By Enock Phiri
The recurring theme in Zambian football administration is not a shortage of expertise, but a pattern of reactive decision-making. The current leadership at the Football Association of Zambia appears to be revisiting old habits rather than correcting them. For years, technical adjustments have often been introduced at the eleventh-hour attaching analysts, expanding benches, or restructuring support teams on the brink of competition. While innovation in technical preparation is commendable, timing is decisive. Intelligence introduced months before a tournament strengthens preparation; intelligence introduced during competition becomes emergency response.
This pattern is not new. During the administration of Kalusha Bwalya, Zambia frequently attached European video analysts shortly before major tournaments. Though Zambia achieved historic success by winning the Africa Cup of Nations, that singular triumph should not obscure structural inconsistencies that persisted before and after it. Today, Kalusha serves within FAZ’s technical committee structure, meaning strategic oversight continues to flow through familiar channels. When tournament outcomes fall short, scrutiny inevitably extends upward toward governance frameworks.
The same reactive approach resurfaced during the 2025 AFCON campaign and again at the 2025 COSAFA Under-17 tournament. Assistant Coach Charles Haalubono had prepared the squad with the understanding that he would lead the technical bench. Following a convincing opening victory over Botswana, FAZ introduced additional coaches — Enala Phiri and Wisdom Kaira — mid-competition. Patrick Phiri had earlier been attached during the Four Nations tournament in Malawi, yet his mandate remains unclear. In high-performance sport, undefined roles do not merely create confusion; they dilute authority. When authority is diluted, decision-making slows, messaging becomes inconsistent, and performance suffers.
The situation becomes even more layered within the Copper Queens setup. Enala Phiri previously served as head coach before the appointment of Nora Häuptle, who reportedly opted to partner with Charles Haalubono instead. That partnership was viewed as functional and stable. The question now arises: is FAZ anticipating a structural shift ahead of the 2026 WAFCON scheduled from 17 March to 3 April 2026, or are parallel hierarchies forming while competitions are ongoing? Structural foresight requires clarity of succession and continuity planning not overlapping mandates.
Financial prioritisation further complicates the picture. Zambia’s last AFCON campaign featured one of the largest backroom staffs in the tournament, yet the competitive return did not match the scale of delegation. Meanwhile, opportunities for meaningful exposure appear constrained. The Copper Queens were reportedly expected to participate in the Dubai Women’s Tournament against higher-ranked sides such as the Brazil women’s national football team an invaluable competitive benchmark. Instead, FAZ has arranged a friendly against the Senegal women’s national football team in Morocco, with preparations beginning on 24 February 2026 while COSAFA commitments remain active.
The core issue is not competence within individual coaches or administrators. Zambia possesses capable technical minds and talented players. The structural challenge lies in coordination. High-performance football environments demand clearly defined hierarchies, explicit role allocation, and continuity of philosophy. When multiple coaches operate without demarcated authority, players receive conflicting tactical cues. When mixed messaging prevails, consistency erodes. And when consistency erodes, tournament objectives collapse under their own ambiguity.
Zambian football does not suffer from a deficit of ambition or talent. It suffers from fragmented technical direction. Effective governance in modern football is not about the quantity of expertise around the table; it is about coherence in execution.
Too many chefs rarely produce a balanced kitchen.
Sustainable football development requires proactive planning cycles, transparent technical structures and long-term continuity rather than episodic intervention. The global game has evolved into a data-driven, system-oriented ecosystem where preparation windows are strategic assets. Zambia’s administrative approach must evolve accordingly.
If FAZ can transition from reactive adjustments to integrated technical governance, the nation’s abundant talent can translate into consistent continental competitiveness. Until then, structural fragmentation will remain the invisible opponent Zambia struggles to defeat.
