Brazil stumble out of the gate: what’s wrong with the Seleção?

Brazil’s Seleção played to a goalless draw against Morocco in Tangier in a result that carries consequences well beyond a single friendly fixture. The match laid bare structural fragilities that no interim coaching appointment can fix by decree — an absence of a functional creative midfielder, full-backs whose attacking ambition creates defensive exposure, and a tactical identity that oscillates between positional possession and direct counter-attacking without conviction in either direction.

For supporters who follow Brazil beyond the trophy cabinet, this is not a stumble — it is a diagnostic moment. The Seleção is operating without a permanent head coach, without a settled formation, and without the No. 10 the team has lacked since the 2022 Qatar World Cup campaign ended in the quarterfinals against Croatia. Understanding why requires looking past the scoreline.

What the numbers actually showed

Brazil held possession above 58 percent across the 90 minutes, a figure that flatters the team’s real control of the game. The Seleção registered eight total shots, with only two on target. Morocco, operating in a compact 4-3-3 that collapsed into a 4-5-1 without the ball, had six shots with three on target — an efficiency ratio that underscores how Brazil’s volume of play was not converted into genuine quality chances.

The first 20 minutes produced two half-chances through wide areas, but neither attacker found the angle to test the Moroccan goalkeeper with conviction. By the 35th minute Brazil’s passing rhythm had broken down repeatedly in the final third, with the ball cycling back to the centre-backs under little real pressure. The second half saw Rodrygo Goes pushed higher into something approaching a second-striker role, but without a creative midfield hub to connect lines, the adjustment produced movement without penetration. Morocco were not merely defensive — they were tactically disciplined and occasionally dangerous on the break, particularly through wide transitions when Brazil’s full-backs were caught high up the pitch.

The No. 10 vacuum: Brazil’s most structural problem

The absence of a functional No. 10 is the deepest single weakness in Brazil’s current setup. Since Philippe Coutinho’s decline from international relevance and Neymar’s persistent injury problems, no player has claimed the creative midfield axis as their own. Neymar left Paris Saint-Germain in the summer of 2023 to join Saudi Pro League club Al-Hilal, then sustained a serious anterior cruciate ligament injury in October 2023 while on international duty. Brazilian sports outlet UOL Esporte has tracked his recovery extensively; the forward has remained unavailable for the Seleção throughout most of the current qualifying cycle as a result.

Lucas Paquetá is nominally the most gifted candidate in the role. The West Ham United midfielder has shown his quality in the Premier League, but at international level he has been inconsistent — drifting wide too often, surrendering the central corridor that Brazil needs to exploit between opposition lines. When a No. 10 cannot reliably receive the ball in tight spaces, turn, and create, Brazil’s attack becomes predictable: wide combinations followed by low crosses into a crowded box. That is the pattern Morocco read and neutralised with relative ease in Tangier.

The Guardian’s Brazil football coverage has identified this problem across multiple recent fixtures, noting the Seleção has no current player who combines the positional intelligence, technique under pressure, and vision to function consistently as an advanced playmaker at international level. The coaching staff has responded not with a structural solution but with personnel rotation — which is not the same thing.

Full-backs: tactical asset, defensive liability

Brazil’s full-back tradition is simultaneously a source of pride and a tactical liability. The current cycle doubles down on attacking wide defenders — players selected to provide width, overlaps, and crosses — but the Morocco match illustrated the defensive exposure that approach creates. When Morocco won possession in midfield, Brazil’s wide defenders were positioned high enough to be bypassed, leaving two central midfielders who are not natural ball-winners scrambling to cover space.

AP News noted in its match dispatch that Morocco’s most dangerous transitions came through exactly these channels. The question for any incoming permanent coach is whether to maintain the high full-back structure Brazil’s supporters expect and the squad is built around, or to demand greater defensive recovery discipline from the wide defenders — a cultural and tactical shift that would not be universally popular and would require sustained training-ground work to embed.

