Talk:Brazil national football team/Archive 1

The official nickname?
A Seleção (The Selected is the official nickname... Other nicknames is also used, bu the official is that...


 * OK, first of all, "Seleção" happens to be short for the official name of the team, but that does not make it an "official nickname" (if that's even possible, by the way -- nicknames are chosen by the fans, not by an executive decision). And yes, in Brazil if you happen to talk about "the Seleção" without further specification, it is understood that you are talking about the national football team (although the term is also used for other team sports, such as volleyball, basketball and such). But this does not a nickname make, the term is not particularly affectionate; it's just descriptive, like calling the Uruguayan team the "National Team" instead of "La Celeste Olímpica." Sportcasters have nicknamed the team the "Seleção Canarinho" a long time ago, and the name, although not the primary way to refer to the team, kinda stuck.MCBastos 22:59, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Does that mean, then, that the Nickname(s) section should be listed as "Seleção, Seleção Canarinho, Canarinho, Verdamarela"? Since "Seleção" doesn't particularly refer to the national team specifically as a nickname, but more as a term, shouldn't those be listed? I'm not going to add them right now as I'm not sure exactly how to refer to them in Portuguese, especially the correct spelling and/or articles that should go with them, but I will add them if there's no response or a positive response to this post. Isaiah 15:05, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Best in the world
i don't think Brazil national football team is the best one in the world through it really has a large number of talented footballers.On the one hand,they lack unity.On the other hand,they are lacking of passion


 * That's an opinion, and this is an encyclopedia. On the other hand, the article doens't state "best" but "most successful", which happens to be true and can be ascertained by just looking to the statistics. SpiceMan 22:55, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

And "best" also fits because it has been ranked number 1 by the FIFA Ranking since its beggining, except for a couple of brief months when France defeated Brazil in the 1998 Cup, and even then remained in 2nd place. Brazil has been number one for almost 15 years now.LtDoc 21:07, 1 August 2005 (UTC)


 * But "best" is a peacock term, and thus should be avoided. SpiceMan 07:32, 6 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Brazil is the best. Sorry europeans. --Mateusc 16:19, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

For the past Three and a half years, Brasil has been and will remain, THE BEST IN THE WORLD.

That's what they fought for during all of the qualifying rounds and throughout the entire World Cup itself.

As for the team not having any unity...That's just an opinion you have. I beg to differ. I don't think there are many teams on the planet that are more united than that of the Brasilian National Team.

I'm sure there are some teams in the world that have fewer problems then that of Brasil but, that comes with winning The World Cup!

Brasil has the most talent on one team that anyone could ask for. Sure that can present problems but, the bottom line is this... Brasil is THE BEST TEAM IN THE WORLD until another country takes that title away.

And even if that happens...There will never be a more talented team to grace the pitch than that of a team from BRASIL!


 * As for the team being the best in the world, that's just an opinion you have, I beg to differ.
 * Now, aside from parodying your bias, the word "best" is not of encyclopedic value because of it's subjectiveness. You might say it is ranked as the best, or that it has the best record so far, anything else is a judgement call. Who knows, maybe Honduras has been the best all along and was just unlucky for so many years. PHF 19:17, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Seleção
'Seleção' means selection. So in this context, I think it means 'selected' in the sense of premier players, i.e. of special quality or value. At least in English, selection has the meaning of being the best of the best; the selected.

Yes, I can see why you reach this conclusion, however, since the term "Seleção" can be applied to any football team / squad in the other (specially the nationals), I think the translation to squad or team is more correct, because I believe it's saying that it's The (best) squad. Although, to be honest, I'd never even heard of the nickname "A Seleção" before reading it here in wikipedia, so maybe we should remove the reference completely (on the other hand, "Canarinho" is very famous and well known nickname).--Vertigo200 01:31, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Seleção is not a nickname is the name. Don't know other romance languages, but in Portuguese and Spanish the word used is "selection" (of players to represent the country in a given sport): pt "Seleção", es "Selección". e.g. pt:Seleção Brasileira de Futebol (Brazilian Football Selection, usually just Seleção Brasileira), es:Selección nacional de fútbol de Argentina (Argentina National Football Selection, usually Selección Argentina, the article's title on w:es was created to comply with standard spanish, ie: not Rioplatense Spanish). Both in Brazil and Argentina, when saying "A Seleção" (pt) or "La Selección" (es), you're referring to the national team, and unless there's a particular context about another sport, it sure means the football one. About canarinho, using the word in Portuguese is usually a reference to the late 60's early 70's national team, and sometimes refers to the national team altogether. Seems to be different in English. SpiceMan (会話) 04:26, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

You're probably right SpiceMan. Someone must have become confused and thought that "A Seleção" was the nickname when it's most likely not (I-ve certainly never heard it here in Brazil... and I really, Really like football). I vote we take away that nickname (if both of you agree, I'll remove it myself). But let we should Canarinho stay, because it can and is used to describe both the squads from 60-70's and the current squad (although I agree with you that's it much more common for the former than the latter).
 * sure. go ahead SpiceMan (会話) 18:19, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

That's fine. BTW, I took 'Seleção' from an article on the FIFA website detailing their qualification problems in past World Cups.

