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