The 2015 edition of the Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON) tournament ended yesterday. Most people are of the notion that the final match did not meet expectations in terms of excitement and the quality of the football. The same can be said of the rest of the tournament. I would like to offer my opinion of what could have gone wrong in the final match of the tournament. I will call it the Strategic Analysis of the AFCON Final. My verdict in terms of the type of ‘strategy’ that was used by both teams was that it was more of a lottery as opposed to a deliberate attempt to win the match. It is no surprise that the match was decided by penalties. I am not saying that the match did not have a bright side but this article shall concentrate of identifying what went wrong. The following points are not necessarily related to each other and as such this post should not be read as a book which will have some sort of correlation. We just want to establish the possible causes of such an unexciting final from a strategic point of view. These lessons are also applicable to business.
Teamwork: Going forward there was little to no evidence of teamwork displayed by both teams. I do not recall seeing players hunting in packs more than 5 times in the whole match. It was mostly two players exchanging passes until they lost the ball. Teamwork was however displayed defensively as players would help each other to mark players like Yaya Toure. As a team you can use strength in numbers to overwhelm your opponents. Not using teamwork will also make you seem weaker than you really are making you more vulnerable to defeat. Individualism seldom works in today’s world.
Use Your Strengths: A pattern that I observed in this match is that both teams were not set up in order to make the most of their strengths. Cote d’Ivoire was not set up to ensure that Yaya Toure would get the chance to take shots from just outside the area, that Gervinho would receive the ball to his feet in areas where he could run behind the defence and to ensure that Wilfried Bony could get crosses from which he could head the ball into the net. Ghana were not set up to give Gyan lobs from which he could use his pace to run onto or the ball to his feet so he could run at the keeper. This was because there was a rift between the midfield and Gyan as there did not seem to be an attacking midfielder. If Kwesi Appiah was the one who was supposed to play this role then he did not do it well. If you do not play to your strengths they will seize to be strengths making you weaker as a unit.
First Mover Advantage: Both teams played a cautious game and seemed ready to take the game to penalties. We all know that penalties involve a great deal of skill and luck. Having bad luck on the day will mean that even the best footballers in the world can miss a penalty. The reluctance to attack is probably why in both teams there was a weak relationship between the midfield and attack as players were not willing to lose the shape of the formation. Always take reasonable risks and be sure to move in on the competition and put them on the back foot to ensure that you have an advantage. As Mel Gibson said in the movie Edge of Darkness, “You had better decide whether you’re hangin’ on the cross… Or bangin’ in the nails.”
Patience: Patience is a virtue. The players in this particular match did not exercise patience as seen with them not retaining possession in order to look for the killer pass. This resulted in the ball being hoofed hopefully up the field with Gyan and Bony left to fight for the ball in the air. In the 59th minute Gradel got a chance to set up Gervinho for a goal as Ghana’s left back rushed in on a challenge and was left for dead. Wakaso hit quite a number of long range shots which did not threaten the goal when he could have taken his time and looked for a killer pass. A lack of patience can compromise you both in attack and in defence as seen in this match.
Roll The Dice: In direct contrast to the point above sometimes you have to take your chances. In the 25th minute Atsu took a chance with a long range drive and it almost reaped rewards. With the way that the match went this could have won Ghana the final and the title. One thing we should note about taking chances is you have to have at least a small idea of when to try your luck. Atsu knew that he was within range and he knew that he had a lethal left foot (as shown in the semi-final with his beautiful goal). The fact that he calmly side footed the ball as opposed to Wakaso’s rash shots showed you that he was taking a calculated risk. This is important in business today.
Accountability: Quite a number of players were not acting responsibly for the team. Serey was not maintaining his position in front of the defence and was not closing in on strikers in that area. It is one of the reasons why Atsu was able to let off a shot in that area. Players from both teams were not making supporting runs to their passes especially when attacking. This is why Bony and Gyan found themselves isolated most of the times. The way that Serey and Gyan stamped on other players were acts that showed that they were not responsible for their actions and could have cost their teams had they received red cards. Always remember that when you are in a team your actions affect everyone else and that a system is as good as its components.
Experience/Exposure: It was evident that exposure or experience at the highest level is important in shaping a player. A lot of these players are from the same backgrounds but the players who are playing for the big teams were shining more than the other players. Yaya Toure, Kolo Toure, Atsu, Appiah, Ayew, Gyan and Gervinho (among others) looked a cut above the rest and offered the most for their teams. In your team you should always have members who have had exposure at the highest levels as their insights and experience is invaluable.
Organisation: The match lacked rhythm because both teams were not organised. There was no evidence of a systematic approach to the game outside the fact that both teams were sitting in defence. Going forward there seemed to be no link between midfield and the attackers. Appiah and Gyan were isolated for most of the game and so was Bony on the other side. The match was more about the players passing the ball around and hoping for openings which failed to materialise most of the time. You have to have a game plan along with contingencies in case you plan does not work.
So this is my diagnosis people. I believe that the match was not that exciting as the ‘strategies’ that were employed by both coaches were not sound. I have left out other things and as I said there were good aspects as far as the match is concerned. What were the good aspects? What do you think of my analysis? Add some insights of your own and let us discuss.
RM
Leave A Comment