Flamengo and Fluminense are legally challenging Vasco’s use of Maracanã, citing the ineffectiveness of a previous agreement and prioritizing field maintenance.
A new controversy stirred the Rio de Janeiro football scene this Friday: the dispute over the use of the Maracanã stadium. Flamengo and Fluminense, who manage the stadium through the concessionaire Fla-Flu Serviços S.A., presented a strong defense against the lawsuit filed by Vasco da Gama. The São Januário team is seeking authorization to host their Copa do Brasil quarter-final match against Vitória, scheduled for next Wednesday, at the stadium.
The controversy centers on the validity of a memorandum of understanding signed last year, which would allow Vasco to use the stadium for eight games between 2025 and 2026. However, the concessionaire claims this document is ineffective because it was not properly signed by its representatives, leaving the signature field blank.
Field Maintenance as a Priority
The defense presented by Flamengo and Fluminense argues that the denial of Vasco‘s request is based on a technical plan for field recovery, established long before Vasco’s request. According to the clubs, Vasco had publicly announced it would play the game at São Januário and only requested the Maracanã with only eight days’ notice, on August 19.
The week between August 23 and 29 was entirely reserved for intensive field maintenance, making any use impossible during that period. This schedule was set after an assessment on July 29, which indicated a “high level of wear due to intense usage” on the Maracanã‘s pitch, according to Greenleaf, the company responsible for maintenance.
Criticism from Léo Pereira and Preparation for the NFL
The Rio clubs’ defense further reinforces its argument by citing the statement from Flamengo defender Léo Pereira. After the match between Flamengo and Cruzeiro on August 19, 2026, Léo Pereira publicly criticized the field conditions:
The field is in very bad condition for both teams.
This statement was used to corroborate the need for the recovery period. Additionally, the concessionaire highlighted that the maintenance schedule also considers the preparation for the NFL Rio Game, an event scheduled for September 27, which imposes specific requirements on the stadium’s pitch conditions.
Vasco Challenged the Agreement’s Validity
The primary claim of the Maracanã administrators is the concessionaire’s lack of signature on the Memorandum of Understanding that would allow Vasco to use the stadium. Representatives from Vasco, Flamengo, and Fluminense signed the document, but the space for the Concessionária‘s signature remained blank.
According to the defense:
No obligation could be assumed by the Concessionaire without observing the representation method provided for in its Bylaws.
This would invalidate the agreement for the Cruzmaltino’s use of the Maracanã.
Equipe M360
