Opinion – PVC: Number 50 exposed in Atlético’s cup exposes the contradiction of unified titles

The number 50 displayed in the cup of Atlético, Brazilian champion of 2021, exposes the contradiction with the announcement made by the CBF, eleven years ago, about the unification of Brazilian titles.

It is known that the process of combining the Brazil and Robertão Cups with the National Championship, created with this name, by João Havelange, in 1971, was political.

Attention: the name was not Campeonato Brasileiro, but Campeonato Nacional. Later, it was Copa Brasil between 1975 and 1979, Golden Cup between 1980 and 1985, returned to Copa Brasil in 1986, often with the nickname Brasileirão.

I was vehemently against unification, in the debate that was created with the dossier brought to the CBF by Santos, Cruzeiro, Palmeiras, Botafogo and Bahia, at the end of the 2000s. It is not necessary to call Dom Pedro 2º the President of the Republic to know who he was the head of state, in the Empire.

On the other hand, I’ve heard fans say they got to know a story they had no idea existed. Fortaleza recognizes itself with two Brazilian vice-championships, Bahia wears two stars over its shield, Botafogo painted its headquarters with the phrase “Double Brazilian champion – 1968 and 1995.”

There would be a thousand ways to unify. Robertão was named after the expansion of Rio-São Paulo. It could, therefore, be unified since the creation of the regional tournament, in 1933. Or join the Taça Brasil to the Copa do Brasil. Or do nothing.

The worst thing is to unify under one criterion – Brazil Cup was added to Robertão and to the National Championship – and then celebrate its fiftieth anniversary, when it turns 66 years of the first Brazil Cup. “This year, we celebrate 50 years of the Brazilian Championship as it is, regardless of whether the others are recognized national titles”, said the CBF when asked about the reason for the commemorative seal.

We just need to know if Pedro Álvares Cabral discovered Brazil or invaded it. Whether it was a proclamation of the republic or a coup d’état. Let’s not even talk about 1964, because they know it was a coup, even though my fourth-grade teacher said it was a revolution. I also learned about the 1930 revolution and it wasn’t quite like that.

We know that the Modern Art Week took place at Theatro Municipal, between February 11 and 18, 1922, and the centenary will argue that modernism was not limited to São Paulo. This should not exclude that the hundred years are just cause to tell this illiterate country who were Mário de Andrade, Anita Malfatti, Oswald de Andrade, Di Cavalcanti…

Also mention the absence of Tarsila do Amaral, for being in Paris at that time, and spread the knowledge about modern art in other parts of the country.

We don’t know how to tell the story of Brazil and, in football, it’s worse. We spent 80 years debating whether the Rio champion in 1907 was Fluminense or Botafogo, a case that ended in division of the title. It would be a scandal if there weren’t seven other titles from Rio de Janeiro and eleven from São Paulo divided into two leagues and two clubs.

Just as Flamengo was champion of Rio de Janeiro twice in the same year (1979) and Palmeiras won two Brazilians in 1967, taking into account the unification.

If they don’t unify, it’s the same, because they won Robertão and the Taça Brasil.

You can’t hear serious people saying, “In my opinion, it’s been around since 1967” or “It’s been around since 1971 for me.” I’m against unification, but once unified I just want to know how we’re going to tell our story.

Pedro Álvares Cabral discovered Brazil? Or invaded? Lamartine Babo consecrated the marchinha: “Who invented Brazil? It was Seu Cabral, two months after Carnival.”