FOUR LESSONS FROM GHANA'S BIG WIN OVER QATAR

In a even game in terms possession, Ghana outscored Qatar by a four goal difference. It was all redemption for the Ghanaian side having been beaten by Mali in their previous friendly game.

 

Five changes to the side that were beaten by three goals told of the manager's intentions. Though a friendly, a double low could have dented Akonnor's stay as the leader of the coaching staff. The pressure had mounted up locally and there was something to vie for. 

Ghana managed to get four goals in the second half after a one all result in the first half. Despite ending the game on a high, 5-1, here are three things we observed;

 

NUMBER 3 LEFT-BACK?

Over 180 minutes of football and one thing was clear as a crystal ball, Ghana looked short in numbers at the left back position. The position has been referred to as the number 3 in tactical terms when playing with four men at the rear. At the African Cup of Nations held in 2019, Ghana tried three different players in that role before bowing out at Quarter Final stage. From there, Gideon Mensah has been the mainstay in the role having started in the last four games. On a bad day against the Malians, he was withdrawn with no direct replacement. Over the said period, Ghana has seemingly tried out new players in the other ten positions without any at the left-back position. 

4-4-2 MADE IT EASY

To every country, a system of play. The 4-4-2 formation, regardless of the variations seems to be a part of the Ghanaian football story. Having faced the Malians in a 4-3-3 formation, one thing was clearly wrong, role interpretation. This affected personnel positioning and the result was bizarre. In the former formation, the players looked comfortable in pressing (high or standard) and even got the first half from that. In ball retention and movements, there was no cause for alarm. Sevilla and Bayer Munich practice this to a greater effect. Formations of play are part of the football culture.

DEDE AT HIS BEST

Right after the lost to Mali, it was stated in our words that Dede Ayew will best help the team if he plays more central. Today, playing as the second striker off his younger brother, Jordan, the captain sailed the ship to shore without any difficulties. His ability to drift to wide areas, opened up spaces in the opponent's defense line. His awareness and goal scoring qualities were sold out too. Keep playing him there. 

 

YELLOW ROYAL?

Nationally, there's been a loud cry to return to the yellow kit as first choice for the national football teams. The majority have cried out that the white color does not tell the Ghanaian story. In the last defeat to Mali, the new white kits were launched and there was a fall. Today, the yellow won the game. This tells the tale of those who called for the change in home kit. Time to go all yellow?

By: Gyamfi Din-Chin

 

GHANA DOESN'T LEGALLY EXIST– FORMER MP FOR HOHOE SOUTH

In the wake of some group of people in the Volta Region demanding independence for a Western Togoland state, Kosi Kedem, a former Member of Parliament for Hohoe South has argued that Ghana does not legally exist.

“There’s no union document on the so-called union between Ghana (Gold Coast) and Togoland. De facto, they are one [unit], but legally, Ghana does not exist,” Kosi Kedem said on Joy News’ PM Express on Tuesday.

 

 

He explained that Ghana as a country is made up of the Gold Coast and the UN Trust Territory of British Togoland, adding that, for a union to be constitutionally legal, a union document needs to be legalized.

 

Kedem said, “Resolution 1044 which recognizes the recommended union, the same UN Resolution 1044 invited the British Government which was the administering authority to take such steps as necessary to bring about the union.”

 

He continued: “So, if a Trust Territory, being ruled by the UN and a colony being ruled by Britain are to come into union, what do you do? You have to sit the two of them down for them to determine what type of government they want to have, what will be their responsibilities, obligations and benefits. No such thing was done.”

 

Kosi Kedem further stated that the main cause of the fight for independence by the secessionist groups is that there is the absence of the union document that details the factors of the union.

 

He indicated that the plebiscite that resulted in the independence of the Gold Coast was facilitated by the United Nations mission visiting French Togoland and British Togoland.

 

He explained further that the plebiscite was to determine the political fate of both colonies which also gave two options, that is, a union with the Gold Coast or an integration of both colonies.

 

Kosi Kedem revealed: “The problem is that there was a plebiscite as a result of the UN Visiting Mission which came to the two Togos; French Togo and British Togo in 1955, and they recommended that there should be a plebiscite in British Togoland to determine their political fate. Majority of Togoland said that they wanted a union with an independent Gold Coast...the UN General Assembly rejected the offer of the union and forcibly integrated Togoland with Gold Coast.”

 

He said a union would have maintained the sovereignty of Togoland which would have given them the sovereign equality with independent Gold Coast under the same government but under the integration, Togoland lost its identity which was completely consumed by the Gold Coast. The union was thus forced on Togoland.

 

Kedem stated that no meeting was held to determine the kind of government to be instituted, its responsibility, obligations as well as the benefits to be derived from the union.

“Instead, on the eve of independence, around 4th March, the British Government with the help of the CPP government just sent troops to Togoland and occupied the place on the pretence that they were quelling a rebellion,” he noted.

 

Kosi Kedem stated that the British government refused to implement the terms and conditions highlighted in Resolution 1044, which was to ratify the union.

He consequently called for a dialogue between the government and the secessionist group and further called for the “rectification of the constitutional blunder” which can end the debate of secession and unite the country.

 

“Violence, confrontation, repression are very powerful, but dialogue negotiation and engagement are far more powerful than violence because violence does not solve any problem, dialogue does. It gives you a long-lasting solution to the problem," the former MP added

 

 

Credit: www.ghanaweb.com