Mali footballers target African Nations success to provide hope to troubled nation

Players motivated by role in promoting peace and pride for nation

"It has been as important for us to win for the people as it has been for ourselves."

The words belong to Seydou Keita, midfield lynchpin of the Malian national side. Having never qualified for a World Cup, and only once reached the Final of the African Cup of Nations, Mali head into a semi-final match with Nigeria at the 2013 tournament on the verge of creating a new chapter in their footballing history.

Despite their limited international pedigree, there is a real sense that Mali are an emerging force, competing in their fifth semi-final since 2000, rising to 25^th in the FIFA Rankings and exporting a host of star players to Europe in recent years including Mahamadou Diarra, Seydou Keita and Mohamed Sissoko, following on from Fredi Kanoute, the most famous footballing representative from Mali in the past decade.

But Mali’s march towards a potential final with either Ghana or Burkina Faso comes at a difficult time for the country and its population and is set against the backdrop of war. In scenes reminiscent of a bygone age, French President Francois Hollande received a hero’s welcome in the historic town of Timbuktu in Mali last week after French forces were successful in repelling the advance of Islamic radicals and al-Qaeda in the country.

Hollande was welcomed to Mali as a saviour. Source: european_parliament

Indeed the past 12 months has seen sustained conflict in Mali, beginning with a Tuareg rebellion in the north of the country driving out the government from the region. The government was then ousted by a military coup d’etat in March 2012. Northern Mali was completely captured by rebels in April 2012, and quickly seized by Islamist groups (who sought to impose sharia law), before the recent fight back and French intervention.

Football has not been immune from the problems. After an impressive and unexpected third place in the 2012 edition of the African Cup of Nations, Alain Giresse quit his position as coach of the Mali national side less than a month before the World Cup qualifiers, in the wake of the military coup which left him initially unable to leave the country. Giresse was unhappy with a new contract offer that “impeded my independence. I had to give a list of players for approval and the medical staff was no longer under my direction.”

Such an event and interference in team affairs could have seen the team’s performances affected negatively. Conversely it appears to have had the opposite effect, galvanising the players in a way also seen with other African nations experiencing conflict in recent years. The team sits just one victory away from their first appearance in the Final since 1972 and should stand a genuine chance of qualification for the 2014 FIFA World Cup in Brazil.

Should they win, the impact at home will be a huge lift to the morale of the Malian people besieged by conflict. Such is the important of the game, football fans have celebrated the progress of the national team on the streets of Bamako, believing that victory can provide a boost for those waging war on Islamic rebels in the north and restore peace to the troubled nation.

Mali defeated hosts South Africa in the quarter-final. Source: GovernmentZA

The players themselves, led by captain and former Barcelona midfielder Seydou Keita, have recognised the importance of positive football results and its influence at a vital time for their country and its people. After reaching the semi finals, Keita wrapped the Malian flag around himself and linked the football team’s campaign on the conflict, saying "It (the flag) flies not only in the northern part of Mali, and not only in the south of Mali, but also outside Mali…That is important. Only football can do that."

Keita has continuously linked the performances of the Mali team back to the conflict and a message of peace throughout the tournament. After their first match he wore a T-shirt with the slogan 'Peace in our Country', asserting, “We want to use football as a tool to restore peace in Mali and we can only do that by winning our matches. I feel happy that we won our first game and I dedicate it towards the efforts to bring peace back home.”

The team set up a five-day camp in Bamako before the tournament in an effort to restore calm in the country. As coach Patrice Carteron explained, “We stayed in Bamako for five days and thousands of people came to watch our training every day. I wanted them to feel something positive and we were happy that they were motivated.”

On a similar theme striker Modibo Maiga said following the quarter-final, “Our biggest motivation is to make Malian people and all the supporters happy.”

Mali is not the only troubled African nation in recent times to enjoy unexpected success on the football field. Following the Arab Spring in 2011, the results of most North African nations improved dramatically, with Sudan, Libya, Morocco and Tunisia qualifying for the 2012 African Cup of Nations. Similarly Greece performed admirably at Euro 2012 against a backdrop of civil unrest and the Syrian Under 23 side were one game from qualifying from the London 2012 Olympics.

In the case of Libya, qualification for the African Cup of Nations came against all the odds –an ongoing civil war wherehigh profile footballers were fighting against Gaddafi; no footballingpedigree; plagued by political interference and the suspension of domestic football.Yet ultimately the effect of revolution and unrest was to inspire, unite andembolden players, leading to such unprecedented success.

Whilst Mali has not undergone a full-scale revolution, the conflict of the past 12 months have affected the entire population and the recent performances of the national football team have coincided with moves towards a resolution of the troubles at home. The Malian footballers are clearly motivated by the potential of bringing success and hope to their people at a troubled time in the country’s history, while the prospect of a first ever international tournament victory is providing an unexpected boost to the Malian fans in the midst of conflict.

Plagued by problems in football and society, is Euro 2012 Greece’s beacon of hope?

Football has not proved immune to the political and economic crisis engulfing Greece, and its problems have largely reflected those of Greek society. Yet as the Greek national side prepares to play hosts Poland in the opening match of Euro 2012, football retains the potential to provide inspiration to a suffering nation.

