Online Reporter
Blessing Malinganiza
Zimpapers Sports Hub
THERE was a moment in Ndola when the Mighty Warriors looked exactly like the team Zimbabwe has been waiting to see again.
Confident on the ball, brave enough to attack and disciplined enough to compete.
For supporters starved of reasons to believe, it felt familiar. Not because Zimbabwe were winning matches, but because they looked like a team again.
That should not be taken for granted. For much of the last decade, the story of the Mighty Warriors has been told through memories rather than progress.
Qualifying for the Rio Olympics in 2016 remains one of the greatest moments in Zimbabwean football history, yet the years that followed became a lesson in how quickly momentum can disappear when success is not supported by planning.
The Four Nations Tournament in Zambia, therefore, carried significance far beyond the final standings.
It offered a snapshot of where Zimbabwean women’s football stands today. More importantly, it exposed the distance still separating ambition from reality.
The lesson from Ndola was not that Zimbabwe are failing.
The lesson was that rebuilding a national team is far easier than rebuilding an entire football ecosystem. Zimbabwe’s victory over Lesotho in their first game of that Four Nations tournament offered evidence that progress is happening.
The team showed composure after setbacks, depth and enough tactical maturity to regain control of a match that briefly threatened to become uncomfortable.
For coach Sithethelelwe Sibanda, those moments mattered more than the scoreline.
Rebuilding teams are measured by their responses to adversity. Zimbabwe responded well.
Players such as Shyline Dambamuromo, Ethel Chinyerere, Christabel Katona and Rutendo Makore provided encouragement for the future. The younger players looked capable of handling international football, while the experienced figures supplied the leadership that every developing side requires.
There was visible growth.
Yet growth and readiness are not the same thing.
The final against Zambia illustrated the difference.
The Copper Queens did not overwhelm Zimbabwe with possession or territory.
They simply demonstrated habits that come from years of competing at higher levels. They punished mistakes quickly. They managed key moments better. They converted opportunities when they appeared.
Zimbabwe, by contrast, left crucial moments unfinished.
That difference is not accidental.
It is the product of systems.
While Zambia transformed women’s football into a national priority, Zimbabwe spent years battling inactivity, inconsistent programmes and administrative instability.
During that period, Zambia produced players who moved into stronger leagues, qualified consistently for major tournaments and gained exposure to elite environments.
The rewards are now visible.
Zambia will travel to Morocco next month for another Women’s Africa Cup of Nations campaign. Their players arrive at international tournaments expecting to compete.
Zimbabwe are still trying to establish continuity.
That is why reducing the Ndola experience to wins and losses would miss the bigger story.
The real issue is whether Zimbabwe’s football authorities are prepared to treat women’s football as a long-term investment rather than a periodic project.
National teams do not emerge from camps.
They emerge from systems.
They emerge from youth leagues, coaching pathways, competitive domestic structures, medical support, scouting networks and regular international exposure.
The strongest national teams are usually reflections of the environments that produce them.
The Mighty Warriors cannot consistently defeat stronger opponents if they are asked to make up years of lost development during a few weeks of national team preparation.
That burden is unfair on players and coaches alike.
There are encouraging signs.
The Zimbabwe Women’s Premier Soccer League has become more stable and more competitive.
More players are arriving in camp with regular football behind them. Coaches have a broader pool of talent to assess. Competition for places is increasing.
Those developments matter because they create foundations.
The danger lies in assuming the foundations alone are enough.
Zimbabwean football has often celebrated beginnings without committing fully to the difficult work that follows.
Programmes are launched with enthusiasm before momentum disappears. Promising performances generate excitement before structural weaknesses reappear.
Women’s football has experienced that cycle before.
The Mighty Warriors qualified for the Olympics and became symbols of possibility.
Yet, instead of building on that breakthrough, the programme drifted. Opportunities were missed. Momentum disappeared. The team became less visible. International competitiveness declined.
The consequences are still being felt today.
What happened in Ndola should, therefore, trigger a wider conversation.
Not about selection, tactics or individual performances, but focusing on sustainability.
What resources will be committed to women’s football over the next five years? How often will the national team play meaningful international matches? What support exists for youth development? How will talented players transition from school and junior football into the senior game?
These questions will determine whether Zimbabwe closes the gap on countries such as Zambia.
The players have already done their part.
They travelled to Zambia and showed that the national team remains alive. They demonstrated commitment, resilience and enough quality to suggest better days are possible. What happens next is no longer primarily about them.
It is about leadership.
It is about whether administrators, sponsors and policymakers see women’s football as an asset worth developing rather than an obligation to be managed.
Zambia’s biggest lesson was not contained in the final score; it was contained in the contrast.
One country showed what happens when investment is sustained over time.
The other showed what happens when recovery begins after years of lost ground.
