Brazil vs. England: 6 Things We Learned in 2-2 Maracana Draw

Brazil and England fought out the international friendly match at the redeveloped Maracana Stadium, with the eventual 2-2 draw perhaps flattering the away side after Brazil were by far the stronger side in the first half.

It was a match which might not have offered either manager too many solutions for their long-term plans with regard to the World Cup next year, but it perhaps offered some insights as to the problems each have at present.

England came into the game off the back of an uninspiring 1-1 draw with Ireland, while Brazil now have one more friendly to play before they take part in the FIFA Confederations Cup starting in mid-June.

Here are six things we learned from the 2-2 draw on Sunday.

England Lack Quality Central Defensive Options

With John Terry and Rio Ferdinand now no longer available for selection for England, Roy Hodgson finds himself with seemingly limited options for the two central defensive spots.

Gary Cahill and Phil Jagielka are currently the preferred duo to play in the role, and while each is a decent Premier League-standard defender in his own right, neither is experienced in terms of Continental football, having just 34 caps between them.

In truth, compared to partnerships at the back England have enjoyed before, this is a fairly substandard central defensive partnership to be heading into a World Cup with.

It might not quite be the weakest area of the team, but neither is it the strongest, and it is one of the most important areas on the pitch. The two will presumably benefit from another year of playing alongside each other whenever possible, which will be important ahead of the tournament—presuming England make it through the qualifiers—but even so, they are not going to get significantly better than they already are.

Joleon Lescott is the current third choice, while younger options Phil Jones, Chris Smalling and Steven Caulker are very unlikely to break into the starting XI before the World Cup.

Playing Deep, in Hodgson's Style, Does Not Suit England

Two solid banks of players stationed on the edge, and 10 metres outside, of the penalty area, frustrating the opposition and absorbing pressure.

Drop back quickly, as deep even as the six-yard box, when the opposition looks to move behind the full-backs or put high balls into the area.

When the ball is won, play out to the channels or flanks and move players forward as a unit through the centre, quickly moving from build-up phase to attacking phase within very few passes.

This is the preferred model of defending and transition play for England manager Roy Hodgson, and he coaches his team to set up as such against moderate or impressive opposition; unfortunately, the players he has available to him are patently not suited to such an approach.

While it would be reasonable to expect players to defend in-season far better than they did against Brazil in the first half, they still aren't built to sit back continuously and break with regularity and with pace. These are players who line up for Arsenal, Liverpool, Manchester United.

Teams, in other words, who usually dominate matches, play higher up the field and maintain at least an equal share of possession—not the 38 percent abomination which England managed against Brazil, which actually went up in the second half after an atrocious opening 45 minutes.

Furthermore, the players he regularly selects are functional without being physically outstanding, limiting their ability to break forward in numbers or as quickly as Hodgson would like.

It is incumbent upon Hodgson to find a way to work with what he has, not to shoehorn those who are available into his own methodologies and then blame failures on a lack of availability or quality.

Brazil's Attacking Options: Depth Is Present, but Is the Quality Enough?

Brazil boss Felipe Scolari lined up with Neymar, Hulk and Fred in attack, with Oscar also supporting in the final third.

Leandro Damiao and Bernard came off the bench, as did Lucas Moura.

All told, it's an impressive array of talent to be able to call upon—especially compared to his opposite number's ability to call on just Wayne Rooney and a half-fit Jermain Defoe, who didn't get off the bench. Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain made an entrance, but more on him shortly.

For Brazil, there are certainly the numbers available to choose from, and that's even without considering the veterans still hoping for a World Cup finale such as Ronaldinho and Kaka.

Possibilities and variations are all there, with the players providing a range of technical and physical skills as well as depth in each of the tactical roles, but are any three or four of them that head and shoulders above their rivals that they could fire Brazil far in the major tournaments?

All eyes will be on Neymar next year in the buildup to the World Cup as he opted to join Barcelona, but things haven't gone all that well for Hulk since moving to Russia.

Five or six very good forwards might get into the squad, but the three or so who are called upon to start matches in the tournaments have to be good enough to break down all kinds of opponents and score the goals to win matches.