Political strife

Greece has been the epicentre of the European economic crisis. No country has suffered as much from the downturn across the continent, with unprecedented bailouts, severe austerity measures and resulting social unrest and protests.

The country is increasingly ungovernable with political extremism on the rise, while the Greek parliamentary elections were brought forward to May 2012 in the hope of solving the economic and social problems engulfing the nation. Instead, Golden Dawn, a neo-Nazi group with links to football violence, won 7% of the vote and entered parliament for the first time. The moderate parties seen as complicit in accepting the bailout and imposing austerity were hammered, and a second election on June 17 looms.

Social violence is also on the rise, with the fascists feeling legitimised by their election to Parliament and newly emboldened. Attacks on immigrants are becoming more common and sure to rise in the run-up to the new election. The country is tense, divided, angry and ready to boil over. The scale of the protests in February 2012 prompted one Greek filmmaker to question, “What do we have left? Television and football.”

But amidst the chaos, the impact on Greek football has been equally disastrous. Greek football is marred by violence, financial collapse and corruption, a reflection of the current state of the nation experiencing political and economic catastrophe.

Football falls foul

Issues first began to surface early in 2011, when a match-fixing investigation widened to include 54 matches, including a season decider between Olympiakos and Panathinaikos, the two biggest clubs in Greece, and eventually implicated two Super League club presidents, club owners, players, referees and a chief of police.

The most high profile suspect was shipping magnate Vangelis Marinakis, the President of Olympiakos and the Greek ‘Super League’. While Deputy Culture Minister Giorgos Nikitiadis described this as "the darkest day in the history of Greek football", it marked only the beginning of a series of problems.

Historically Greek football has had strong links to the shipping industry, with teams such as Panathinaikos and AEK Athens associated with shipping moguls such as Andreas Vgenopoulos, Nikos Pateras and Nikos Notias. When Marinakis bought Olympiakos in 2010 it was billed as in keeping with the notion that tanker owners financed local clubs as a social contribution. Shipping was, however, one of the principal industries affected by the economic slump, and the big football clubs were therefore quick to follow.

Owing to this perilous state of the economy, giant clubs including AEK Athens and Panathinaikos are now on the verge of collapse and have been handed suspended one-year bans from European competition by UEFA for falling foul of financial regulations. The financial crisis is crippling the Greek football league - Iraklis were previously relegated from the Greek top flight for various alleged financial misdemeanours. The most worrying development is the fact that eight teams are facing transfer bans and other sanctions due to their not being able to pay their players.  Leading players such as Fabian Vargas and Jose Carlos are threatening strike action, with Carlos, a forward for AEK Athens, recently stating,

“I don’t care if the team gets cleared to play next season. I want all my money; otherwise I’m not signing any papers. I’m not going to give you any more time and I don’t care if other players are signing settlements. I’m looking out for what’s mine”.

Politics has never been far away from Greek football, with Greek businessmen viewing ownership of Greek football clubs as a means to political influence, and it was of no surprise when the Greek football league was suspended for one week in February due to protest at a new law giving expanded powers to a state-controlled sports committee.

Alongside the economic and political impact, Greece has witnessed a corresponding rise in stadium violence. There has always been a level of violence and hooliganism synonymous with Greek football, with fan groups such as Original (AEK), Thyra 13 (Panathinaikos), Gate 4 (PAOK) or Porto Leone (Olympiakos) keeping a large swathe of the Greek population away from football stadia. Panathanaikos in particular has traditionally had far-right supporter groups, although were largely dismantled by their President Yanis Vekris a few years ago. Yet recent disorder has been on a distinctly greater scale, with the Athens derby between Panathinaikos and Olympiakos abandoned in March after serious rioting, with arrests, injuries and fires in the stadium.

It is set against this backdrop that on Friday June 8 the Greek national football team will take on hosts Poland in the opening match of Euro 2012.

A beacon of hope?

The Greek national side has historically been untouched by the violence that blights the domestic game and the economic problems of Greek football, funded as it is by an extensive sponsorship programme. Indeed the federation was recently criticised for giving the national coach Fernando Santos a 45% payrise, while the team jetted off to a Euro 2012 training camp at an exclusive resort in Kitbuehel, Austria. Yet there is a sense that the Greek national team feels a sense of duty and represents a potential force for good at a time of anger and disillusionment in Greek society, with the ability to transcend conflict, bring Greeks together and restore national pride at a time of conflict, chaos and humiliation. Plagued by problems in football and society, does Euro 2012 offer a beacon of hope?

Greece and Celtic striker Georgios Samaras said in March,  “Sometimes sport and football make people forget their problems. So what we can do in the national team is play at the Euros and give happiness to our people in Greece”, while in an interview Greek football federation President Sophocles Pilavios stated, “I don’t know if the success in a football match has the power to take one out of his problems. I wholeheartedly hope so, I’m sure that the players can bring uplifting moments to the Greeks.”