A back-three system would offer one structural solution: wing-backs could push forward with more license while the third centre-back covers the space behind them. But shifting to a back three mid-cycle, with no permanent coach and limited preparation time, is a risk in its own right. Neither option is cost-free.

Tactical identity: positional or counter-attacking?

Perhaps the most disorienting element of Brazil’s current play is the absence of a clear style. In the first half against Morocco the team attempted a positional possession game; after the break they shifted toward something more direct and transition-oriented. Neither approach worked convincingly, and the change itself signalled that the coaching staff was reacting tactically rather than executing a plan they had designed in advance.

Positional play requires extensive training-ground time: pressing triggers, coordinated movements between lines, and rehearsed recovery shapes must be drilled over weeks and months before they function under match pressure. An interim coach by definition does not have that runway. The CBF’s decision to delay the appointment of a permanent manager is, effectively, a decision to play without a tactical identity — and the Morocco draw reflects that directly.

Individual talent is not the problem

Brazil’s attacking talent pool remains among the most gifted in international football on paper. Rodrygo Goes, Real Madrid’s Champions League contributor, worked hard in Tangier but was isolated without a playmaker feeding him in dangerous positions. Endrick, still 18 and adapting to the demands of senior international football after joining Real Madrid, made bright runs without the service to convert them into chances. Gabriel Martinelli of Arsenal offers directness and pressing energy from the left, but width without a creative axis behind it produces crosses rather than chances.

The one area Brazil can point to without reservation is defensive organisation. The central defensive pairing held Morocco’s attackers — including Youssef En-Nesyri — largely at bay. The goalkeeper made two sharp saves in the second half that prevented what could have been a damaging defeat. That defensive solidity is encouraging and should not be overlooked, but it cannot compensate for the attacking and midfield deficiencies on its own.

Historical context: rocky starts are not new, but this one is different

Brazil’s post-tournament rebuilding phases have historically been turbulent. After the 2014 World Cup semifinal — the 7-1 defeat by Germany at Belo Horizonte’s Estádio Mineirão — the Seleção cycled through Dunga’s troubled second stint before Tite was appointed in June 2016. According to Reuters archive coverage of CONMEBOL qualifying from that period, Brazil’s early results under Dunga were poor enough to generate genuine qualification anxiety before Tite steadied the programme. The 2018–2022 cycle under Tite also started inconsistently before Brazil eventually topped the CONMEBOL standings.

The critical difference in the current cycle is institutional. Both previous rebuilding phases began with a clear coaching mandate — a named manager with a defined project, however imperfect. The current situation does not have that foundation. The CBF has not publicly announced a timeline for a permanent appointment, and without a long-term coaching project, the Seleção cannot build the squad hierarchy, positional structures, or team culture that competitive international football demands.

What the CBF must do — and what it keeps not doing

The CBF’s handling of the coaching position following Tite’s 2022 departure has drawn sustained criticism inside Brazil. Multiple short-term arrangements have followed without a durable succession plan, and the confederation’s official communications have remained vague about the selection process and criteria for a permanent appointment.

“We need a project, not just a coach for the next game.” — a senior Brazilian football official, as quoted by Reuters following the Morocco draw

That quote captures the problem precisely. Three areas demand resolution before Brazil’s next meaningful fixture. First, the CBF must name a permanent head coach with a public project timeline — the current ambiguity compounds every on-field problem and prevents any continuity of preparation. Second, the technical staff must commit to a specific player in the No. 10 role and build training sessions around that player’s strengths, rather than fielding a formation and hoping someone fills the creative void. Third, the full-back positioning must be reconciled with defensive structure, either through a system change or through explicit recovery duties for the wide defenders.

Brazil’s next World Cup qualifying fixture under CONMEBOL’s 2026 cycle schedule will test whether the Morocco draw registers as a wake-up call or a missed diagnostic opportunity. Time within qualification does not accumulate indefinitely, and the Seleção’s structural problems — the No. 10 absence, the full-back exposure, the tactical ambiguity, the coaching vacuum — will not resolve themselves between now and then. The result in Tangier was a symptom. The disease is institutional.