Also Published on Sportingo 10 June 2008

I don’t know what Ana Ivanovic’s coach Sven Groeneveld is thinking [drinking], but I do hope there are no other coaches in tennis or in any competitive individual sport that drink or think like him. Groeneveld’s decision not to be in the stadium for the women’s single final on Saturday at the French Open because he also works for Adidas, the same clothing company that sponsors Dinara Safina, the opposing finalist, boggles the mind slightly to say the least. The grand slam is the epitome of every tennis player’s dream. And their coaches some of whom have been with their wards since they just left diapers will naturally look forward to a day the players will have a chance to achieve this dream.

After reading Matt Cronin’s piece and Groeneveld’s excuse yesterday Friday before the final, I went to bed an Ana Ivanovic fan, praying she will win today, in spite of the fairy tale drama a Safina win would have bestowed on the sport to crown the last two weeks. The strength of character that Ivanovic showed in that match, in which some players would have wobbled not seeing for the second consecutive time in a year, their coach not being in the stand, would endear her to me for a long time to come.  Gronenveld was not in the stand during her drubbing by Justin Henin for the same bogus reason of clothing and shoes accessories almost exactly a year ago and one cannot help but question his motivation and whether such coaches are appropriate for the good of the sport, even with their technical capability.

As I turned in my bed last night, my mind kept wondering to another competitive slugfest, boxing, and the great matches it used to stage years back. What could have been the outcome of Ali – Frazier without Angelo Dundee in the ring side, or how history books would have written about the Sugar Ray–Thomas Hearns first fight without the legendary line from Dundee, ‘You are blowing it son, you are blowing it!’, or Tyson’s battle for the world title without Cus D’Amato and Kevin Rooney. One might argue that it is not the same sport and unlike boxing the presence of the trainer in tennis, where he or she is resigned to a gentrified frustration to only look but not to give advice to the player, is not necessary. Apart from the obvious fact that this rule actually needs to change – the WTA made some trials last year, but the rule does not cover all tournaments yet and does not apply to the slams or to men’s tennis – the purpose of being there is not just for that particular match, but present potential glimpse of nuggets for future matches. These are glimpses that we cannot glean from watching on television screens alone.

Ana Ivanovic begins Monday world number 1, and one with a major championship under her belt, sash, around her belly button, or whatever young girls wear these days. This feat is a testament to years of hard work by her, her family and her team, which Gronenveld is a critical part of. I really do not know what kind of job Gronenveld is doing for Adidas or whether Adidas is footing the bill for his work with Ivanovic. Whatever role it is, a conflict of interest that deprives him of watching the joys of Ivanovic on Saturday needs to be reappraised and a choice need to be made, and not just by him. If Ivanovic really wants to be a great player like Justine Henin and others she has mentioned, it will surely be helpful to have a coach whose undivided attention can be counted on, and whose conflict of interest would not be a handicap at critical moments. If Adidas is behind the stipulation that a coach cannot be seen rooting for one of his players, if the adversary is also an Adidas sponsored player, this company needs to think again for the benefit of the sport. It has just deprived Groeneveld of a wonderful sensation on Philip Chatrier last Saturday, and it is a great pity, as it is not unavoidable.

On 22 May 2008, a group of people (Nigerians - patriotic, optimistic and exasperated - friends of Nigeria, concerned neighbours, bewildered and curious nationalities from other parts of the world) gathered at the premises of Trust Africa in Dakar, Senegal to watch a thought-provoking video entitled Naija Junction: Nigeria in 2025 produced in 2007 by the Africa Leadership Institute and Leap Africa to generate a discussion on alternative images for the country’s future.

This uncomfortably poignant short film begins with a scene of children playing loudly and freely in an urban squalor, being chased by a tired man whose deep slumber in a stifling room they have just disturbed, arriving at an unknown place with four doors. A peep into the keyholes reflects a glimpse of the different possibilities of Nigeria’s future, which the country will arrive at by taking one of the four possible roads in the next 17 years. These are envisaged by the producers as :

· Parambulator: A roundabout story of how to get from where you were to where you were in about 18 years.
· Shine Your Eye: A story of a people that seek salvation from a small clique of leaders who are able to deliver some economic gains at the high price of brutal repression of individual freedom and self actualization.
· Jaga Jaga Republic: A story of how self-seeking leadership, endemic corruption, a populace rendered supine by apathy and superstition, ethnic distrust, religious strife, and elitist power struggle all contribute to destroying the Nigerian nation.
· We don Win: A story of how, with remarkable foresight and fortitude, Nigerians are able to raise their nation from its slumber to become Africa’s largest economy and a leading member of the G20.