While only a maximum of 5,000 Greek football fans are expected to follow the team in Poland and Ukraine, there is no doubt that providing a boost to the embattled country and its football-mad public is motivating the Greek footballers, and a good performance from the Greek national side in Euro 2012 could lift the national pride of the Greek nation and bring a measure of joy and respite to the country watching the tournament at home. It could well be the only positive during a difficult summer of elections, political strife and economic chaos.

There is a recent precedent for this.

The legacy of 2004

In 2004 the country was also in crisis – the government faced criticism on all sides over its preparation for the forthcoming Athens Olympics, with the whole competition poised to relocate to Sydney amid fears that the country was dangerously behind schedule.

But it was at this point that the Greek football team came from nowhere to win the 2004 European Championships.

The squad contained few exceptional players, but seemingly achieved the impossible through hard work, determination and a single vision, united behind manager Otto Rehhagel. The country went wild, and the returning champions were greeted as heroes by the ecstatic country.

The Prime Minister, Kostas Karamanlis proclaimed, “Greece is on the lips of everyone in the world who follows this mass and magical sport called football”. Taking inspiration from their success and the collective work ethic, Karamanlis further implored the nation to unite and complete the Olympic preparations, saying, “These boys taught us a lesson as to what Greeks can do when we really believe in something”. Construction was ultimately completed, and the 2004 Olympics were generally perceived as a successful event, despite the problems of how to use the stadiums following the Olympics.

Euro 2012

Today, Greece finds itself in mired in catastrophe that dwarfs anything in its history. But as in 2004, a European Championships looms large on the horizon. Can football unite Greeks behind their country and restore national pride at a time of conflict, chaos and humiliation? Can a good performance from Greece at Euro 2012 really make a difference?

While players, football figures and politicians may say and hope that it can make this difference, a poor performance could merely add to the collective gloom and disorder. The Greek national football side has proved that it has the ability to rise above politics and social division, but the future is above all, uncertain. The country is tense and riven by conflict, and there are no guarantees that a good performance would have a long-term impact, but there is no doubt that it would be a welcome distraction to a suffering nation.

National skipper Giorgos Karagounis summed up the entire situation and possible impact of the Euros best when he asserted, “There are many problems in football and in the country and we all live these problems. But when it comes to fight for the national team, there is no room for these thoughts”, while the team was motivated “during the tournament, to help them forget for a short time at least the problems of everyday life. Surely the Greeks are waiting for this joy and we hope to give it to them.”

And as Makis Papasimakopoulos, correspondent with Athens News, told me: “Anything to do with European competition is important to Greeks. We even flooded the streets when we won the Eurovision song contest! It’s always been like that and right now it will be even more so. Greece needs the team to do well at the Euros. There are no two ways about it.”

Football and the Falklands never far apart

With 2012 marking the 30th anniversary of the Falklands War, tensions are rising on both the political and sporting fronts. As history shows, this is not a new development...

Monday 2^nd April marks the 30^th anniversary of the beginning of the Falklands War between Britain and Argentina in 1982. The past few months have seen diplomatic tensions rise between the respective governments over the sovereignty of the islands in the South Atlantic, oil exploration rights, the dispatch of HMS Dauntless and even the posting of Prince William to the Falklands as a search-and-rescue pilot.

Yet one of the more inflammatory gestures was perceived to be the naming of the 2012 edition of the Argentine First Division as the Crucero General Belgrano Primera Division, invoking the famous name of the Argentine cruiser General Belgrano, sunk by British torpedoes during the war with the loss of 323 Argentine crew (almost half of Argentine losses during the conflict).

Whilst it is true that each season sees the Argentina Football Association (AFA) go though the formality of bestowing official names on competitions (recent examples include figures such as Rene Favaloro or Nestor Kirchner), this was widely viewed as a controversial move ahead of such a significant anniversary of the Falklands War. Argentine top-flight club Lanus also entered the debate by weaving an image of the disputed islands into their first-team strip.

Such headlines are unsurprising. As history shows, football is never far away from the issues surrounding the Falkland Islands.

1982

Indeed the first action of the Falklands War in 1982 was the eviction of Argentine scrap metal workers from South Georgia by Royal Marines of HMS Endurance stationed on the Falklands. The last act of these troops before leaving was in fact to win the annual football ‘Shield’ of the Islands, a tournament that often featured sides comprised of Argentine workers.

 As the fighting intensified in the Falklands, tensions rose around football. Source: neonbubble

As the war took its course in 1982, it was impossible for football and politics not to collide, with a real possibility of the Home Nations (England, Scotland and Northern Ireland had all qualified) withdrawing from the World Cup in Spain. While Argentine fans unfurled banners stating, “England must leave the Malvinas” during a friendly against the Soviet Union, Tottenham Hotspur’s Argentine midfielder Ossie Ardiles (whose pilot cousin Lt. Jose Ardiles was killed during the campaign) was booed by English fans and subsequently moved on loan to Paris St-Germain. Stockport County even abandoned their blue-and-white Argentina-inspired strip on the grounds that it “hardly seems appropriate, given the current circumstances”.