Hi. I am Brazilian. Every single match of the Brazilian team is referred to as "jogo da Seleção". The media, the players, the public, everyone refers to the team as "a Seleção". It has been so for at least the last three decades.

Indeed "Seleção" is the common term used to refer to the Brazilian National Football Team in Brazil. "Verdeamarela" is seldom used (let alone it's bad grammar - if anything, should be "Verde e Amarela", which means "Green and Yellow", and is always used after "Seleção" - I'm Brazilian too btw). What about "Scratch du Oro"? That's neither English nor Portuguese. It is not uncommon to find the Portuguese form "Escrete de Ouro" in the press, which translates to "Golden Scratch". girco 15:49, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

I hope my addition is appreciated. Streamless 19:49, 1 February 2006 (UTC) Actually, it is "Little Canary Selection".

I don't know which nickname the world wide media uses, but we, brazilians, use that when mention the selection. Officialy (e eu nem sei escrever este raio) is "the Selected".

The word "Seleção" (Selection or Selected, as anglo speakers translate) is a general term for any National Team. We say "Seleção Inglesa" (England National Team), "Seleção Francesa" (France National Team) and on. So, I suggest that we remove the term "The Select" as a nickname for the Brazilian National Football team. --Mrzero 20:05, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

I think we should put Seleção, just put a note next to it expaining it can mean any national team, ex. next to it put "Seleção (refers to any other national team as well)". Seleção is always used to describe them and even though it can refer to any national team it has become a nickname for Brazil. Abreuzinho 15:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Zagallo
Hi, again. Sorry, I don't know how to start a new sub-topic. Just to comment that I removed the reference to Zagallo saying "You will have to swallow me". He indeed said that, but not in the Cup, but in 1997, after Brazil won the America Cup; see an article about the case here: http://www.gazetaesportiva.net/idolos/futebol/zagallo/desabafo.htm Regards, 201.8.187.27

You're absolutly correct, I'm terribly sorry for my mistake.--Vertigo200 21:30, 30 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Hi, maybe this Zagallo quote could be added to the Mário Zagallo, as it needs to be expanded. Carioca 22:47, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Gomes?
Quem colocou o Gomes como goleiro? Parreira nunca falou nesse cara. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rick Browser (talk • contribs) 02:00, April 2, 2006

Question
According to http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/world_cup_2006/teams/brazil/4773881.stm, Ronaldinho is playing as forward, not mid. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.151.12.8 (talk • contribs) 04:04, May 16, 2006


 * According to BBC, the English Liverpool would also defeat São Paulo FC in 2005. English press doesn't understand anything about football. They should only talk about and play rugby and let the five-times champion Brazil carry the football fame alone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrzero (talk • contribs) 20:11, June 27, 2006

State flags
I think we should name the states as well as put the flags. I have no idea where the players come from just by looking or clicking at the flags.Borisblue 17:43, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I think that's far too much information, hold the mouse over the flag and it will usually display the flag, or if you're that thirsty for more in depth stuff, just look at the player's article. You should be glad there's a flag there, I sometimes question if they should remove em all toghether. PHF 19:19, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Question 2
Why doesn't Brazil do well at the Olympics?
 * It is because Olymícs has age limit (<23) to play and the most best brazilian players mature their football only with >24


 * While the Olympics do have an age restriction, Brazil does not, however, perform poorly at the Olympics due to the young players by any means. While Brazil has formed some great under 23 teams and come close to the Olympic gold, it is still the only international titled to elude Brazil. The Brazilian national football team has met a varied degree of success with its under 23, under 20 and under 17 teams at various tournaments. The sole difference is that Brazil has yet to win an Olympic gold medal. Άθως 14:35, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Images
Should I put one or two images to improve the article? I think just one is unsatisfactory. What do you think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.147.68.81 (talk • contribs) 18:42, June 3, 2006

World Cup records
Brazil didn't win 2006 World Cup (yet) so I removed it from the entries —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.143.73.2 (talk • contribs) 18:18, June 14, 2006

Tentative starting line-ups and formations
There is a problem with the code that makes subsequent text appear peculiarly. I added  and it looks okay, but it's not fixed properly.  SLUMGUM   yap    stalk   03:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Balls and boots from World Cups won by Brazil
Image:Bolas chuteiras 5copas.jpg appears on the page, accompanied by the caption "Balls and boots from World Cups won by Brazil, Nike store, London". The balls and boots are not actually from those World Cup, rather they are styled to represent those those World Cup. The picture is therefore testament more to Nike's merchandising capabilities than the World Cups won by Brazil. That's why I think it should be removed. Anyone disagree?  SLUMGUM   yap    stalk   01:04, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Your critic makes sence to me. I would favour its removal. --Abu Badali 03:52, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Record run in World Cup play?
If I've done the math correct, in the last four World Cups, the Brazilians have played 26 games. And of those, they've won 20, had 3 draws and only 3 losses. Is it safe to say that no other national team has ever come even remotely close to that run of winning? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nygoodliving (talk • contribs) 00:46, July 2, 2006

Nicknames
Can we start to lower these nicknames down to 2 or 3 instead of having so many? What nicknames should we keep and which ones should go? Abreuzinho 15:46, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Anyone have any good idea's on how we can make the info box smaller by some how altering the nickname(s) so they take up less space. AJSDA115 14:15, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

2006 World Cup team
I wonder if it´s still relevant to maintain the players selected for the previous World Cup. It may be transferred to a new (?) article containing the teams selected for all World Cups. Coach Dunga has now called up a new squad, and many players are likely not to play any longer for Brazil, which should be reflected in this article. Lomibz 23:19, 1 August 2006 (UTC)


 * If caps include the match against Norway, how come Vagner Love shows none? He played a few minutes towards the end of the match.

