Nigeria’s Super Falcons produced arguably one of their best performances in recent times last Thursday, as they shocked tournament co-hosts, Australia to keep Nigeria’s hope of reaching the knockout stage of the ongoing 2023 Women’s World Cup tournament alive.
Leading up to the tournament, the Australians who are ranked 10th in the world, and Olympic champions Canada were tipped as heavy favourites to progress from Group B, which includes Nigeria.
Nigeria’s Super Falcons went into their ongoing Women’s World Cup first game as heavy underdogs against Olympic Champions, Canada, who are ranked seventh in the world. The Falcons put up a resilient performance to earn a hard-fought draw against their North American counterparts, with goalkeeper Chiamaka Nnadozie making some impressive saves, especially a second-half penalty save.
In a similar fashion, against Australia on Thursday, the Super Falcons faced great odds as they battled an Australian team that had the advantage of playing in front of their imposing home crowd in Brisbane. With the victory over Australia, Nigeria became the first African team to win a game at the 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup by shocking co-hosts Australia.
The Falcons didn’t have just Australia to contend with, as questions have been raised from far and wide about the quality of refereeing, right from the start of the match.
Quite a number of football pundits and fans went away with the impression that the officiating was questionable and a seeming premeditated attempt to edge out the Super Falcons, the only surviving African team in the tournament.
The Super Falcons now top Group B on goal difference with four points and are in a good position to qualify for the knockout stages, whereas Australia trail in third with three points and must win their final game to progress from the group.
So why would officiating favour Australia over Nigeria?
Well, while we preach and strive for equality, fairplay and the highest ideals in global politics, trade and sports, we continue to inch towards these ideals but certainly are yet to arrive at the El Dorado.
As such, protestations of racial and other discriminations continue to be received and processed at global and local competitions.
Then again, Australia and New Zealand are co-hosts of the 2023 Women’s World Cup. Perhaps some would think that it would take the wind out of the sails of the competition and dampen the tempo of the event, as well as kill the spirit of the home fans, if the co-host were edged out of the contest so early.
Furthermore, co-hosting costs money and with the state of the global economy, hosts are not so easy to come by.
The FIFA bid evaluation report estimated the cost of running the tournament would be about $150 million, with just over $100 million of that coming from governments. That indicates Australia, being a co-host, would have doled out in the neibourhood of $50 million, and heaven knows how much more in other attendant costs.
Recall that just a few days ago, the Australian state of Victoria pulled out of hosting the 2026 Commonwealth Games, citing major cost blow-outs, leaving organisers “hugely disappointed” as they scrambled to keep the multi-sport event afloat.
State Premier Daniel Andrews said the initial estimated Aus$2 billion (US$1.36bn) needed to hold the Games would more likely be around Aus$7 billion, which he called “well and truly too much”.
Then again what checks are in place against warped officiating?
Surely, there are the rules of the game which are quite well known to players, officials and many fans across the world.
But since much of the complaints about faulty officiating tend to be directed at the human factor component; perhaps it would help to have some balance in the geographical representation of the officiating.
The officiating in the ongoing competition includes match officials from Togo, Kenya, South Africa, Cameroon, Zambia, and Morocco, but none from Nigeria.
However, four Africans are among the 33 referees presiding in the competition.
They are Salima Mukansanga of Rwanda, who officiated at the men’s AFCON, Amedome Vicentia of Togo, Karboubi Bouchra of Morocco, and Makalima Akhona of South Africa.
Furthermore, FIFA recruited more than five Africans among the 55 assistant referees and 19 video match officials. FIFA’s decision to base its criteria on “quality” implies that Nigerian officials are inadequate.
“As always, the criteria we have used is ‘quality first’ and the selected on-field match officials represent the highest level of refereeing worldwide,” says Pierluigi Collina, the FIFA Referees Committee Coordinator.
It is our position that FIFA, being a global custodian of sporting excellence and fairplay, has the responsibility and capacity to ensure equitable representation for continents and nations in the officiating of the beautiful game.
This will ensure that fairplay is at once stated and then seen to be in effect.
The world will be watching as Nigeria’s Super Falcons file out to test their standing against the Republic of Ireland in the game of grits today, Monday.