There was serious debate about the Home Nations’ participation in the World Cup, particularly following World Cup hosts Spain abstaining in the United Nations vote on the war. BBC Panorama ran a poll asking the public whether Britain’s football teams should compete, while questions were asked within Cabinet as to whether a potential second round meeting between Scotland and Argentina might be allowed to go ahead. Yet Prime Minister Thatcher was adamant that the nations compete, regardless of whether a meeting with Argentina in the latter stages would be politically difficult. In a speech to the Commons she stated her “belief that a good showing by the England team in Spain will prove an excellent fillip for the servicemen in the Falklands”.

Beyond the War

"It was as if we had beaten a country, not just a football team...Although we had said before the game that football had nothing to do with the Malvinas war, we knew they had killed a lot of Argentine boys there, killed them like little birds. And this was revenge."

Diego Maradona

Between the end of the war in 1982 and the recent heightened tensions, there were other occasions when football and the Falklands have become entwined, the 1986 World Cup quarter-final being the most famous, as referenced by Maradona. As former international Roberto Perfumo declared, “In 1986, winning that game against England was enough. Winning the World Cup was secondary for us. Beating England was our real aim”. 

Maradona has frequently waded into the debate. Source jmrobledo

In 1999 it was the turn of a little-known footballer named Martyn Clarke to stoke the tensions. Clarke became the first Falkland Islander to play football for an Argentine club, when he was brought over from Port Stanley to train with Boca Juniors. He was quickly the focus of mass media attention and spent his first evening eating pizza with Maradona, who famously let him use his mobile phone to call home. Clarke was the son of a Royal Marine who had served in the Falklands War, and his move provoked much consternation back home, while he was arguably used as a political pawn by Boca (in particular by Esteban Cichello, a friend of Maradona, who first spotted him), being sent on loan to two lower-league Argentine clubs. 

A lack of direct competition on the football field in 2012 (Argentina have failed to qualify for the London Olympics) means the 30^th anniversary may not be marked by a similar story. However, this is not to say the London Olympics might not throw up a story to re-ignite old fires. Whenever the Falklands is debated in popular discourse or tensions rise of the political front, football and sport is sure to follow.

Syrian footballers close in on London 2012

Amidst the chaotic political situation in Syria, one could be forgiven for presuming football is the last thing on the minds of many Syrians. Yet on Wednesday the Syrian Under-23 national football team travels to Bahrain where a victory would put them just one match away from qualifying for the London 2012 Olympic Games football tournament.

Sport has not been immune from the events of the past year in Syria. While the Syrian Premier League was suspended in 2011, matches have resumed, albeit with a large number of postponements. Syria was the only nation of twenty-two Arab countries not to send a team of athletes to the 2011 Pan Arab Games in Doha at protest of the Arab League’s suspension of their membership. Given the turbulence in the country, perhaps it was just as well that Syria were disqualified by FIFA in August 2011 from qualification for the 2014 World Cup after they fielded an ineligible player, George Murad, against Tajikistan.

But practically from nowhere and against all odds the Syrian Under-23 football side is making waves. A stunning 2-1 victory over group favourites Japan in early February, courtesy of a spectacular last-minute strike from Ahmad Al Salih, has catapulted Syria to the top of their qualification group and arguably installed them as favourites to qualify for the Olympics. Syria need to beat Bahrain this week and Malaysia next month, both of whom they have already defeated in this campaign, to guarantee their place in London, with South Korea and one of Uzbekistan or United Arab Emirates (at the expense of Australia) the other likely qualifiers from the region.

The situation is unprecedented given Syria’s previous lack of footballing pedigree, having never qualified for a World Cup or even got past the first round of the AFC Asian Cup. Even if they slip up and Japan top the group, Syria will still have further chances to reach the Olympics via playoffs first with other second place Asian teams and then potentially against Senegal in Coventry, venue for the AFC-CAF playoff.

However the victory over Japan, played on neutral territory in Amman, Jordan due to the unrest in Syria, also demonstrated the potential consequences of Syrian qualification for the Games. Although there were no direct clashes, the match was overshadowed by the politics of the conflict, with many Syrian fans opposed to President Bashar Assad cheering on Japan, while supporters of the regime chanted, "Long live, Bashar”. Should Syria qualify, it opens up the possibility of demonstrators opposed to the Syrian government and its violent repression descending on the London Olympics to protest against the regime, were the crisis not to be resolved by the summer.

The possibility of the Great Britain football team playing against Syria during the Olympics is both intriguing and sure to be immersed in political overtones. The current squad is drawn from all over Syria, from Damascus and Aleppo to Hama and Homs, cities at the sharp end of the current struggles. Both have been subject to army bombardment and fierce crackdowns in recent months.

Aside from the likely protests, the level of attention lavished on this group of young Syrians playing football in the UK at a global event would inevitably be monumental, with their actions and words under intense scrutiny. They have the potential to become the focus for a rallying cry against the Syrian government for opponents of the regime. Will the players present a united front or would political divisions manifest themselves in their performances and words? Would any players defect or speak out against their government with the world media watching and listening? What would the consequences of any resistance be?

On the other hand, a Syrian Olympic football team might represent the manifestation of sport overcoming violence and politics, possessing the ability to become a force for good. Representative as they are of all areas of Syria and its ethnic diversity, they could provide Syria a chance to show that sectarianism can be overcome and stoke a unity overcoming political chaos, violence and division.

