The first South American national team out of the blocks in 2010 is Chile, who has been in training since the turn of the year in preparation for an exhibition match against Panama next week.

The squad is almost exclusively composed of home-based players, and bears little relation to the first choice team that last year ensured Chile's World Cup qualification for the first time since 1998. Almost all the senior players are based abroad, and have club commitments that make them unavailable for this fixture.

No meaningless games in World Cup year

But that does not mean that next Wednesday's match, in the small city of Coquimbo, is a meaningless affair. In the build up to the World Cup there is value in any opportunity for some of the players to get together, and there are chances for fringe members of the squad to push their claims.

For example, who is going to be the third-choice goalkeeper, Nery Veloso or Christopher Toselli? Can defender Hans Martinez book his place in South Africa? Does little attacking midfielder Edson Puch have the talent to tip the balance at senior level? And is Esteban Parades a viable attacking option?

These are important questions - especially because the possibility always exists that injuries on the road to the World Cup could transform today's reserve into tomorrow's first choice. And even if it is only to be a reserve, this is a trip that no one will want to miss. Everyone will want to be on that plane to South Africa, part of one of the most intriguing teams to have qualified for the 2010 World Cup.

More than anything, the resurgence of the Chilean national team and the curiosity that surrounds them is the work of one man - coach Marcelo Bielsa.

He took over with morale on the floor. Amid disciplinary lapses and internal rows Chile had lost 6-1 to Brazil in the 2007 Copa America. Few would have imagined that little more than two years later they would finish South America's World Cup qualifiers in second place, just a point behind Brazil. Or, with Chile traditionally being a team strong at home but weak away, that they would have won more games on the road than anyone else. No ordinary coach could have brought about such a turnaround. But Marcelo Bielsa is emphatically no ordinary coach.

Bielsa transforms Chile

The first time I saw him at close range was in Paraguay at a post-match press conference during the 1999 Copa America. He had recently taken charge of his native Argentina, and his second competitive match had not gone well. He had watched his striker Martin Palermo miss three penalties as his side were beaten 3-0 by Colombia. Frustration boiled over, and Bielsa had been sent off.

What did he think about the refereeing, he was asked in the press conference. Staring at a fixed spot in the distance he started by saying that normally he didn't like to comment on the performances of the officials. We all waited for the traditional 'but this referee should never be allowed near a football pitch again' rant. Instead of which, Bielsa continued by saying "but in relation to my expulsion the referee was quite correct, because I protested in an ill-mannered form." I instantly understood why Bielsa had been nicknamed 'el loco.' This guy was something else.

"While you are sleeping," he once said to one of his players, "I am thinking of ways for the team to win." That is Marcelo Bielsa. A tortured intellectual of football, a brooding obsessive with his own way of doing things. Bielsa wants to attack - always. He wants the game to take place in the opponent's half of the field, keeping them under constant pressure, suffocating them and imposing the strengths of his own team.

Hs footballing philosophy has little use for the conventional full back. His standard formation is 3-3-1-3. A trio to mark. One holding midfielder, and two who push forward down the flanks, looking to link up with the pair of wingers in a constant quest to create two-against-one situations down the flanks against the opposing full backs. Two wingers, then, plus a central striker and an attacking midfielder behind the front line. High tempo, highly ambitious and highly successful - in World Cup qualification.

But not, in 2002, in the real thing. Bielsa's Argentina set off for Japan and South Korea justifiably proclaimed as pre-tournament favourites. They had sailed through qualification, and were lauded by many for their blend of European dynamism and South American artistry. Back in Buenos Aires the big subject on the endless TV football round table shows was who would Argentina meet in the final. The gods of football have a long track record of detesting such hubris. Argentina was eliminated in the first round.

2002 World Cup a tournament to forget

In all three games Bielsa's team had so much possession, so much territorial domination, but no penetration. Part of it was probably that the Europeans (Argentina lost to England and drew with Sweden) defended so much better against crosses than the South American teams had done in qualification. And also the players, at the end of the gruelling European season and with the 2002 World Cup held earlier than usual, did not have enough gas in the tank for such a physically demanding game plan. It stands as Bielsa's big failure - and, typical of the man, he relishes the opportunity that failure brings to re-evaluate concepts and try again.

South Africa, then, will be his second attempt at the World Cup. He is back with 3-3-1-3, and once again he appears to have his players totally convinced about what they are doing. He is no substitute father figure type, and doesn't seem to exude warmth - but he has a remarkable capacity to win over the players to his project. It is extremely rare for Bielsa to be criticized by people he has worked with. They line up to pay tribute to his quality.

With Chile he has the benefit of being able to pick Alexis Sanchez, a more natural winger than those he tried to play there for Argentina (Ariel Ortega on the right and Claudio Lopez on the left in 2002). Superb in one-against-one situations, Sanchez can hit the by-line and cross or cut in from the right.

Inside him, centre forward Humberto Suazo has an excellent understanding with attacking midfielder Mati Fernandez. There is far more flexibility and interchanging of positions than was the case with Argentina in 2002, when the striker (Gabriel Batistuta or Hernan Crespo) was squeezed up against the opponent's goal and behind him Juan Sebastian Veron was operating further forward than his ideal position.

The downside of the current Chile team is that they defend badly in the air - critics of Bielsa's system (quiet at the moment but always ready to appear) would argue that the obsession with attack leaves them too open to the counter-punch. Evidence for this comes from the World Cup qualifiers against Brazil - a 3-0 defeat at home, and 4-2 away. Is Chile really strong enough to take such a bold approach to the highest level of the game?