no great financial incentive for them to put themselves through all this. They do it because pulling on the shirt of their national team genuinely means more to them than it does for many Europeans.

The idea that the European-based players don't care about the national team is the turgid ravings of the bar-room bore - but even intelligent minds can fall victim to this 1930s nationalist twaddle.

There have been times when Brazil coaches have tried to play the nationalist card, assuming that a team of home-based players will show more commitment. It is warmly applauded, until reality is revealed on the field and it all ends in tears.

When midfielders Josue and Mineiro were playing with Sao Paulo the Brazil coach Dunga was criticised for leaving them out. Now they are in Europe, Dunga is attacked for selecting them.

In reality, the problem has much more to do with football than it does with nationalism. It doesn't matter where the likes of Gilberto Silva and Mineiro play their club football. What does matter is that they form the most limited, laboured, unimaginative and inept central midfield that this writer has ever seen play in a Brazil shirt.

Brazilian football urgently needs a rethink in this area. When they can start playing well and winning - and victory has a magical quality able to build a bridge long enough to unite the Brazil's public and its European based players.

You can put your questions to Tim Vickery every week on the World Football Phone-in on BBC Radio 5 Live's Up All Night programme from 0230 to 0400 BST every Saturday. You can also download last week's World Football Phone-in Podcast.

<a class="bodl" href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/fivelive/programmes/upallnight.shtml">Up All Night website</a><a class="bodl" href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/podcasts/wf/">World Football Podcast</a>

<a name="questions"></a> YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED

My question concerns the (in my opinion) bloated beast that is the super group that all South American teams must navigate in order to get to a World Cup. I am a long-suffering Colombia supporter and have had to put up with two World Cup exits! I think if the qualifying group went back to its original two-group format then it would be more exciting and indeed please a lot of the big European clubs who lose their players repeatedly during almost three years! Do you know if any such plans are afoot or even mooted?

Jairo Jaramillo

I think your perception of the one big qualifying group has been a bit distorted by the fact that in those past two campaigns Colombia haven't done too well out of it.

I have to disagree - I think this format, with everyone playing everyone else home and away, is one of the best things that has ever happened to South American football.

Remember, unlike Europe there are no qualifiers for the local continental competition, the Copa America. So previously there were gaps of years between competitive internationals - making it very difficult to retain a good coach.

But since 1996, South America's national teams have enjoyed the sort of structure that Europeans take for granted - regular competitive matches, with the chance to retain a team and grow together in confidence and tactical sense.

It is precisely this that is largely responsible for the remarkable rise of Ecuador and Venezuela. As the overall standard has improved it has become harder for Colombia to qualify but they have made a promising start this time.

They are the only team still unbeaten and if they can find a few more goals they should be making you proud in 2010.

Got a question about South American football for Tim Vickery? Email him at vickerycolumn@hotmail.com