There are distinct parallels with Libya, whose football team’s qualification for 2012 African Cup of Nations was set against the backdrop of civil war. Their impressive performance at the tournament presents a powerful example of revolution and unrest conspiring to unite, inspire and embolden a football team. In turn the exploits of the Libyan footballers offered some measure of respite, joy and unity to a beleaguered nation suffering the effects of war.

Thus it may not be simply coincidence that this upturn in performance for the Syrians is happening in the midst of national upheaval. There are indeed similarities with the form of other Arab nations’ football sides since the start of the Arab Spring. With the exception of Egypt, every North African football side (Tunisia, Libya, Algeria, Sudan and Morocco) saw their results improve in 2011 since the outbreak of their particular versions of the Arab Spring, compared with the year prior. 

Through the power of experiencing seismic events at home, footballers in these countries have shown the ability to work together during tough periods towards a common goal and success. While their country is being torn apart, the Syrian Under-23 team is clearly fostering a sense of unity and strength through adversity. The results on the field are testament to this.

One player who is highly unlikely to feature is Abdelbasset Saroot, 20-year old goalkeeper for Syria's Under-23 team, but now a leader of the revolution and a marked man on the run from the Syrian authorities in battle-scarred Homs.

Saroot recently told Al Jazeera, "It's worth it. I'm free. I've travelled all over the world to play football. But freedom is not just about me or about travelling. What about everyone else? Freedom is a big word. It's about freedom of speech and freedom of opinion. If you see something wrong being done, freedom is being able to talk about it.”

Having already lost his home, brother and friends, and survived three attempts on his life, his story will doubtless be told during the summer if his Syrian teammates are competing in the Olympics, whether he is alive or not.

Testing times: Cricket and the Twenty20 Squeeze

Stepping back from the malaise and inquests into English challenges against spin bowling or the form of their middle-order during their 3-0 drubbing by Pakistan, the series has highlighted worrying trends in worldwide Test cricket; namely the increasing prevalence of erratic results, mismatches, batting collapses and the spectacle ending prematurely.

It recalled South Africa and Australia bowling each other out for 96 and 47 respectively on a tranquil Cape Town pitch in November, Sri Lanka’s collapse at Cardiff, or India’s whitewashes at the hands of England and Australia.

Since the First Test of The Ashes in November 2011 there have been 51 Test matches played around the world. 76% (39) have seen results, only 24% (12) drawn. This compares to an all-time average of 65% versus 35%, a hefty difference and does not even account for timeless Tests running until 1939. The 100 Tests prior (July 2008-November 2011) saw a ratio of 70-30.

While not advocating drawn matches, more disturbing is the lack of Tests extending into a 5^th day, the hallmark of a mismatch or low-scoring affair. A full 51% of the last 51 Tests failed to enter the 5^th day, 12% not even reaching the conclusion of a 3^rd day, with the worst offenders being Australia, New Zealand and India.

Saeed Ajmal was chief tormentor of England batsmen in the UAE. Source: paddynapper

Perhaps most alarming is the sheer amount of comprehensive defeats inflicted across the board. These 51 Tests saw 13 innings defeats and 10 more of between 8-10 wickets or by over 250 runs.  Thus a full 45% of Test matches since November 2011 were essentially non-contests. This is no time to blame the so-called ‘minnows’ of Test cricket. Those predominantly on the receiving end were India, Australia and Sri Lanka.

Is this the ‘Twenty20 Effect’ in action?

A number of exciting recent Test matches (the India-West Indies tie or New Zealand defeating Australia by 7 runs with no side scoring above 233) cannot disguise the fact that Test cricket is being affected by techniques and temperaments increasingly more suited to shorter formats.

Andrew Strauss aired his “concerns about the state of test cricket” in October, declaring, "The administrators are trying to recognise the primacy of test cricket, but there is a real difference between saying it and making sure your actions follow it.”

The balance between the three codes is currently out of kilter, as the diminution of England’s 2012 series with South Africa to three Tests demonstrates. The Test Championship was jettisoned due to ICC Champions Trophy broadcast rights. As Twenty20 competitions take root, from the Big Bash to the IPL, the gradual yet distinctive encroachment of shorter-form cricket is clearly influencing Test batsmanship.

The Test calendar is being squeezed by Twenty20 tournaments such as the IPL. Source: SandFlash

The squeezing of the cricket calendar to accommodate more Twenty20 tournaments and ODIs brings reduced preparation time before Tests and difficulties for batsmen in adjusting between different codes within ever-shorter series. Too many good sides are being dismissed for low scores on decent pitches by generally solid bowling units. In the past 51 Tests, teams have been bowled out for under 200 on 33 occasions.

The shot selections of English batsmen in the First Test in Dubai pointed to a lack of application. As Geoff Boycott thundered, “their brains went out of the window” with only Matt Prior and Jonathan Trott demonstrating intent to “occupy the crease, show a great deal of patience and accept that runs arrive at a slower pace.”

