Publications
Partners
The SA Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (Sascoc) has sown confusion with its selection criteria for the national women’s and men’s Under-23 football teams for the 2016 Olympic Games.
In announcing Team SA selection policies this week, the Olympic governing body insisted that both teams should be ranked number one on the continent to be considered for selection.
Fifa has allocated Africa three slots for men and two for women at the Olympics. However, there is currently no continental ranking system in place for the men’s Under-23s.
Sascoc CEO Tubby Reddy insisted: “At the very least, they [football teams] must be number one in Africa.
“The CAF [Confederation of African Football] criteria have got nothing to do with us. We take IOC [International Olympic Committee] and Fifa standards, and we are allowed to change and make it more difficult for our teams.
“Even if they place second, they won’t be considered.”
But Safa CEO Dennis Mumble believed that “Fifa decides, not the IOC”.
He said: “The process is clear, except when they [Sascoc] say Banyana must be number one. The qualifying process is determined by Fifa and not Sascoc.
“We’ll go according to a body where we are affiliates. We’ll engage Sascoc to clear up any confusion.”
The women’s teams go through a qualification-elimination process over four two-leg rounds, while the eight-team CAF Under-23 Championships – to be hosted in Senegal – will determine the continent’s three representatives in Rio next year.
Third-ranked Banyana and the Under-23s will resume their qualification campaign next weekend against Kenya and Zimbabwe in the third round.
Sascoc has also set near-impossible qualifying standards for 2016 Olympic hopefuls in other codes.
Sascoc president Gideon Sam said all member federations had agreed to the selection criteria. Athletics and swimming were no longer required to fulfil two qualifying standards, as had been the case in the past.
“At the end of the cycle, we decide on the criteria that are satisfactory for everybody. All the federations – except two – have signed. It’s painful for now,” he said.
The Olympic governing body has also scrapped African competitions as an avenue for athletes to attain their qualifiers for the Olympics.
This does not apply to football.
Reddy said: “With due respect, the level of competition in Africa is not like the rest of the world.
“Many of our sports go into continental competition and qualify very easily because there is no quality; they go to the Olympics and are almost dumbfounded at the level of competition there.”
He added: “If we allowed rowing, for example, to qualify in Africa, all our 32 boats will qualify. There is what is called the universality principle, which calls on athletes from Africa to participate – and that is for countries that find it difficult to qualify athletes.
“We qualify athletes at the highest level, so we can’t claim that we need to use universality.”
Reddy said Sascoc’s stance was about performance.
“Very often we are criticised that we take big teams to the Olympics. Teams get bigger when team sports qualify. [The chances of] a team from our country winning a medal at this stage are minimal. These are the real issues. And the debate is, do you just open for everybody to go, or do you go for quality?”
Sascoc would deliver a team of 105 – including officials – to Rio.
“We prioritise. At the moment, we are looking at athletics, swimming, rowing, canoeing, cycling and boxing. Then we support others but not the same that we give to these six. Then come September-October we’ll increase spending on medal hopefuls and reduce spending on those who are just trying to qualify,” said Reddy, adding that Operation Excellence (Opex) requirements were tighter.
Opex provides financial, medical and scientific support to athletes who are deemed medal hopefuls.
“We do six-monthly evaluations and athletes must prove themselves through their performance for us to keep them in the programme.
“If not, we drop you. If you are new and performing now, we bring you on board.”
