Flu stumble in Argentina: Renato’s side face tough Maraca return | OneFootball

The night of football for Fluminense left a bitter taste and the certainty that their spot in the semifinals of the Copa Sudamericana was compromised by a strategy that bordered on cowardice and the stubbornness of their coach, Renato Gaúcho. The tricolor fans go home with the clear conviction that the blame for the defeat, and for a possible elimination, falls directly on the misguided choices of the technical staff.

First Half: Caution and Gaps in Defense

Playing at home, Lanús started the match in a predictable manner, adopting a cautious approach and, at times, sitting back completely. However, the home team gradually managed to take control of the game, exploiting Fluminense’s weaknesses. The Tricolor showed enormous difficulty in marking from the very beginning, especially on the right side of the defense. It was precisely there that Marcelino Moreno and Salvio found fertile ground to create the best chances, taking advantage of the excessive space left by Guga—a tactical flaw that the coach failed to fix. After the period of greatest Argentine pressure in the middle of the first half, Fluminense even managed to balance the actions, building good plays down the flanks and creating a chance to open the scoring with Renê. However, the chance was wasted, a sign of things to come.

Second Half: The Stubbornness that Buried Their Chances

The second half revealed the most worrying side of Renato Gaúcho’s strategy. Fluminense simply gave up attacking the opponent, surrendering possession and initiative to Lanús. This passive stance, combined with a midfield lacking any creativity, turned the Tricolor into a team without ambition. Even with the well-known low technical quality of the Argentine players, who failed to take advantage of their dominance to create real danger, Fluminense suffered from the fear of taking risks. With deep defensive lines and no drive to go for goal, the team from Rio neither attacked, nor pressed, nor showed any desire to win.

The changes made by Renato Gaúcho only made things worse. They were wrong choices that brought neither the energy nor the attacking intent needed. The insistence on Soteldo, who failed to make a difference on the field, was further proof of the stubbornness that permeated the night. Even though the Venezuelan did not deliver on the pitch, and with other options available, the coach insisted on bringing him on. And more: he made a substitution that, in the eyes of every tricolor fan, seemed senseless—unless there was a request to come off or some injury, taking Martinelli off for Bernal would test the patience of even the calmest supporters. At the very least, he could have brought on Acosta or even Riquelme Felipe. But no: the coach chose not to change the outlook of a sterile midfield, keeping players who could not create dangerous plays, leaving the attack isolated and inoperative.

The tricolor fans, who expected a determined and proactive team in the quest for the semifinals—especially given the low quality of the opponent—will go to sleep with the bitter and clear certainty that the defeat is a direct result of a cowardly strategy and the misguided decisions of a coach who insisted on his stubbornness and failed to read the game. Renato Gaúcho has an undeniable share of success so far, no doubt. But today, the blame for this painful night lies mainly with him.

This article was translated into English by Artificial Intelligence. You can read the original version in 🇧🇷 here.