-
African countries are struggling to host the eight
Nations finals without interruption, let alone cope with
twelve. Most member associations have
yet to fulfill
the minimum requirement for an eight
Nations final. If we prematurely increase the
number of participants to twelve,
we will make it that much more
difficult for those that are trying. Only a
handful of rich African
countries will monopolize the hosting of the Nations
cup.
-
Even In the countries where the above
facilities are available;
important matches have been held in empty Stadiums,
mainly due to lack of purchase power of the spectators
and some times because of disinterest when the host team
is not playing or disqualified in the early stages of
the tournament.
-
Furthermore,
we will compromise the
standard of the competitions both in the qualifications
and the final phase of the tournament.
In
view of these African realities,
which remain unchanged even now, he preferred the affordable, and
very competitive, eight Nations final. Although his arguments have
not been discussed and defeated; on the 28th of February 1990,
C.A.F. made the first increase to twelve, which was soon followed
up by the second increase to 16 on the 23rd of March 1994.
Today,
this decision is promoted as hugely beneficial to African
football; some
media networks including the
popular
"Soccer Africa" on DSTV,
are trying to justify
the
overambitious
format
as a motivation for National Associations to build football
infrastructures.
Even the representatives of the majority National Associations,
who due to the premature increase, have effectively been deprived
of their rights to host the Nations Cup, prefer not to challenge
the arrangement which has doubled their chances to qualify; as the
duration of their stay In office is very much attached to the
qualification success of their respective teams.
At this point in time, and may be even
in the foreseeable future, most African countries do not and will
not need
three or
four huge
international standard stadiums. The big money
being wasted on these one time use
luxury Stadiums can level and fence many practical playing fields
for the children and
youth of the continent.
The
infrastructures built for
Burkina Faso 1998 and Mali
2002 have not done any good to football,
these hosts did not, and do not
yet
have the domestic leagues or the spectators to
justify three International
standard Stadiums. Soccer
Africa should have visited the current state of the Nations Cup
Stadiums in these countries, before
concluding such infrastructure development benefits poor African
countries!!
On the other hand, since the continent
started the sixteen Nations final, the tournament has evidently been
the monopoly of the few.
Ghana
which hosted the 4th in 63,
the 11th in 78
and co-hosted the 22nd in 2000, is now to host the 26th in 2008.
Nigeria which had already hosted the 12th was given the
opportunity to co-host the 22nd with Ghana.
Tunisia, host of the 5th in 65, and the
19th in 94, was again
given the 24th in 2004. Egypt, host of the 2nd
in 59, the 9th
in 74 and the 15th
in 86, had to take the 25th in 2006.
This data does not reflect continent wide infrastructure
development; on the contrary, it reveals the
inability of the large majority of member counties,
to host a sixteen Nations Final.
Eight
Nations Egypt 86
Even if one is to look at the list of candidates for every Nations
Cup since the increase in 1994; they are either countries which
have already hosted, or, the very few oil and mineral rich
countries of Africa.
Angola for the 2010 edition does not represent the big majority of
African Nations. In fact it is one of
the few
rich
countries, which can
comfortably join the
future
monopoly list.
Zambia
is
a good example of
the African majority.
The eight Nations final was beyond it, and it had to withdraw as
host of the 1988 edition, despite the efforts of then head of
State, H.E. Dr. Kenneth Kaunda. The new format denies this
extremely successful football Nation in the continent; its right,
and declared desire, to host the Nation's Cup final.
Zambia
tried in 1988
The choices were, and still
are, between:-
-
Using the limited resources to give more children the
opportunity to play football and there by protect
them from hazardous temptations; or, ignore this
social responsibility in favor of one time use
expensive infrastructure.
-
Giving
the majority of member associations, the opportunity
to host this very useful and
prestigious Continental tournament, or, continue
with the rotation
shown above.
-
Increasing the standard of competitions both at the
qualification and final stages, or compromising them
for quantity.
Yidnekatchew used to say;
"we can not
replicate
Europe
in every aspect of the game. Africa has produced skilled players and
teams that match, and sometimes exceed Europeans, but,
these isolated cases should
not deceive us into believing that we have achieved
European standards in all the domains of football".
Europe can afford a sixteen Nations final, but, the eight
Nations final is still the most sensible option for Africa.
The Confederation is
generating more revenue from this expansion, as the
number of matches in the finals have doubled from 16 to 32,
however,
the exaggerated claim on the success of the format, is
questionable, if not self deceptive. Particularly, in
view of the cons elaborated above.
C.A.F.; the
beginning.
C.A.F.; early
dispute with F.I.F.A. on the issue of Apartheid.
C.A.F.; lengthy
power struggle within, the turning point in Yaoundé 1972.
C.A.F.; the
intrusion of the Supreme Council for Sports in Africa.
C.A.F.; evolution of
the African Nations Cup.
C.A.F.; the battle
for its rightful place in F.I.F.A..
C.A.F.; Preserving the history.
C.A.F.;
Yidnekatchew Tessema
and the current leadership of C.A.F.
Back to home page
Yidnekatchew Tessema.
