adminIT has been exactly seven days since the latest episode of Zimbabwe’s football soap opera started when the Zifa leadership “voted” to dissolve the insolvent association and immediately replace it with the National Football Association of Zimbabwe (Nafaz). While they were well within their rights to dissolve Zifa under the association’s constitution, it is the manner and perhaps the timing that has set tongues on fire.
That they chose the eve of an important assignment for the Warriors in an African Cup of Nations (Afcon) qualifier against Malawi was perhaps the first hint that the difference between Zifa and Nafaz will be the name. Unless of course if Zifa was only playing its normal inefficiency role for the final time.
Can someone at Nafaz please tell us why this “rebranding” had to be on the weekend the Warriors were playing a crucial Afcon qualifier? Couldn’t the dissolution of Zifa at least wait for us to properly celebrate our third Afcon finals qualification?
Was Nafaz so urgent that the leadership had to rain on the Warriors’ parade because all focus during the week was on Zifa and Nafaz, with people wanting to know what was going on, but sadly the mute button had been pressed at the football leadership’s offices?
No one was explaining on the record what was going on. People wanted to know how it is we played and qualified under Zifa, but seven hours later, Zifa ceased to exist and now Nafaz was going to take over all Zifa’s responsibilities, except the $7 million debt.
The interesting thing is that the same faces that comprised Zifa and helped author part of its confusion are same people at the new Nafaz, and holding the same positions they held at the association they dissolved.
Can we really trust them to run a functional association free from Zifa’s constant tendencies of inefficiency?
The Zifa council decided to dissolve the association because it was insolvent; it owed more money than the value of assets it. Zifa couldn’t pay its debts nor could it work towards a compromise with its creditors and they resolved to wind up the association instead.
While the decision to wind up the association was rightfully made by members of the Zifa council, can these same people turn water into wine as Nafaz, particularly after running from the huge debt at Zifa?
Yes, potential sponsors were not willing to be associated with such a debt ridden association, but will they now fall over each other to fund Nafaz simply because it is new and debt-free?
Wouldn’t they be more wary that Nafaz could be dissolved in the same manner as Zifa without notice to escape from servicing accrued debts?
Was the problem the name or how the association was being run? If the name was the problem, are we saying previous Zifa administrations were so dumb not to figure this out? I believe if they all thought like our present football administrators, we would have witnessed dissolutions with each elected leadership because Zifa’s name was soiled year after year.
To prove that the name wasn’t the problem, the manner in which Nafaz was formed had all the Zifa DNA. Firstly there was no public notice given on the intention to dissolve Zifa and the association’s councillors were ambushed as the matter wasn’t on last Saturday’s agenda. This begs the question whether adequate professional advice was sought before arriving at last week’s decision.
Did the councillors have the mandate of their respective constituencies to affirm such a vote, since the matter was not on the agenda? If it came up as a matter arising, wouldn’t it have been prudent for them to ask for time out to consult their constituencies on how to vote?
With such characters moving into Nafaz, then another name change should be in the pipeline in the not too distant future, because as we have come to know, the leopard cannot change its spots in as much as it might not like them.
derick.khumalo