WORLD CUP; Fifa Should Increase More African Teams And More player Substitutions At The World Cup
The 2022 world cup Exposed The Racist Tendencies Of Ugandans Who Considered France More African Than Morocco
At
last the world cup came to an end this weekend concluding what has since been
dubbed the best of all world cup tournaments in history. This world cup has,
however provoked some of us to come up with some innovations that can make it
more competitive
When critically observed, of all football competitions,
the world cup is the easiest tournament to win. Why? There are very few games a
team needs to win at the world cup. Because, first of all, on average, a given team
needs to win seven only games to win the world cup
In fact Argentina managed to play Saudi Arabia,
Poland, Mexico, Australia, Netherlands, Croatia and France to win the world cup.
Secondly,
you need to also realize that you can be fixed in a group with very weak teams
like Qatar, Saudi Arabia or even china.
On
the contrary, you need to play and win over thirteen games to win the European club
champions league.
Therefore,
I think it would be better to add more teams to expand the world cup teams that
play in the tournament so that a given team plays at least ten games to win it.
And since morocco has managed to play to the last four (semi finals), Africa deserves
some two more slots to expand the tournament to a more competitive tournament.
Another
suggestion concerns the number of substitutions made in a given game. I think
five substitutions are very few in a given game.
Remember
a world cup team comprises players selected across the globe to play for the
national team. Now it’s not fair that you select 24 players for the tournament
and only revolve around using only eleven plus five substitutions.
This
is national team football which requires a given team to use as many players as
it can to exhaust its full potential. Simply allow the team to select from the
24 players for a given game.
In
most games we saw how teams would play games into extra time and you could see
that even players who had come on as substitutes were completely exhausted.
A
case in point is Japan which pushed Croatia into extra time and eventually to
penalties. If you observed critically, it was evident that the Japanese players
couldn’t lift their legs to take the penalties. If there had been a provision
to change, it would have necessitated making some changes to enable fresh
players finish up the game in extra time.
Therefore
allowing the team to make substitutions to the whole team harms no one because it
reflects the full potential of a given team. Those innovations can go a long
way in making the world cup a more entertaining tournament.
The
limitation on the substitutions made some teams appear weaker than they are. Teams
like England and France have lot of talent that they cannot be limited to five
subs only.
Because
of the limitation in the number of subs, most coaches made errors in selection
which cost their respective teams. A team like England had very good players
that it was practically difficult to fix them into one eleven.
You
could name two elevens of the English team and they all give you a value for
money performance. For instance England has players like Alexander Trent , who
is considered the best right back in the world but he never got a single minute
of world cup football!
Because
of the limitation on the number of subs, managers made mistakes which could
have been avoided if they had room to make more changes.
For
instance the French coach couldn’t field talented players like Eduardo Camavinga
and Kinsley Corman in most matches. But when
he got the chance to field them in the final against Argentina, they changed the
game, which France was losing 2-0 and forced it into a 3-3 draw after extra
time and into penalties.
With
England you can accuse the manager Gareth Southgate for having the wisdom to
play Rushford, Grealish and Alexander Trent from the start or after half time. But
you can also argue rightly that a flexible provision of more subs could have
given him the space to give them playing time.
UGANDANS ARE
RACISTS
Another
observation about the Qatar 20 world cup was the level of sectarianism that was
exhibited by Ugandans. When morocco went on to play the semi finals, most of
the Ugandans made blunt racist remarks that the Moroccan team was not African by
appearance.
And
as such most Ugandans made lots of noise when France beat our African brothers
from North Africa in the semifinals. They rooted for France simply because it
has typical black skinned Africans!
These
are the same people who complain about the racism by the white people in the Diaspora.
While we are agitating for African unity of whole continent, most of our people
still consider our Arab brothers as foreigners residing on the same African continent.
While
we claim that football is a uniting force, this world cup also demonstrated
that it can also evoke terrible divisions in society.
But
my ultimate prayer is that FIFA should adopt those aforementioned suggestions of
adding at least two more slots for African teams and also allowing teams to
make as many as eleven substitutions to exhaust the potential of the teams.
Fred Daka
Kamwada Is A Researcher, Policy Analysts And Blogger ; kamwadafred@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment