Win or no win, Ahmed Musa must now be removed from that team like a parasitic jigger from the leg. It’s fashionable to diss Osaze Odemwingie now but I’d rather have an Osaze in my team than a Musa whose only redeeming quality is the ability to run fast. And then stumble over. It was refreshing to see an Eagles team being able to string passes together, close down opponents quickly and battle for each other. I have been very critical of Mikel Obi because previously he would let the game pass him by without one care in the world. He has excised that nonchalance from his game and we all are very pleased with him, Chelsea player or not.
From yesterday, it would have been the in-thing to turn on ourselves. We would have berated ourselves no end for ever daring to criticize the Super Eagles, exhibiting that baffling Nigerian brand of short-term amnesia. Truth is the performances at the time were dire and deserved all the vociferous criticisms and denouncements. And guess what happened: Yesterday.
I wish the team Stephen Keshi took to the Nations Cup were indeed a “Biafran” team, as the noise claimed in the sluggish start. The whole point of this article would have been enhanced ten-fold. However, let’s get to addressing the feeling in this country that every single tribe must be represented in the Super Eagles and other national endeavours. These noises are muted today because the Super Eagles have struck gold and thus have many fathers. The Biafran notion has been dropped and stomped to blend with the dust it rightfully belongs with. If the Eagles had exited at the first hurdle as generally expected, there would have been no end to this perfidious tribalistic cowbollocks.
For everyone’s sakes, someone must grow some balls and pick his team with only one quality in mind – merit. I don’t care if Nigeria is led by Efik man after Efik man; what I care about is tangible results and whoever can produce them is a go, repetitive Efik or not. It is near impossible, but we must accept, at some point, that it is more to our benefit to have the best qualified and willing persons at the helms of more sensitive affairs of state than our buffoon tribesman whose only advantage over others is the sound of his name. It is reflective of this national cake mentality that we want someone we know in high positions, so that we can send high-powered delegation after high-powered delegation seeking for some flimsy favour.
The only thing federal or national about our character is a mutually assured determination to get rich quick and by whatever means possible. And for those who already possess some means, the determination is to amass even more wealth perhaps to cater to the needs of generations unborn down the line, no matter whose head is trodden upon in the present. This is why where it matters – in high-stakes politics or in big business, Nigeria is united. Nigeria only begins to be divided when the treasure trough is withdrawn. Nigeria is the anti-adage: United we fall, divided we stand.
To hell with federal character and its purveyors. May you roast in fiery blazes if you’re one of those who continually jeopardize progress by bringing the question of ethnicity into every national issue. So far so good, there’s no Yoruba person in the highest reaches of government in this term and I’m not any less hungrier or happier. What then is the point?
Sexism or apologist sexism, another form of sanctioned discrimination, also grates the nerves. If we must give men and women an equal playing field, it must be equal. Breasts and a vagina must not be a consideration. Yes, women may have been suffered rights in the past but it is no reason to throw reason into the wind in the present. The practice of reserving a certain percentage of posts for women is as laughable as those Hollywood movie makers who only use black actors in an attempt at political correctness. If a woman or man must occupy a post, that woman or man must have beaten off competition from every other choice, woman, man or a combination of both. We must not sacrifice progress at the altar of political correctness or as an apology for the wrongs (which could also read as protections) done in time past.
And for the champions of gender equality whose measure of equality is how many women are appointed into political posts, there are better things to concentrate all that political fervour on. How about the protection of the mental and emotional health of the girl-child for instance? How about allowing women serve their nation in combat? After all, are there no dare-devil female robbers? How are military men with vaginas treated in the barracks – as objects for depositing roving and homing pleasure or as genuine service men?