Introduction
The Africa Cup of Nations (ACN) was founded in 1957 and from 1968 onwards has been held every two years. However, beginning in 1996 the tournament organizers adopted a 16 team tournament format. The final cementing change begins in 2013 with a switch to odd-numbered years so as to merge with World Cup and European calendar as many African footballers play for European clubs. In the tournament’s history of success, Nigeria and Cameroon can be categorized as ‘good’ teams, Niger and Mauritius as ‘bad’ teams, and Eritrea and Somalia as the ‘ugly’ teams. The good teams are the most successful, the bad teams have qualified for the ACN but not with much success, while the ugly teams are yet to qualify. This article aims to identify why some African national teams win or lose at, or fail to qualify for, the ACN by looking through three lenses – football human capacity, organizational capacity and physical capacity.
Differentiation by football human capacity
Football human capacity (FHC) is the cumulative number of coaches, players, administrators, agents and support staff. Increasingly, evidence from the African Cup of Nations continues to support the positive relationship between competent FHC and football success. For example, a comparison between one of the ‘good’ teams, Nigeria (with 2400 professional players and 34 football agents) and a ‘bad’ team, Mauritius (with 0 professional players and 1 football agent). The bottom line is African national football teams that invest well in attaining an advantagious FHC and possess committed, competent and competitive staff and are more likely to be successful at the ACN. The link between FHC and success at the ACN can be zeroed down to the capacity of football staff to plan, develop, and implement better winning drills, tactics and strategies.
Differentiation by football organizational capacity
Football organizational capacity (FOC) is the self-organizing ability of national football federations through the attainment of corporation and coordination, and is measured by the number of football teams, clubs, and successful professional leagues within a particular nation. A recent survey of African national federations revealed that nations with a greater number of clubs and teams and a well-organized professional league perform significantly better at international football tournaments such as the ACN. For example, a ‘good’ team like South Africa (with 900 clubs and 3200 teams) and a ‘bad’ team as Chad (with 50 clubs and 148 teams) perform significantly differently at the ACN. The link between FOC and winning at the ACN can be explained by each nation’s ability to develop well-organized clubs, teams and competitive professional football leagues which later produce winning national teams.
Differentiation by football physical capacity
Football physical capacity (FPC) is the ability to possess football stadiums, football camps, football fields, equipment, and sports technology for recruiting, training, monitoring and evaluating. Specifically, a greater number of football stadiums enables increased hosting ability and sponsorship opportunities, especially where naming rights are concerned. FPC can have a positive influence on success at the ACN. For an example, compare one of the ‘good’ teams, Zambia (the 2012 CAN champion) which has 28 football stadiums with a ‘bad’ team, Lesotho which has just one stadium. Additional, FPR may also add value by enabling the football associations to exploit additional opportunities such as developing football training clinics and seminars for coaching and training. Football stadiums and facilities are an important success factor through enabling athletes to train in a high quality environment and therefore provide the link between preparation and excellence.
Conclusions and recommendations
In conclusion, the ‘good’ teams are mostly endowed with adequate football human, organizational and physical capacities, while the ‘bad’ teams are less endowed with similar football capabilities. However, the ‘ugly’ teams such as Eritrea and Somalia are characterized by war and the overwhelming incapacity to plan, develop and utilize their own football capacities. For such teams, additional barriers to football success include general political stability, undemocratic regimes, and massive economic stagnation with poor governance of football associations. All of these disabling barriers make it very difficult to nurture, produce or enhance their football capacities. In sum, to graduate from a ‘bad’ to a ‘good’ team, there is an urgent need for the elimination of barriers and the implementation of progressive football policies to enhance the strategic planning, growth and implementations of football capacity attainment and utilization.