The South American World Cup qualifiers are always interesting, especially when two big teams collide. This round brings the clash between Colombia and Brazil, with these two units meeting at Barranquilla.
Before Betting on Colombia vs. Brazil
The Colombians had a disappointing campaign in the previous WC qualifiers, staying out of the tournament in Qatar. It was a big blow for this nation, who got used to seeing their favorites among the best teams on the globe.
Cafeteros are without a defeat for the past 15 games, with ten victories and five draws. They have improved significantly compared to the previous period, but we need to say that Nestor Lorenzo’s team doesn’t have too much luck during matches. Right now, they are on a three-game streak, posting nothing but draws.
Brazil is far from expected. After playing 1-1 at home against Venezuela, they were defeated in Uruguay, and that was an especially painful defeat for Selecao. The rivalry between them and the Uruguayans is the biggest on the continent, so this failure had significant consequences.
The team doesn’t have the needed chemistry, and the Brazilians look more like a unit composed of individuals, not team players. At the World Cup in Qatar, we saw plenty of problems in the back line, which have continued up to this day. Another issue is the lack of playmakers, and as much as this sounds strange, Brazil doesn’t have a player whose role would be like De Bruyne’s in City, and we think we all agree that Neymar isn’t that type of a player anymore.
Colombia vs. Brazil Offshore World Cup Qualifiers Betting Odds
Offshore Sportsbook | Colombia | Draw | Brazil |
---|---|---|---|
BetOnline | 3.44 | 3.10 | 2.20 |
MyBookie | 3.40 | 3.15 | 2.20 |
BetUS | 3.45 | 3.15 | 2.15 |
SportsBetting.ag | 3.44 | 3.10 | 2.20 |
XBet | 3.40 | 3.15 | 2.20 |
The game in Barranquilla comes at the worst possible moment for Selecao, who is still searching for itself after a couple of disappointing tournaments. Colombia is aggressive and strong at home, but we still wouldn’t bet on their win, yet pick low efficiency instead.