Request
I would like to request a Confederations Cup Record for Brazil, can anyone help? 86.144.108.194 20:54, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Recent call-up
The list for recent call-up section is becoming too long now. I have 2 suggestion on this issue Please give your suggestion, thanks. - Martin tamb 03:42, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete the players who has retired from international football off the list
 * Delete the players who hasn't been called since World Cup, as people could still access them in the 2006 FIFA World Cup Squad section
 * Or we could retain the current format

International caps and goals
I have try to correct all the international caps and goals. However, I find something interesting that Brazil often has non-official friendly match (such as vs Selection of Catalunya, vs Sevilla FC, vs Lucerne Selection, and more recently vs Al-Kuwait SC ). As these are unofficial matches, FIFA does not count the caps and goals from these matches. I have correct them all, but if anyone find a mistake please tell me and correct the stats, thanks. - Martin tamb 03:48, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Another think that I forgot to mention is that if anyone use www.sambafoot.com as a reference for international caps and goals, there are some mistakes on that website statistics. That website includes caps and goals from unofficial matches and also from matches played by Brazil Olympic Team. Since Brazil Olympic Team is technically Brazil U-23 and not managed by the current senior coach, these caps were not counted. One special case is the CONCACAF Gold Cup 2003, where the Brazil senior team were invited, but they send the Brazil U-23 instead. However these matches are recorded as senior team matches and therefore the caps and goals from Gold Cup 2003 are counted as senior team caps. - Martin tamb 03:53, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Proper title
I or someone else can move the page so it has a proper title, namely Brazil National Football Team. Contact me if you wish for me to move it, free of charge ;). Eiyuu Kou 01:54, 31 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The convention across all football articles of this type is to use Country national football team. The team are usually referred to simply as "Brazil", hence the full title is not a proper noun. Oldelpaso 09:24, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Notable former players
Can we lose the notable former players section? With five World Cup wins there are many notable Brazilian players, but without specific criteria for inclusion the list is inherently POV - the list is currently based on the personal opinion of the editors who added them. Perhaps a prose section would be better e.g. Pele is regarded by X and Y as the greatest player of all time... Ronaldo holds the record for World Cup goals etc. Oldelpaso 09:31, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

caps/goals for Julio Baptista
in this article and in Baptista's article, it is said he has 0 goals in 20 caps, information i believe is derived from the soccerbase website. however, in this website and in arsenal's official website - the writeup on Baptista - says that he has scored a few international goals! what's up with this inconsistency? Chensiyuan 02:00, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * meantime i shall resolve the ambiguity in arsenal.com's favour. if contrary evidence can be found (apart from soccerbase, which is really the only website i know which says 0 in 20), then let it be adduced. Chensiyuan 02:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Well I believe that arsenal.com has incorrect stats. I usually use the website sambafoot.com for Brazillian players' caps and goal. In this page it shows that Baptista has 29 games and 6 goals. However as I mention in previous talk topic, we need to subtract the caps from unofficial matches which are the matches from Brazil Olympic team on January 2003 (5 caps and 3 goals from matches against Norway, Czech, Egypt, Chile and Germany) and also the matches against clubs or selections team (3 caps and 3 goals from matches against Tokyo Verdy, Selection of Catalunya and FC Sevilla). This resulted in 21 caps with no goal. However, I'm pretty sure that the last time I updated his caps it was 20 caps and no goals, just as soccerbase says. But right now I honestly don't know which one is correct because it is difficult to find complete lineups from Brazil matches since 2001. I only start collecting the lineups since season 2003-2004 onwards and I can only confirm that the matches that they listed seems correct. Maybe arsenal.com ignores the caps from 2003 CONCACAF Gold Cup (July 2003) in which Baptista participate. In this competition Brazil chose to send their Olympic team due to their national team commitment on Copa America 2003. However, the matches were considered as senior team matches because this is a senior team tournament, the caps are counted for senior team. Well, honestly I still doesn't know whether to put 18/3 or 20/0 or 21/0 on his stats. It's just to complicated to find exact stats. Martin tamb 15:21, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I found another interesting source to add confusion here. This page is from FIFA and I assumes this is the correct one. However he listed 11 caps and 2 goals as of 29 June 2005. If I'm not wrong he only plays 2 more times after that under Parreira in 2005 and another 3 games under Dunga in 2006. This would put us in another strange results of 16 caps and 2 goals. Martin tamb 15:30, 30 January 2007 (UTC)


 * yes i have also seen the yahoo fifa page. it is strange indeed. it was also part of the reason why i thought arsenal.com could be correct. however, i did not cite the fifa page because it is evidently outdated. i would have thought the brazilian FA website would be helpful, but there is no english version so i won't understand its contents. Chensiyuan 15:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

