A doughty draw, snatches of smart football in two heavy defeats and an experience of a lifetime. Neither Khalid Jamil nor his men would have thought of going up against either Panama, Brazil, or Uruguay. Gurpreet Singh Sandhu said his first reaction on learning India’s opponents in this window was to check if it was true. But there he was, getting big on Darwin Nunez.
Manvir Singh against Marquinhos; Vinicius Jr smelling leather as Anirudh Thapa fired an overhead clearance; Thapa’s goal; Mohammed Sanan making one Uruguay play sit on the floor; Akash Mishra’s right foot; Ryan Williams’s goal and assist andalmost spoiling Pedro Morisco’s debut for the Selecao; Sahal Abdul Samad pulling off a nutmeg against Brazil. They happened and nearly 1 lakh watched from the stands in Kolkata and Bengaluru though that number should have been more. Much more.
Need more of this
Khalid Jamil will watch the games again to understand why five of the 11 goals that India shipped came near or after the hour mark. There were times against Brazil, and more against Uruguay, when it seemed a contest between a bantamweight and a superheavyweight. Jamil and the squad will have seen first-hand how clinical top teams are in front of goal; the quality of their crosses (Nahitan Nandez’s delivery for Uruguay’s second goal was where neither Anwar Ali nor Sandhu could reach) and Panama’s accuracy with long-rangers
But Jamil will also know that, the fadeaway against Uruguay notwithstanding, India tried to play even against top-50 teams. Slips in concentration notwithstanding (and that is an important lesson as well), India worked the ball up the park against opponents who had another gear. Players who were part of these games and Sunil Chhetri, who was not, have said they want more. Caring little for his reputation because he thinks this is good for the team, so has India’s saturnine head coach at every available opportunity.
{{/usCountry}}But Jamil will also know that, the fadeaway against Uruguay notwithstanding, India tried to play even against top-50 teams. Slips in concentration notwithstanding (and that is an important lesson as well), India worked the ball up the park against opponents who had another gear. Players who were part of these games and Sunil Chhetri, who was not, have said they want more. Caring little for his reputation because he thinks this is good for the team, so has India’s saturnine head coach at every available opportunity.
{{/usCountry}}Having gone where it never has, can the All India Football Federation (AIFF) give Jamil what he wants? Can this be an annual affair in the reshaped, longer window? It is important for these games to be at home, as this gives India the best chance to punch above their weight. Also, at 138, India are not likely to be invited to play marquee teams.
Problem is: what is good for footballers does not necessarily help balance books. That’s why most football clubs lose money. Heavily. The financial burden, president Kalyan Chaubey has assured, is not AIFF’s. But that’s for now. These games cost money and empty seats at Kanteerava and Salt Lake stadium, which received massive infrastructure upgrade because of Brazil just ahead of a new ISL season, beg the question whether elite international football and India are made for each other.
The easy way would be to eschew ambition, give in to those who have asked what purpose these matches served, and give up. Accept that Widow’s Bay can never be Martha’s Vineyard. But the easy way is not always the right way. The first Indian Grandmaster, the first Indian at Wimbledon, the first time India played a Test created pathways not evident then.
India can play teams between 70-100 in the remaining windows. King’s Cup, Merdeka, CAFA Nations Cup are options that must be looked at. But do not give up on the chance to host top teams once a year. After a long training camp. If Singapore can host Brazil and Argentina can play Benin, why can’t India invite a top-20 team? The good news? The company that got the teams here is keen on doing this; if nothing else they would like to fail better.
For sure, it will be one of the things the national teams need. Football’s fundamental problems –infrastructure, as Chaubey has pointed out, the small players’ pool and longer seasons, as Diego Forlan and Vikash Dhorasoo have, are but three– need to be addressed. But why must one happen after the other?