Similarly Michael Clarke summed up Australia’s woeful collapse to 47 all out in Cape Town stating, “Our shot selection was disgraceful…Apart from numbers 10 and 11, who else even lasted 20 balls?”

Simultaneously we see selection of players for Test cricket originally identified by national set-ups for shorter forms or earmarked as “Twenty20 specialists”. One name stands out, David Warner. The young Australian opener has much to prove, but a phenomenal exhibition of hitting in his 69-ball century against India was a statement of intent. His early success could convince other nations to fast-track limited-overs stars into the Test side.

David Warner. The future of Test cricket? Source: paddynapper

The flip side of the coin is Eoin Morgan, whose selection followed a similar path to Warner’s, but is currently exhibiting the dangers associated. His unorthodox techniques, tailor-made for Twenty20 cricket, are being questioned and his response has been to attempt to manufacture his game into something it is distinctly not, a “traditional” Test player.

India’s successive 4-0 whitewashes away to Australia and England serve as a warning. They have called into question not just the enduring class of their stellar batting line-up, but the quality of the next crop of Indian Test stars raised in the cut and thrust of the IPL. As obdurate Indian batsman Aakash Chopra recently argued, the IPL created a collapse in technique and concentration and “quite bafflingly, became a parameter to judge a player for national selection”.

Cricket is witnessing the first generation of Test players who have spent the majority of their careers playing one-day and Twenty20 cricket. The squeeze is starting to be felt.

First written for All Out Cricket

Fernandes and QPR wrong to dismiss Neil Warnock

Warnock the latest victim in Premier League revolving door

Football is a tough business and managers are always first in the line of fire when results are not going the way fans, the board or the owners expect. However, the sacking of Neil Warnock is yet another classic example of owners lacking both patience and perspective, threatening to destabilise a club which had adjusted relatively well to the demands of Premier League football.

Whilst an 8-match winless run is enough to put any manager under intense pressure, perhaps it is events at Sunderland which have caught the eye of chairman Tony Fernandes, where within a month of taking charge Martin O’Neill has turned around the fortunes of a club which was languishing towards the foot of the table. 13 points from a possible 18 has resurrected Sunderland’s season that was threatening to become a fierce struggle against relegation and clearly there are hopes that a new manager may have the same effect at Loftus Road. 

The problem is that there are not too many managers of the calibre of Martin O’Neill with his Premier League experience and a proven record at improving teams, and one could argue Sunderland were in a slightly false position given the quality of their squad. Indeed the speed of the turnaround may say just as much about Steve Bruce’s management as Martin O’Neill’s. Mark Hughes is expected to take over at QPR, but is he really a big enough improvement on Neil Warnock to justify such action?

Warnock with the Championship trophy he won last season. Source: hammersmithandfulham

Statistics do not settle the debate either. On the one hand, Premier League statistics from 2005-11 show that new managers earn around three more points and improve a club’s league position by one place on average in their first 10 leagues games in charge compared with their predecessors final 10 matches. Come the end of the season, those three points could be crucial. However, as the League Managers Association so frequently points out whenever a manager’s tenure is cut short, this focus on short-term gains rarely lead to long-term success and stability.

More tellingly, last season the Premier League was the only one of the top five European leagues and lower English leagues where on average managers were sacked despite improving their clubs’ position. Too many managers are sacked when they are doing a relatively good job or have the capability of turning round a difficult spell. Such are the fiscal pressures and chronic short-termist outlook of modern football; this has become a recurring feature of the past few seasons.

Given time, could Martin Jol have turned Tottenham into the force they currently are without the need for the catastrophic tenure of Juande Ramos. Would Blackburn be in the situation they currently find themselves if Blackburn’s new owners gave Sam Allardyce a fair chance? Who is to say that Chris Hughton could not have taken Newcastle into the top 7 after it was he who settled a club that was veering from one crisis to the next? Warnock is another audition to this roll call of poorly treated managers.

Hughton was harshly dismissed by Newcastle last season. Source: mikebrown59

 Yet there are some signs that clubs are beginning to realise that the success of the likes of Manchester United and Arsenal during the Premier League era has been down to continued faith in managers and their subsequent longevity. Owen Coyle could have been dismissed when Bolton slumped to the foot of the table last month, but if anything their chairman Phil Gartside was Coyle’s most vocal supporter. Wolves and Wigan could sack Mick McCarthy or Roberto Martinez as they continue to flirt with relegation for yet another season. Even Blackburn have resisted absurd levels of criticism and abuse of their faith in Steve Kean, which began to be rewarded with 4 points from away matches with Liverpool and Manchester United over the Christmas period. Arsene Wenger and David Moyes have had their positions questioned this season, but both provide compelling cases for what a measure of managerial durability can do for club stability. Warnock himself had just become the first QPR manager in six years to complete a full season, a strategy which had clearly reaped significant dividends.

QPR have in fact adjusted relatively well to life in the Premier League. The club sat 9^th in mid-November, and are only a few wins from returning to mid-table comfort. Some of Warnock’s summer signings (Bothroyd, Wright-Phillips, DJ Campbell) have flattered to deceive, but as he has often pointed out, was not able to sign the players he had pinpointed due to the club’s ownership situation in the summer. QPR are certainly not favourites for the drop, with Wigan, Blackburn, Bolton and Wolves with as many problems, and perhaps even Norwich or Swansea could slump into trouble if their bubbles burst in a similar way to Blackpool or Hull in recent seasons.