WP Football importance
Changed it from "high" to "top". "Article is extremely notable, but has not achieved international notability, or is only notable within a particular continent"? Please. Macgreco 03:18, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Captain
I have changed the current captain from Gilberto Silva to Lucio. I know that Gilberto Silva is the captain during Copa America this June, but officially Lucio is Brazil's captain. Brazil has played 14 matches after World Cup and Lucio has been captain for 6 matches, and in all of them, Gilberto Silva also playing but not appointed captain. Gilberto Silva has only captained the team 4 times, all of them during the absence of Lucio. Other players that has been captain during Dunga's era are Edmilson (2 matches), Kaka and Ronaldinho (1 match each). Martin tamb 06:36, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Intro
Let's simplify: Copa America 2007 in introduction is not needed and "seleção canarinho" can be quoted in History 70s section. --Ciao 90 00:02, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Yellow and red cards
Talking about Pelé in 1966: "And even more surprisingly, while some of the fouls were brutal and seemed to cause serious pain, if not injury, none of the opposing players who chopped him were sent off or carded" - that's not actually very suprising at all when you consider that yellow and red cards weren't introduced until the 1970 World Cup... 192.93.164.23 15:06, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Unfinished code
Added the rewrite due to sections having code that needs to be cleaned up. BT14 22:18, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Biggest Defeat
There is no way their biggest loss is 2-1 to Norway, they have definately lost by more than that in their history. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Michfan2123 (talk • contribs) 04:13, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Biggest defeat
What about the 98 world cup final - They lost to France 3 0! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.219.95.3 (talk) 08:09, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * That bit seems to have been vandalised several times recently. I've restored the genuine biggest defeat, 6–0 to Uruguay in the 1920 Copa America. Oldelpaso 08:21, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Away Kit
Brazil's new Away Kit has yellow trimming instead of white. Can someone fix that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Άθως (talk • contribs) 04:33, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

______________________________________________________________________________________________

how old are this site?

______________________________________________________________________________________________

Time to archive?
There are misleading/confusing discussions here mentioning names such as Parreira. -- Loukinho (talk) 09:02, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. It is indeed time to archive, as the talk page was never archived since its first edit back on May 21, 2005. --Carioca (talk) 23:01, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Now a bot will automatically archive old messages. --Carioca (talk) 01:47, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Anderson
I reverted an anonymous editor who insists to add the wrong info that Barnsley's Anderson was called up for the match against Sweden. Anderson Silva de França, of Barnsley, was not called up for the match against Sweden. Manchester United's Anderson Luís de Abreu Oliveira was the player called up for that match against Sweden. Check this link, this link and this link. --Carioca (talk) 20:15, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Accents
I am asking to see if it is okay if I add missing accents to some of nouns in this article. Thanks for reading this. And by the way I am new to this so please forgive my errors (although I do know what I am doing in terms of editing names). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bort08 (talk • contribs) 03:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, you can go ahead and add the missing accents, but it is better to also improve the article by adding more information and/or adding references instead of just fixing typos or adding accents. --Carioca (talk) 03:49, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Olympics
Moved Olympics to proper section. In fact olympics is not valluable at soccer in Brazil, because most strongest players mature their football before 24 years. --Ciao 90 (talk) 10:19, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi! Thanks for moving the Olympics to a proper section. Regarding your comment above and this message, I found no sources indicating that the Olympic Games are or are not valued by Brazil, but it is a fact that the preparation for the 2008 Olympics was very poor (check this source). Obviously, Dunga said that the competition is important to Brazil (check this source). While this source is not specific for Brazil, it says that the competition is only valued by South American and Africans. Hope that helps. --Carioca (talk) 21:45, 1 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi, per LEAD I moved again Olympics to proper section. There is no need to feature this, golden medalists in their articles such as Spain, France do not state this on LEAD, the edit summary by User:Sportin and birthplace of the User:Ultracanalla that reverted my edit suggests this is getting out of context of encyclopedia to endorse rivalrism between Brazil x Argentina in effort to defame the Brazil national team. My revert is in pure book of style guideline but the dispute that seems emerged indicates tendentious npov. --Ciao 90 (talk) 11:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what any of this has to do with this article, since the Brazil national football team doesn't play there - the Brazil national under-23 football team does. (Although it might have not always been that way) -- Chuq (talk) 12:17, 2 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree that the Olympics info should not be placed in the lead section, as per the reasons mentioned above by Ciao 90. Maybe the best option is to create an article named Brazil Olympic football team, similar to this one, and include the Olympic record table in there. We could just summarize the Olympic record of Brazil in the Brazil national football team article (or even remove that info, as per what Chuq said), and move everything else to the other article. The Brazil national football team article should be focused on the main team, while the Brazil Olympic football team article would be focused on the Olympic team. Starting a separate article for the Olympic team will make possible to add more info, like a history section. --Carioca (talk) 19:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC)
 * The fact this article is not even created endorse the argument that Olympic football is not important in Brazil. There is not interest by anyone make an article like this, find materials, informations, sources. And note that Brazil is synonym of soccer worldwide. Argentina article was created because they care about olympic gold medals. --Ciao 90 (talk) 13:55, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * No, sir. The Olympics should be mentioned in the main article too. We shouldn´t erase this information, because in South America and in Africa, Olympics teams are almost senior teams... And "importance" is a subjetive word. And it´s NOT true that in Brazil it´s not important: that´s because they didn´t win the tournament... See this  , so don´t lie, please... Brazil played always with a lot of excellent players in the Olympics; a lot of them were football stars.