As these scenarios are based on the various historical, socioeconomic and political factors which have shaped the present Nigeria reality both locally and globaly, understandably, elements of the possible scenarios cut rather too close for today’s Charly and Comfort. Nigeria has tried and toyed with each of these development paths at one time or the other and with differing degrees of commitment, consolation and chagrin. What makes this scenario thinking exercise crucial at this juncture is not just the spectre of a horrible Jaga, Jaga Republic or a triumphal We don win, but that the very essence of capacities and elements that can make any of the scenarios possible is present in the Nigerian reality. And that the simple six-letter word choice will continue to be the factor at the end. Will it be the wide, narrow or convoluted paths?

This laudable film, which is being shown in various gatherings all over the world, it has been shown on national television in Nigeria and has been watched by President Yar’Adua and members of the government, generates excitement and debates everywhere. Dakar was not an exception. For example, the undercurrent running through the film of the weight of corruption as the stumbling block for the country begs for reflection. The last one year of the present government has been spent focusing on fighting corruption, with some high profile cases of stinking linen finally getting a necessary washing. But some Nigerians see this as diversion from the priority, the president should get to work immediately on the seven-point agenda for which he got into power: power (the electric kind here), electoral reforms, education, agriculture, the Niger Delta, health and employment generation.  The latest opinion poll conducted by the Guardian (Lagos) on 29 May 2008 puts Yar’Adua’s approval rating at 48%. The new name for the president is Baba-Go-Slow. And as the fabled urban traffic jams from which the nickname originated, it is an unnecessary time waster. The declared state of emergency on the electricity sector has yielded nothing for the eighth largest exporter of oil. In a television broadcast on 30 May 2008, the president announced that the three newly finished gas turbines would have problems because the immense natural gas resources of the country have been earmarked for exports for the next seven years and the contract with the companies have to be renegotiated. (See ‘Nigeria power shortage to persist’ till 2015.)

I am yet to be impressed with the government’s anti-corruption noise, not just because time is fast running out for Nigeria, 2025 is round the corner, but because history has shown that successive anti-corruption crusades will not go deep enough for a structural transformation of the country. We had eight years of selective anti-corruption crusade by the last government, while energy seemed to be lacking for action to provide basic infrastructure facilities such as electricity, water and health. The last sector is so bad that those in power do not even use it. The last vice-president and failed presidential candidate was flown out of the country for a dislocated knee injury from gym training. The current president has been flown to europe several times for regular treatment in the last year or so.

Is corruption really THE emblematic factor for Nigeria and its development? What makes Nigeria different from equally corrupt countries elsewhere in the world? What makes corruption a social expectation and value in Nigeria and how can its society change and be changed? The debate is unending….

By presenting a mirror of Nigeria and its development path to provoke dialogue and discussions, the film rightly shifts the onus of responsiblity on Nigerians to get themselves out of the present context and prepare a better future for themselves. It is Nigerians themselves who need to promote their country, their image and not expect others to do it for them. For an entity as critical as Nigeria, it is inevitable that discussion around Nigeria’s role and responsibility in the West Africa region, Africa and the world at large will be raised. To comments of big brother mentality, the Nigerian Ambassador to Senegal present at the screening reminded the gathering of the country’s role and sacrifices in the region and on the continent. Sacrifices for which, Nigeria and Nigerians do not benefit from.

Leadership is an important element in Nigeria 2025 scenarios, and the problem of lack of effective leadership has never been more serious than in Nigeria. With huge resources and wealth, Nigerians continue to smile while suffering, struggling against mammoth odds without government assistance, yet continue to put or unable to dislodge the same crop of leaders to run their government. In Naija Junction, there is very little of what individuals can do at their own level to lead Nigeria towards the right development path.

All in all, this is a very commendable initiative, from Leap Africa and the Africa Leadership Institute. Hope we can make the right decisions and move to action.