Wenger, a testament to longevity. Source: gordonflood

Warnock had turned round a club that was languishing in 20^th place in the Championship when he arrived and enjoyed astonishing success in returning them to the Premier League after a lengthy absence, all on a shoestring budget. There was little, if no dissent from the terraces. Many fans are angry at the decision to dispense with his services. For all his ability to rile opposition players and fans or the authorities, he displayed remarkable diplomatic skills to get the best out of the mercurial Adel Taraabt and even Joey Barton was showing increased levels of calm. At the very least he deserved the whole season to keep QPR in the Premier League. On a personal level he also had a fair amount of unfinished business and a point to prove after relegation with Sheffield United in acrimonious circumstances surrounding Carlos Tevez.

Yet in the haste to establish QPR as a Premier League team and presumably raise its profile in Asia, Tony Fernandes has taken a risky and harsh decision. The chairman has admitted he will be culpable if the new manager cannot keep QPR in the Premier League. But Neil Warnock is now just another statistic in the annals of Premier League history and the tendency to unceremoniously dump a manager as a solution to any prolonged dip in form.

The Arab football Spring

The performances of the North African national football sides in 2011 have reflected the political actions of the Arab Spring

The failure of Egypt, the champions of the past three tournaments, to qualify for the 2012 African Cup of Nations (ACN), alongside the absence of regional heavyweights Cameroon and Nigeria, has thrown the tournament wide open.

Egypt’s campaign in particular was a shambles, with defeats to Sierra Leone, Niger and South Africa in the final qualification stage. But 2011 has not been an ordinary year in North Africa. With Egypt’s revolution beginning on January 25 2011 and the Arab Spring in full flow, one could be forgiven for thinking the instability in the country could not have helped its football team, particularly given the continuing uncertainties moving into 2012.

However, the list of qualifiers for the African Cup of Nations has thrown up a number of surprise names, not least Libya and Sudan, as well as (less surprisingly) Tunisia and Morocco. While Tunisia were tournament winners in 2004 after beating Morocco in the final, Sudan have made little impression on the tournament since they won the competition in 1970. Libya has hardly ever registered in African football consciousness, a runners-up spot in 1982 notwithstanding. Alongside Algeria (who just missed out of qualification), all these nations have had significant upheavals and protests during the Arab Spring and in the case of Tunisia, Libya and Egypt, regime change.

The 2010 African Cup of Nations in Angola, won by Egypt. Source: me_studio

It seems implausible that national footballers can remain unaffected by such political turmoil. With national football teams so often projected as a symbol of the nation; and aggressively so in the case of some North African states, could there be a link between the nature of political action and performances on the football field? Is there a case to make that powerful nations can be rocked by revolutions, but smaller and weaker nations can be emboldened and united by them?

So how have these six North African nations fared since the outbreak of their particular versions of the Arab Spring in the past year?

By collating the results from all matches (both competitive and friendly) since the beginning of the Arab Spring political action in each nation and comparing these results against performances from the previous 12 months (or at least eight games in the case of Morocco and Libya to ensure a fair sample size), it seems abundantly clear that almost all of the North African sides, with the dramatic exception of Egypt, have improved their results in terms of average points per match (see table below).

Apart from Egypt, 2011 has been a fantastic year for North African football

Taken as a whole, these six nations have competed in 53 matches since the start of the Arab Spring, gaining 87 points, with a 45% win ration and an average of 1.64 points per match.

In the 12 months prior to the Arab Spring (or at least eight matches stretching back into 2009 for Libya and Morocco), these same six nations contested 60 matches, but only won 79 points, with only a 33% win ratio and just 1.32 points per match.

Whilst a trend is clear, it is important to look at each country more specifically.

Egypt appears to be the exception to the rule. The country was arguably, up until 2011, the most successful team in African football during the past decade with an unprecedented three straight ACN crowns, boasting seven titles overall and have qualified for every tournament since 1982.

Although the Pharaohs had not begun their qualification campaign well, in the 12 months between their 2010 African Cup of Nations victory and the Egyptian revolution, they were boasting an average of 2 points per match including five straight wins in January 2011. This is even discounting their January 2010 ACN success, which featured 7 straight wins against high quality opposition, and would raise their points per match to a phenomenal 2.39. Their evident fall from grace has been staggering.

Since January 25 2011, Egypt have picked up one solitary win and one draw from five matches, with defeats to South Africa and Sierra Leone ensuring they finished bottom of their qualification group.

The Egyptian revolution was notable for the unity of the population in throwing off the power of President Mubarak. Indeed there was apparent cooperation in protest organisation between the fans of the rival Egyptian teams Al-Ahly and Zamalek, with the latter long regarded as a pro-government club during the Mubarak era. The only public backing to the regime came from a few club managers and Egypt’s national coach Hassan Shehata rather than fans or players.