 * A Brazil Olympic football team could be created, but we must mention something about this tournament in the article of the senior team, because south american teams at olympics are almost the 70% of the senior team.


 * If you want to continue, ther is a discussion about Olympic football here


 * And please don´t include the sentence put by Ciao90 before discuss it. The info was BEFORE many of you reverted without discussing... --Ultracanalla (talk) 23:02, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi! I agree that the sentence that the Brazilian football team never put importance in the Olympic competition should be removed, as I found no sources confirming that, and besides, it is not neutral. It is better to avoid mentioning if the Olympics is important or not for Brazil. I suggest keeping the Olympics section, with just the following text: "The Olympic football tournament is the only international competition in football organized by FIFA that Brazil has never won. Although they have never won a gold medal at the Olympic Games, they won two silver medals (1984 and 1988) and two bronze medals (1996, 2008).". Everything else (like the Olympics Record table and the participation in Beijing 2008) should be placed in the Brazil Olympic football team article. What do you all think? --Carioca (talk) 23:17, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi! I´m totally agree, but the "Olympic medal record" box should continue on the article where it is. --Ultracanalla (talk) 23:26, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, that little Olympic medal record box could stay too. --Carioca (talk) 23:29, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi! I just started the Brazil Olympic football team, so I removed the Olympic info that we agreed to remove in the discussion above. --Carioca (talk) 04:31, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Olympics
Its extremely wrong that the Olympic Games are or are not valued by Brazil.

If you see the participations table Brazil is the third team in participations with 11. Only 6 countries have more than 10 participations and this is very important bacause the main venue of the olympics is the participation.

Some of the greatest players of Brazil especialy last years have participated at Olympics (Romario, Bebeto, Tafarel, Ronaldo, Rivaldo, Ronaldinho, Roberto Carlos) if you check the previous rosters you can find many more.

Brazilian national football team trying at least from 1984 to win a gold medal and despite the fact that they haven't done this the brazilian participation is very important.

I have created the article Argentina Olympic football team but i believe that the brazilian Olympic team was always a part of the main team.Sportin (talk) 08:01, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, Brazil sent its best players to the Olympics, but they were still under-23 players plus three overage players (since 1992, when the under-23 age limit started). The Brazilian Olympic team is a separate team. For example, in the 2004 Pre-Olympics, Brazil was managed by Ricardo Gomes, who was never the manager of the main team. Gomes managed the Olympic team from 2002 to 2004 (check this link). I prefer to avoid mentioning in the article if the Olympics are important or not for Brazil because there are no neutral, reliable sources, about that. It is better to let the readers come to their own conclusions after checking the players who competed in the Olympics. Hope that helps. --Carioca (talk) 22:21, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

2008
How come the "archive" shows discussions from 2007-2008 and the current talk page includes discussions from the year preceding the archive?? Very interesting indeed. -- Loukinho (talk) 18:50, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * It seems that the bot is incapable to properly archive those old discussions. They need to be manually archived. --Carioca (talk) 18:53, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I just archived the old discussions. --Carioca (talk) 19:36, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you Carioca! You're the man!! -- Loukinho (talk) 06:36, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Most goals
There seems to be a discrepancy between the list in the article and the list here. Might be vandalism, but it needs looked into. - Dudesleeper / Talk  11:08, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * You are correct. Feel free to fix the info, and use the RSSSF page as the source. Regards, --Carioca (talk) 17:36, 1 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I have just fixed the info according to RSSSF. Feel free to take a look. I also fixed the Most appearances section. Regards, --Carioca (talk) 19:21, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

New List
I have recently been involved in the creation of the List of football players with top domestic, continental and international honours. One slightly frustrating aspect of the list is that there is no short-hand name that I am aware of, in the English-speaking world at least. This may be because no player from an anglophone country has yet succeeded in making the list. Needless to say there are numerous Brazilian players and I wondered if there might be a Portuguese language phrase for the achievement.

There is also a question mark about Márcio Santos being on the list, identified in a footnote. The question boils down to the qualification criteria for Copa América medals.

Any help gratefully received. Ben  Mac  Dui  15:28, 31 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Sorry, AFAIK there is no word or phrase in Portuguese for this achievement. Regarding Márcio Santos, you can find more info here (just check each Brazilian game). He was on the bench in some games, but he did not play any Copa América 1997 game. Brazilian books (such as Enciclopédia do Futebol Brasileiro Lance, Volume 2, page 296, which is a very realiable source) and websites usually list him as having won the Copa América 1997, despite the fact that he did not play a single game in that competition. Hope that helps. --Carioca (talk) 19:50, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Tha's great - many thanks. Ben   Mac  Dui  09:50, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Presences and goal statitistics
Has anyone a reliable source to know how many goals and presences brasilian players have in official games? I cannot find exactly how many caps and how many goals has player Julio Baptista. Sources vary a lot.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.97.102.198 (talk) 02:52, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
 * You may try RSSSF. --Carioca (talk) 02:58, 14 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Use Team Archive lineup from RSSSF, but make sure that the match wasn't classified as unofficial match (Tipo (Class): amistoso não-oficial (unofficial friendly)). Use this "A" Matches list from RSSF to make sure that the matches are official and recognized by FIFA. To make things more complicated, CBF often recognized unofficial matches as official and count their caps, therefore sources may still vary, but I believe that RSSSF based their archive on FIFA. Martin tamb (talk) 16:56, 9 May 2009 (UTC)

