How to Justify Banning Togo from the Next Two Africa Cup of Nations?
FIFA and its confederations take political interference into sporting affairs pretty seriously. Perhaps too seriously, given certain circumstances.
The decision of CAF to ban Togo from the next two Africa Cup of Nations because of the decision of the Togolese government to withdraw the team from the current tournament is defended by the confederation as follows:
The Executive Committee of the Confederation of African Football met on 30 January 2010 and examined the withdrawal of Togo national team from the Orange Africa Cup of Nations 2010.
The Executive Committee and its president renewed their sincere condolences to the families of victims involved in this tragic terrorist attack which happened January 8, 2010. The attack was condemned by CAF and also a total support was given to the Togolese team.
At that time, CAF said they have understood perfectly the decision of players not to participate in the competition.
Meanwhile, following a decision taken by players to participate in the competition, the Togolese government decided to call back their national team.
The decision taken by the political authorities is infringing CAF and CAN regulations. Therefore, a decision has been taken to suspend the Togo national team for the next two editions of Africa Cup of Nations, with a fine of $50,000.00 handed to the Togolese national football association, in conformity with article 78 of Africa Cup of Nations Angola 2010.
CAF then links to their regulations to prove their point (actually, they don’t: the link doesn’t work).
Togo midfielder Thomas Dossevi expressed his disappointment.
“We are a group of footballers who came under fire and now we can’t play football any more. They are crushing us. Togo should appeal the suspension. When we said we were going home for a three-day mourning they said they were with us in this ordeal and now they punish us.”
This comes just five days after CAF president Issa Hayatou said “We wished they would have stayed but respect their decision to leave.”
Apparently not.
Can anyone offer a serious defense for this decision? We like to look past the obvious reaction here, but I can’t think of much more to say about CAF’s insensitivity here, expect that it’s remarkable they couldn’t even wait for the dust to settle on the tournament and the brutal attack on Togo before laying down the hammer on a still grieving team.
Recent Diary Entries
9 Comments
Trackbacks
- The Sweeper: Togo Ban Fallout Continues | Pitch Invasion
- The Sweeper: Where’s Your Wad Gone, Premier League? | Pitch Invasion
- CAF Chief Issa Hayatou Should Resign | Pitch Invasion
The lives and emotions of the players conflict with CAF’s finances. I’d be curious to see if the CAF would have reached the same decision had Ghana, Cameroon, Ivory Coast or Egypt had been attacked and withdrew.
Well, it has generated some serious media attention. Any press is good press?
But seriously, this is a similar pattern of poor governance – lack of foresight, coordination, and communication leads to major problem. Everyone points fingers, and those in authority burn an effigy. Repeat. Recycle. Rinse.
It’s the single most outrageous decision in the history of football administration and should not be allowed to stand.
Even CAF’s pretense is highly questionable as the “government intervention” only occurred after CAF and the Angolan organizers put very significant pressure on the Togolese delegation in Cabinda to change their original decision not to compete. That pressure has been reported to have included a visit by Hayatou himself, and this ruling provides an indication of the kind of “persuasion” he may well have engaged in the immediate aftermath of the incident.
If there is no real justification for the suspension, then can someone suggest the CAF’s motivation in doing this, aside from wishing to uphold a simple law which has been applied a number of times before? That is, what does the CAF have to actually gain from “unfairly” suspending Togo aside from, like I said, upholding a rule?
1. Terrorists tried to kill players. 2. Trying to protect their player’s lives, they took the most natural and understandable decision, to keep away from danger. 3. They interpreted this as in irregularity and penalize the team.
Did I get this right?
To Micah’s point — Adebayor should convince Essien, Drogba, Kalou, Mikel, Eto’o and other influential African footballers to boycott any matches connected with the 2012 edition of the Cup of Nations until CAF reverses this ridiculous ban. CAF’s finances would surely be affected by the lack of star power in future matches. As Tom so correctly stated, even the timing of this decision is laughable and overtly vindictive.