While the other North African nations move towards new democratic regimes or have gained significant concessions from government as a result of their protests, the future for Egypt appears more convoluted and strained, demonstrated by recent protests against the interim military rulers. The ensuing instability of the post-Mubarak Egyptian nation has been echoed by poor performance on the football field.

This however, is not the general trend. Morocco, Algeria, Sudan and Tunisia have witnessed significant performance improvements since the Arab Spring, while Libya has maintained its strength overall, but has improved dramatically in competitive qualification matches.

“This is for all Libyans, for our revolution”.

So said 39-year old goalkeeper Samir Aboud upon Libya’s astonishing qualification for the 2012 African Cup of Nations, after a draw against Zambia put them though as a best runner-up.

Libyans turn out in droves to watch their side play Mozambique in September. Source: Magharebia

 Despite a recent poor run of friendly results, the Libyans are unbeaten in competitive matches since the revolution against Col. Muammar Gaddafi, notching up two wins and two draws to round off a qualification campaign that saw them go unbeaten and concede only one goal.

For a team that was significantly affected by an ongoing civil war, it was an astonishing achievement. Playing on neutral territory with a new flag, strip and anthem, coach Marcos Paquetá summed the mood up by stating the team was now "not only playing for football success but for a new government and a new country”. Even more so when you consider Col Gaddafi's son, Saadi, ran the Libyan Football Federation and was once captain of the national team. The team had been a symbol of the regime.

It has certainly not been smooth sailing. Former star playmaker Tariq Ibrahim al-Tayib was notably absent from recent matches, following pro-Gaddafi outbursts including reference to dead rebels as dogs and rats. During the conflict there were reports of 17 figures from Libyan football, including four who claimed to be members of the national side, turning up in a rebel-held town and announcing themselves as opponents of the regime.

One of them, Adel bin Issa, the coach of Tripoli’s top club al-Ahly where Saadi Gaddafi used to play, announced he had come “to send a message that Libya should be unified and free”, and he hoped “to wake up one morning to find that Gaddafi is no longer there.”

The new Libyan side, made up from players from all parts of Libya, has the potential to become a powerful new unifying force post-revolution. Their performances thus far and qualification for the African Cup of Nations may represent a good focus for new beginnings as the new nation moves into 2012.

The statistics show that Tunisia, Morocco, Sudan and Algeria have all experienced far better results in 2011 since the beginning of their respective protests or in the case of Tunisia, regime change, as compared to the 12 months preceding the Arab Spring.

Algeria, where protests led to the lifting of a 19-year old state of emergency, had a forgettable 2010, losing 8 matches and achieving an average of 0.86 points per match. Yet in 2011 Algeria won three of five matches and ended qualification on a high, only losing out to Morocco.

Even Morocco, which experienced smaller protests but significant political concessions, saw their performances improve from 1.25 points per match in 2010 to 1.75 in 2011 and finish top of their qualification group.

Kenya v Sudan. Source: Advocacy Project

Sudan, in a year when the country has experienced protest, violence and division with the breakaway of South Sudan, also qualified as a best runner-up behind Ghana in their ACN qualification group. Having played a large number of matches this year, a win ratio of 53% and a points per match of 1.79 is a huge improvement on 2010’s 25% win ratio and 1.13 points per match.

Finally Tunisia, the standout model of the Arab transition to democracy, also saw an improvement in performance from 1.27 points per match in 2010 to 1.75 in 2011 and a comfortable qualification behind Botswana.

"The events at home really stimulated our team and we believe that the players felt greatly liberated after what happened," (Esperance coach Nabil Maaloul)

While the Tunisian national team were qualifying for international competition, leading Tunisian side Esperance were winning the African Champions League. Players were keen to invoke synergies between revolution and victory on the pitch, with defender Khalil Chammam stating: "One positive thing from the revolution was that, although we suffered a lot, those changes and the suffering made us stronger -mentally and physically."

As in Egypt and Libya, Tunisian football suffered direct interference politicians before the revolutions. It was no surprise that in all three cases; national leagues were shut down upon the breakout of protests against the regimes. The majority of Libya's squad was home-based, where league football was suspended in March, while six others play in neighbouring Tunisia, where the league has only recently resumed. It is impossible to separate the fate of national footballers from politics when the impact is so great.

The paths of the North African national sides have not been universally similar. Instead they have in fact tended to replicate the upheavals themselves. Tunisia, Morocco and Algeria have seen liberalising efforts or regime change. It could be argued a new sense of liberalisation and increased freedoms has been epitomised in the successes of these national teams. Certainly in the case of Libya and Tunisia it appears that the political changes have sparked a new found unity, inspiration and rallying call, factors that have seeped through to the national football sides.

Whilst the link may be casual and the statistics do not delve any deeper than top-line numbers, the North African national football teams seem to be reflecting the mood and progress of Arab Spring and their successes are symbolic of energised nations realising their potential. Only in Egypt has the national side not been a flag bearer for success. Rather than being freed from shackles, a powerful footballing nation appears to be more confused and unstable than it was prior to the revolution. In football as in politics, confusion can breed downfall.

Follow me @matthewlbarrett