Record
In the article Spain national football team, it is said they hold the record of 35 consecutive matches undefeated. Doesn't Brazil hold the record too, when in 90's they got 35 without losing? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.58.125.212 (talk) 23:37, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi! Yeah, you are correct. You can check this reliable source. --Carioca (talk) 23:50, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

Biggest win
I just found out that Brazil-Nicaragua 14-0 (October 17, 1975) does not appears on RSSSF List of Brazil "A" Matches and not even on FIFA's list of Brazil's matches. That 14-0 win was in the 1975 Pan American Games and the article mentioned that Brazil send their Olympic team. In this era only non-professional players or youth players are allowed to participate in the Olympics, hence this imply that Brazil actually sent their amateur team to the Pan American Games. Does the biggest win need to be changed with the official match that are recognized by FIFA? I found a 10-1 win over Bolivia in 1949 and 9-0 win over Colombia in 1957 which are South American Championship matches and are listed by both FIFA and RSSF. - Martin tamb (talk) 05:07, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It is better to keep the game against Nicaragua as Brazil's biggest win, as a very reliable source, which is the book Seleção Brasileira 1914-2006 (authors: Antônio Carlos Napoleão and Roberto Assaf) says in the page 72 that this game was Brazil's biggest win. However, a note can be added regarding the point raised by you. Hope that helps. --Carioca (talk) 20:17, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply. I did not aware about the book, it seems to be a very reliable source, I guess it's better to leave the Nicaragua win there. I'll see what I can do about the notes, but I don't want to clutter the infobox with too much information. Thanks. - Martin tamb (talk) 01:26, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Elo
Highest Elo ranking 	79 (March 1953) Lowest Elo ranking

This is isn t true! --VeszélyesElem (talk) 19:07, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Fixtures
May I please know the source of the fixtures? Zahir 08:19, 26 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rihazrihazrihaz (talk • contribs)

Requested moves on players article
There are several requested page moves related to this article that could use some opinion and comments: Any comments, both support and oppose, are highly appreciated. Cheers. — MT (talk) 04:59, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sandro Ranieri → Sandro Raniere (Discuss)
 * Nilmar Honorato da Silva → Nilmar (Discuss)
 * Thiago Emiliano da Silva → Thiago Silva (footballer) (Discuss)
 * Frederico Chaves Guedes → Fred (footballer) (Discuss)


 * You can list those requests here. --Carioca (talk) 20:09, 18 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Already done, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football. — MT (talk) 00:45, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I've also notified WikiProject Brazil, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Brazil. — MT (talk) 04:22, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Article size
This page is 102 kilobytes long. Perhaps we should move the history section to a separate article. The history section could be moved to a new article named History of the Brazil national football team. --Carioca (talk) 20:41, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree, history section has too many information. That can be transferred with the article noted above, and we can left a summary of it. This will also help to meet FA status. Tanvir 07:22, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The page is 121,122 bytes long now. --Carioca (talk) 21:22, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Ronaldo Record
Should we include somewhere that Ronaldo holds the record for most goals scored (15) in one tournament? That is a prestigious accolade for Brazil, and I feel as though it belongs in the article. What do you all think? [] Adamh4 (talk) 16:18, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
 * You can mention it in the 2002 World Cup section, but the Ronaldo article already mentions this information. --Carioca (talk) 19:54, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Jairzinho
There appears to be a mistake in the top scorers section. Jairzinho is mentioned as having earned his latest cap on 5 March 2014, which seems almost impossible given that he is currently 69 years old. Also, the number of caps/goals in the table doesn't match the appearances/goals stats listed in his personal Wikipedia article. If someone who is knowledgeable about Brazilian football could please take a look. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.126.228.151 (talk) 20:26, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Fixed. --Carioca (talk) 20:04, 6 April 2014 (UTC)

Most caps error
In the most caps section, Rivelino is listed twice. (#3 and #10). How can he be both?

James Foster Rio-1970 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.119.95.190 (talk) 21:41, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

Samba
I think it's really important that we add in something about the Brazilian style of football -- samba. It's a mix of dance and football, and purely unique to the region because it stems from a Brazilian music/dance. Here's a link,, we should find a place for this in the article! Let me know what you think. Adamh4 (talk) 21:30, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

david luiz
Someone should update David luiz club (PSG of course) in the current squad session! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.16.193.164 (talk) 10:13, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Nicknames
The nicknames Canarinho and Verde-Amarela are not common nicknames for the Brazil national team. Seleção is the only widely used nickname. --Carioca (talk) 21:24, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

"Seleção" actually it cant be considered a nick name, since is the word in portuguese designed for "national team". None in Brazil consider it a nickname, seleção is used for any national team. 189.110.147.193 (talk) 20:03, 29 May 2013 (UTC) Their actual nickname is "chorões" ("big criers") because they cry a lot when don't win and have to face a penalty shootout. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.234.135.216 (talk) 01:50, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Team Colours
2014 World Cup features Brazil team's home colours with yellow shirts with white shorts/socks. Please update. Thieh (talk) 18:00, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
 * It is not a permanent change. After the World Cup Brazil will play with the traditional home colors more often. --Carioca (talk) 19:39, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 July 2014
The national team are currently ranked number 1 in the World Football Elo Ratings and 3 in the FIFA World Ranking. Brazil is the only team to have won the world cup in three different continents: once in Europe (1958 Sweden), once in South America (1962 Chile), twice in North America (1970 Mexico and 1994 United States) and once in Asia (2002 Korea/Japan). They also share with Spain a record of 35 consecutive official matches undefeated.

