Short characterization BRAZIL

 

PLAYERS

STARTING SIX - SUBSTITUTES

Ranking

2002-2012

1

CLAUDINO, Fabiana  (C)

WCH 2002

7

3

LINS, Danielle

4

PEQUENO, Paula

OG 2004

4

5

SILVA, Adenizia

6

MENEZES, Thaisa

WCH 2006

2

8

CARVALHO, Jaqueline

9

FERREIRA, Fernanda

OG 2008

1

11

CAIXETA, Tandara

12

PEREIRA, Natalia

WCH 2010

2

13

CASTRO, Sheilla

14

OLIVEIRA, Fabiana  (L)

OG 2012

1

16

RODRIGUES, Fernanda

 

General

The average age of the Olympic champion of 27,7 years demonstrates that it is a very expe-rienced team (9 players already had competed in two World Championships, 6 players belonged to the 2008 Olympic gold medal team). The age distribution with 2-3 players each in the age groups 23/24 to 31/32 years makes a continuous substitution of players without a negative impact on an optimum team structure possible and kept the level of performance very high. The average body height of the team (184 cm without libero) and 7 players between 183 and 187cm as well as 2 blockers in the starting lineup with 194cm underline the necessary anthropometric presuppositions for a successful blocking and attacking play in modern female volleyball.

The dynamic and powerful offensive play as well as the perfect symbiosis of universal playing ability and individual performance potential for special tasks again characterized the highly organized and efficient, but simultaneously emotional mode of playing. of Brazil’s team: take out). Modern scouting information is applied in a systematic way to adapt the individual as well as the group tactical actions to the opponent as well as to the specific situation.

The 2008 Olympic champion had to struggle in the round-robin pool matches (TUR 3:2, - USA 1:3, - KOR 0:3, -CHN 3:2) and advanced to the quarter-final in the 4th position. During that phase of the tournament almost nobody believed in a repetition of Brazil’s Olympic victory. But thanks to the patient and clever coaching by Jose Guimares (substitution tactics, search for the best line-up, build-up of self-confidence) the team returned to the strength it has had in many tournaments before. It is worth mentioning that initially the reliable and stable Paula Pequeno (No. 4) played a lot, but in the later matches of the tournament including the three deciding matches Fernanda Rodriguez (No. 16) was able to make it to the first line-up. While the win in the quarter-final still was hanging by a thread and the team had to struggle hard to advance (3:2 - RUS), in the semi-final itself the Brazilian team had no problems (3:0 against JPN).  After clearly losing the first set in the Olympic final (11:25) the team performance of Brazil increased a lot and almost reached a state of flow. The US-American team later in the final had no real chance (61:46 attacking points, 77:70% perfect serve reception actions) and Brazil again captured the Olympic title.

 

Complex I - Attack (first ball side out)

The successful attacking combinations /tempos had their basis primarily in a precise and stable serve reception performance (rank 1 in team-ranking: 76% +, best receiver No 16 Rodriguez: 81%, libero No14: final: 84% +). With her range of action the libero (Pos.6 and 1) eased the burdens of the players at the neighboring positions and supported a dynamic transition towards the signaled course of combinations. In the different rotations the team in most cases applied one to two clearly and simply structured combination options. The attacks in general are characterized by a mixture of very efficient 1-tempo-attacks and speedy attacks from the outside positions. In the 1-tempo-attacks No 6 Menezes is especially striking, while No 1 Claudino acts very dynamically and efficiently behind the setter (“one leg actions” when setter P3/P4). The backcourt attack is a clear attacking option with the setter at the net, but also plays its role in „emergency“ situations following inaccurate serve receptions. The variability of the spikes, the arrangement of the approach to the spike of all players involved and the alternative attack arrangement outside the signaled combination (especially considering the role of the setter following inaccurate serve receptions) are additional performance features which are worth mentioning. 

 

Complex II – Block

In team ranking BRA ranks 3rd (17% kills / 2,8 average by set; WCh 2010: 21% kills / 3,4 average by set). Both block players performed on top performance level (No 1 Claudino:  1st in individual ranking: 20% kills / 0,94 average by set; No 6 Menezes: rank 5: 11% kills / 0,75 average by set). But the blocking performance is not only characterized by direct block points. Considering category “CII - team attack” (playing sequences: no touch and block-touch) you can clearly see that the high and closed blocking area (blockshadow, slowing down of power attacks) supports the work of back-court defence.

It is not possible to deal with all facets of the blocking behaviour in detail in this short team characterization. The total picture of the video clips offered stresses in all its nuances the technically as well as tactically extremely well thought-out block play which always is adapted to the situation (see also “CII - team attack - attractive rallies”). The flexible changing appli-cation and adaptation of the positions of the different block formations (perfect movements and synchronous actions) need to be emphasized.

 

Complex II – Attack (transition)

The selected match sequences illustrate the coordinated co-operation of block/field defense and the arrangement of counter attacks related to typical match situations. The dynamic first tempo-attacks in front of and behind the setter or alternatively performed speedy attacks from outside positions (especially effective from P4) as well as individual backcourt attacks (P6 “Pipe”) are typical and  impressive solutions for freeball situations.

High and closed blocks at the outside positions in defense situation create efficient diagonal defense (P5 in case of “no touch the block”) and efficient actions of 3-players-defense-back-court-formations possible.  In the majority of the cases attacks are terminated at outside positions, following defensive actions without touching the block backcourt attacks were performed in a couple of cases (P6/1).

Following the attack coverage, outside position attacks dominate (in blocktouch situations) very often at P2 (the attacker at that position only in rare cases is part of the coverage). The distribution of the sets following block coverage is interesting. On outside positions sets are played away from these ranges of action (P4: P2 / P2: P4 or backcourt). From a tactical point of view there are two reasons to do so: calm and clear arrangement and finalization of the attacks and changing the positions for building up the block and covering puts additional pressure on the opposing team.