The Big Boss has proved himself to be an astute manager, but the Super Eagles would be more successful if they moved on. There can be no denying that Stephen Keshi is a winner. His record is exemplary, and littered with improbable achievements. Most impressive was qualifying unfancied Togo for the 2006 World Cup in Germany, a feat that seems even more eye-catching when you consider that, after South America, Africa has possibly the most difficult qualification series.
Minnows traditionally do not qualify out of Africa for the World Cup. The geo-political landscape of the continent, as well as rigours of the old qualification system (the newer one is rather easier to negotiate) meant that only the very best could get through. Even if a nation debuted, there was usually a period of continental relevance and/or dominance preceding, one example being Nigeria in 1994.
They were a talented bunch; Emmanuel Adebayor was the star, but the likes of Mohammed Kader Coubadja, Kossi Agassa and Yao Senaya Junior were outstanding for the Hawks. Keshi took this group and put them on the map of world football.
By the time the Africa Cup of Nations in 2006 came along though, cracks began to appear. The unity and siege-mentality that the Big Boss had instilled into the squad started to dissipate as the players outgrew the cocoon. Togo exited the tournament in Egypt at the group stage with three losses and two goals scored.
Therein lies the issue with Keshi at the helm of the Super Eagles.
It is one thing to coach a team with low expectations, and another to coach a country like Nigeria whose expectations are sky-high. His rant at the World Cup, hitting out at critics and perceived “enemies within” was unnecessary and betrayed a man on the edge of his tether. That, in our fifth appearance at the global showpiece, and as African champions no less, gave him away.
He is on the verge of a new, bumper contract to stay on as coach, and no one can say he has not earned it. Whether it is the wisest course of action for a country as big as Nigeria is another matter entirely. To borrow a Biblical metaphor, Keshi brought us out of irrelevance. Is he the one to take us to the land of Promise?
The common refrain following Nigeria’s showing in Brazil is that the Super Eagles equalled their best-ever outing at the Mundial. This is true, if a tad disingenuous. The team bested the abject showings of 2002 and 2010, but to compare with 1994 and 1998 on the basis of progression alone is simply misrepresenting facts. The ’90s performances featured two wins apiece, in addition to some truly excellent football, notably the games against Bulgaria in both editions and even defeats to Argentina and Italy.
There will always be a dichotomy of views on what exactly football is, and how it should be played. One the one hand, there are the pragmatists who prioritise the result to the detriment of all else.
The purists, however, want to see art, revel in the flow of the game, and gasp in wonder. Reductive football is alien to the Nigerian; in hosting the Afcon in 2000, a partisan capacity crowd in the National Stadium booed the Super Eagles for failing to break down a stubborn, defensive Congolese side in a goalless draw. This was in the second group match!
The fact that so many are willing now to retain the present management is testament to a change in the Nigerian psyche. Having spent over a decade drifting slowly into football’s wilderness, the scars of failure have made a nation forget what its footballing ethos is. It was 16 years ago that the reward for a Round of 16 place was a sacking. Now, it is a new contract.
Keshi’s team was by no means impressive in Brazil. Who can forget the eyesore in Curitiba against the Iranians? Even more alarming was that he went into the biggest football tournament in the world with no idea of what his best line-up was. Newcomer Ramon Azeez (a defensive midfielder) was played behind the striker against a team set up to defend primarily, and with Nigeria needing a win.
Who can forget the performances (or lack thereof) of John Obi Mikel and the refusal to drop him in the face of his under performances?
It is decisions such as these that lead one to wonder if Keshi can truly crack the big time.
If football in the last decade has taught us anything, it is that there are broadly two ways to achieve success on the international stage. The first is to have a core playing club football together, see Spain and Germany.
The second is to have a manager whose tactical savvy can pull a rabbit out of a hat, see Uruguay since 2010 and Costa Rica in Brazil.
The former is unlikely to happen, for various reasons which may not be under our control. The latter, however, is ours to control. Keshi has done enough to have us question his tactical and technical quality over the course of his tenure. Costa Rica went on an improbable run to the Quarter-Finals by strategically minimising their weakness at the back, and did it without losing a game despite facing Uruguay, Italy, England and the Netherlands.
Keshi’s strength is in building a team and bucking expectations by challenging the establishment. This works only in the short-term for many reasons, chief of which is that players and teams grow. Challenge the establishment long enough and you become a part of it. You cannot build siege mentality when you are no longer an underdog.
When appointed, he said he wanted the national team shirt to mean something again. He wanted to return a sense of pride and duty to the Super Eagles. He has undoubtedly done those, and made Nigerians proud of the team again. Keshi was the man for an important transition, and has cemented his legacy. That said, if the team is to move to the next level, a change is in order.
Credit: http://dailyindependentnig.com