64.91.214.8 (talk) 03:52, 8 July 2014 (UTC) won the world in three NOT four continents...that is incorrect Once in Europe..... That is correct!! North and South America is ONE continent- There is ONE AMERICA continent that is divide in 3 parts North, Central and South! The rest of the paragraphs is fine

❌ Most reference books consider North and South America are different Continents - Arjayay (talk) 11:32, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Worst ever defeat
It should be replaced by the 8th July 2014 defeat to Germany. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.178.128.21 (talk) 21:28, 8 July 2014 (UTC) And that's why you wait till the end of a game before updating stats. Darkson (BOOM! An interception!) 21:49, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Er, games not finished yet - it shouldn't be updated until the game is over. 81.132.108.246 (talk) 21:32, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
 * And in the (unlikely) event Brazil score two unanswered goals it would need to be removed again - wait till the match is over, then update. It's not rocket science. Darkson (BOOM! An interception!) 21:42, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
 * See? Darkson (BOOM! An interception!) 21:46, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 July 2014
Update on biggest defeat:

2014-07-08 Belo Horizonte Germany 7-1 Brazil

Cedric tsan cantonais (talk) 21:52, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Already done Already being dealt with. The 6-0 is a joint record. Kahastok talk 21:57, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 July 2014
remove:  6–0  (Viña del Mar, Chile; September 18, 1920)

Pennstate913 (talk) 21:38, 8 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Better keep both scores (0-7 currently) for the rest of the WC, for historical comparison ("worst defeate since ...") --89.204.138.99 (talk) 21:41, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Already done - being sorted already. Kahastok talk 21:57, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Worst defeat is 7-1 though, and will reflect that after the tournament, since goals for feeds into that, correct?


 * I see no harm in keeping both records in. Then readers can make up their own mind (some might argue that the 6-0 is worse because Brazil did not score). Kahastok talk 22:05, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

'Nicknames' has several mistakes
it's 'canarinha' not 'canarinho' 'El scratch' mat be used by some Latin American commentators, but is certainly *not* used by Brazilians, because it's not portuguese. Brazilians use the word 'escrete' (form the English word 'scratch') but in Portuguese it's 'o escrete' (meaning 'the national team') and not 'el escrete'.

I'll be happy to contribute more corrections... :-)

Cheers

2.81.103.181 (talk) 16:20, 9 July 2014 (UTC)Guilherme

Worst defeat?
Ok, since the page is having abit of an edit-war right now, let's try and settle this. Their biggest defeat before this was a 6-0 loss to Uruguay in 1920. Now, it's 7-1 here in 2014. The goal difference is exactly the same, so which gets put down as the worst defeat? Or both? Redverton (talk) 21:51, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer putting in both. Cedric tsan cantonais (talk) 22:02, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Since goals scored is an important stat in the world cup I'd rate 7-1 a bigger loss than 6-0 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nappateemu (talk • contribs) 00:03, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