Against England, despite a plethora of chances (Brazil had 32 shots during the game), they did not do that.

Neymar had seven shots alone without finding the net, while Hulk and Fred had three apiece. They won't always be so profligate, and they presumably won't always be up against goalkeepers in as good form as Joe Hart was on the night, but questions remain over their genuine penalty-box quality nonetheless.

You can be sure that Romario, Ronaldo and the like would likely have put a few of those chances away; can Brazil's current crop of attackers do so when it really matters?

Midfield Lacking in Pace, Passing Ability and Vertical Penetration

Frank Lampard, Michael Carrick and Phil Jones: Much like the defensive pairing, individually they are accomplished players who have played important roles for their clubs, but together they offer very little in a team-dynamic perspective.

Especially when coupled with the deep-lying tactics that England employed, or were forced to employ by Brazil, during the first half.

Jones is hugely energetic but does not possess great pace on or off the ball, while at 34 years of age Lampard is never going to manage to bomb forward to support a breakaway half a dozen or 10 times a half. His strength has always lain in making late surges into spaces on the edge of the box, but England never had the ball for long enough in the final third to make this a possibility.

Carrick operates best as a playmaker from deep roles, and he certainly had the ball in that area, but he was under so much pressure from the opposition that he had very little time or chance to do anything with the ball. Another important note is that all his teammates were so close to him all the time that there was rarely a decent out-ball for Carrick to aim for.

All in all, England had a hugely flawed, thoughtless midfield in place, one which never had a chance to work together in the manner that the more mobile two, Lampard and Jones, might be able to make a success of.

Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain: Ideal Impact Sub?

England opted to introduce Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain after 62 minutes, trying to change the flow of the game after Brazil had taken a 1-0 lead.

The Arsenal youngster brought a new pace and vertical threat to the team, playing just off Wayne Rooney up front. It took just a few minutes for a tangible result to be offered, as he hit a fine first-time effort, hard and low, into the corner of the net from 20 yards.

It was one of just four shots on target England had all game long, and it came only five minutes after he entered the pitch.

Oxlade-Chamberlain has suffered this season at the Emirates, playing infrequently and having to settle for a bit-part role off the bench, but that looks like the best option for him at present at the international level. He can play wide on either flank or in the central role he occupied here, meaning the manager can employ him as needed, as the extra option in the final third or as a straight swap for the likes of Theo Walcott.

The only remaining question then is if he's not starting regularly for Arsenal, should he be in the England squad?

Are Either of These Nations Seriously Challengers for the 2014 FIFA World Cup?

On the evidence of their World Cup qualifying matches so far and their last few friendlies, England are not a viable option to challenge for the tournament proper next year under Roy Hodgson.

Too often reactive to going behind rather than trying to seize the initiative in games themselves, England regularly look one-dimensional and lack great quality in depth. Much has been made of the lack of numbers available to the manager to choose from, but all nations have to work with what they have available.

Hodgson must mould those available for selection into a system, or a number of systems, which can win against a variety of opponents.

So far under Hodgson, England have played 17 matches. They have won nine of those games—two against San Marino and one each against Moldova, Sweden and Ukraine being the only competitive victories Hodgson has managed.

In fairness, it must also be recognised that he has only actually lost once in 90 minutes, a friendly against Sweden. The five matches between August and October will tell much more about how far England could go at the World Cup, but right now, they look a fair bet to fail to improve upon their usual quarterfinal exit.

For Brazil, immense pressure will be on them to win the tournament outright as hosts. Despite five wins in World Cup history, they've never won on home soil, and the vast money spent on stadium redevelopment, infrastructure and the re-employment of Scolari will all be used as sticks to beat the team with if they fail.

It's easy to say they won't win it, but Brazil have had two managers and no competitive matches in the long buildup to the tournament. More will be able to be deduced, by viewers and by the manager, following the Confederations Cup.

They certainly have an impressive squad, but collectively this Brazil squad lacks the finesse and consistency of the likes of Germany, Spain or perhaps, most alarmingly, Argentina.

Time will tell—but the smart money probably wouldn't be on either of Brazil or England lifting the trophy in 2014.

Follow @karlmatchett