A defeat by a 7-1 margin certainly is a higher defeat than one by a 6-0 margin, and this is the way it is handled on all other national team Wiki pages. Keeping the 6-0 in the list would be extremely inconsistent not only with the practice of sorting and classifying defeats/wins on Wikipedia in general, but with this very Wiki page as well: Because if you list the 10-1 victory of Brazil against Bolivia from 10 April 1949 as Brazil's biggest win, you would also have to list Brazil's 9-0 victory against Colombia from 24 March 1957 in the same category. And if we started doing this for every single national team page on Wikipedia, it would turn into an absolute mess. CONCLUSION: Uruguay's 6-0 ought to be removed, with Germany's 7-1 being retained as the higher result. Wackelkopp (talk) 13:27, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Your claim that Wikipedia differentiates between results of the same margin is observably false. On the contrary, it appears the standard is to include all results of the same margin. For example, the team pages of Mozambique, Ivory Coast, Turkmenistan, Cameroon, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Iran, Czech Republic, and Belgium all include results with different scorelines but equal margins in either the biggest win or biggest defeat section. You are correct in that it would be inconsistent to include both the 6-0 and 7-1 losses, but not both the 10-1 and 9-0 wins. To be consistent with the rest of the team pages, all four results should be mentioned. Gazzawhite (talk) 01:01, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * This is the only previous discussion I can find regarding this. There the consensus is to keep all results of the same margin. Gazzawhite (talk) 01:25, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * This is definitely NOT the standard, and some of these other team pages you listed are somewhat obscure - and, interestingly -and contrary to your statement- neither of these eight pages had a discussion on the talk page about this topic, so I really don't know why you come up with an assumption such as the one that there was 'a consensus to keep all results of the same margin'. There simply is no such consensus. And as a counterexample: The national team page of Argentina does not contain the 5-0 defeat at the hands of Uruguay on 16 December 1959, although it has the same goal margin. The page of the Netherlands national team contains a 12-2 defeat by the hands of an England Amateur national team in 1907, that of the Belgium national team contains a 11-2 defeat by the hands of the very same team; both matches are not even considered official international matches by the FIFA and should therefore have no place in the list - and although this is a completely different point, it just shows how incredibly inconsistent Wikipedia seems to be when it comes to these matches. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wackelkopp (talk • contribs) 03:00, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I've made a new topic on the Project Football page to discuss this. Hopefully we can get some sort of consensus over there.Gazzawhite (talk) 03:42, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Would be nice to have this topic discussed properly in order to finally get to a real consensus on how to handle this in articles of national teams in general. Wackelkopp (talk) 03:56, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Article Split
This article is quite large at 140kB. Wiki size guidelines say that articles over 60kB should probably be divided. I plan to create a History of the Brazil national football team article, and will move some of the historical material from this article over to that page. I wanted to give folks some warning before they see large chunks of this article disappear. Barryjjoyce (talk) 02:42, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Good idea, but the article is still too large, as it is a member of Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded, so not all transcluded templates are displaying properly. Wbm1058 (talk) 21:03, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I moved World Cup navboxes to the appropriate sub-article (diff), and now the article is back within limits and displaying properly. Wbm1058 (talk) 01:09, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Júlio César
Is he really retired from the national team? SLBedit (talk) 15:07, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Most successful national team in the world? Clarify.
Quote: "Its achievements have led CONMEBOL to consider it as The most glorious and successful of all national teams from South America and the World." Is this quote referring to all national soccer/football teams in the world or all national teams in the world. If it's the former then the article would be improved by specifying this. If it's the latter then that is unlikely as the All Blacks would surpass Brazil in this respect. 121.73.7.84 (talk) 16:12, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Another improvement would be referring to "football" as either association football (clumsy), or soccer (simpler). For most English speakers (outside the UK) football doesn't necessary mean soccer. Football is an umbrella term which can refer to a number of different sports. This is probably not such a major issue as people reading the article are almost certainly going to be aware that the sport being discussed is association football, but the resistance of some to use the unequivocal name soccer, despite this being the most commonly used English-language term for this sport creates these issues. 121.73.7.84 (talk) 16:25, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
 * CONMEBOL is a football association, so they are referring to this sport, most likely they do not care about the All Blacks or other sports. Regarding the name of the sport, most of the world call it football, just a few countries call it soccer, and even in those countries several people adopt the name football instead of soccer. --Carioca (talk) 20:57, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

The reference page which leads the reader to think it was CONMEBOL who stated that it is the most glorious nation in the world is NOT official. Isn't there any OFFICIAL statements? Since that website is, again, non official. Please add it again when there is a notable official statement. Marcus Diniz (talk) 13:25, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

1978 FIFA World Cup
To date, this was the last time that Brazil has not finished as leader (1st) of their group, during a FIFA World Cup finals.

They finished second in their group, on three occasions: 1930 (Uruguay), 1974 (Germany) and 1978 (Argentina). --RLH Grumicker (talk) 10:42, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

1966 FIFA World Cup
To date, this was the last time that Brazil was eliminated during the First Round of a FIFA World Cup. --RLH Grumicker (talk) 17:10, 14 November 2014 (CET)

They were eliminated in the First Round, on three occasions: 1930 (Uruguay), 1934 (Italy) and 1966 (England). --RLH Grumicker (talk) 11:03, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Brazil Olympics Record
You Have A Mistake In The Total Stats !! Brazil Played 54 Games And Won In 31 And Draw 8 And Loss 15 .. Simply You Forgot To Add The Stats Of The Last Tournament 2012. Also You Have Another Little Mistake In 2008 Tournament Stats Because Brazil Won In 5 Games And Loss 1 .. And You Put 4 Wins 1 Draw And 1 loss .. But Brazil Don't Made a Draw Never In The Competition. I Hope You Fix It. Thanks For Advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.116.87.80 (talk) 12:13, 14 June 2015 (UTC)

National goals and caps
please update well caps and goals of Brazilian players in the national team — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.53.134.165 (talk) 00:22, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Ronaldo scored 73 goals if we include frendlies
Ronaldo scored 73 goals and not 62 if we include frendlies. And since neymar goal-list includes friendly goals I think we should correct the stats for Ronaldo. Here's a video that show all his goals for Brazil https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYLeAQk8KVI      --Zidane-Materazzi (talk) 17:03, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Biggest defeat was not against Uruguay nor Germany
It's well known here in Brazil that the biggest defeat was against Yugoslavia in 1934 [8-4]. No other team scored more goals against Brazil than Yugoslavia did. So, the biggest defeat on the right-hand side column is wrong. Thank you. MarcosPassos (talk) 18:18, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

It's not. Yugoslavia scored just 4 goals more than Brazil but Chile and Germany 6. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arndt1969 (talk • contribs) 17:33, 3 July 2015 (UTC)