Carlos Queiroz and the Black Stars: Is the Real Problem Tactics or Poor Finishing?

The Black Stars’ performance against Côte d’Ivoire has reopened the debate over the future of head coach Carlos Queiroz. Some Ghanaian football supporters are questioning whether the Portuguese trainer’s reported monthly salary of $80,000 is justified by the team’s performances and style of play.

The criticism has been direct. Queiroz’s detractors describe his tactical approach as too limited and heavily dependent on counter-attacking football. They argue that the Black Stars lack a coherent method of building attacks through midfield, leaving the forwards isolated and reducing their influence on matches. This, according to critics, partly explains why strikers such as Jordan Ayew and, more recently, Brandon Thomas-Asante have struggled to make a consistent impact.

Several individual and tactical issues also emerged from the encounter. There have been calls for the inclusion of a midfielder capable of shooting effectively from outside the penalty area to provide another attacking option. Questions have also been raised about whether Abdul Fatawu Issahaku should start matches or be deployed as an impact substitute, a role in which some believe he is more dangerous against tiring defenders.

Alexander Djiku’s readiness after a lengthy absence has also come under scrutiny, while Gideon Mensah endured a difficult outing that added to concerns about the team’s defensive balance.

Despite the mounting criticism, Queiroz has confirmed that he will continue as head coach of the Black Stars. In a statement addressed to Ghanaian supporters, he described the position as a privilege, responsibility and mission to honour one of Africa’s greatest football nations.

Queiroz praised the courage, discipline and commitment of the players, technical staff and Ghana Football Association under challenging circumstances. He said the next phase would focus on building a Black Stars team capable of competing strongly at the 2027 Africa Cup of Nations and ultimately challenging at the 2030 FIFA World Cup.

“One Team. One Nation. 35 Million Hearts. One Heartbeat. The Mission Continues,” he declared.

However, inspirational words alone will not settle the debate. The performance against Côte d’Ivoire suggests that Ghana’s problems involve both tactical organisation and poor finishing, although the two issues must be examined separately.

Queiroz acknowledged that Ghana created four clear scoring opportunities, mentioning chances that fell to Augustine, Benjamin and Sibo. According to the coach, the players lacked the necessary inspiration and composure at the decisive moment. From that perspective, the tactical system produced opportunities, but the players failed to convert them.

The wider match statistics, however, present a more complicated picture. Ghana recorded 11 attempts but managed only two shots on target. More worryingly, the Black Stars failed to register a single shot on target during the first half. The team also struggled to transform possession and build-up play into sustained attacking pressure.

Poor finishing can explain missed opportunities, but it does not fully account for an attack that frequently appears predictable and disconnected. If forwards are receiving the ball in difficult positions, operating without adequate midfield support or being forced to depend almost entirely on counter-attacks, then the problem extends beyond individual execution.

The concern among analysts is that the match against Côte d’Ivoire may not have been an isolated poor performance. Ghana’s lack of attacking threat has appeared repeatedly, particularly against stronger opponents. This raises a legitimate question about whether Queiroz’s system creates enough high-quality chances for the players to succeed.

At the same time, coaches cannot take responsibility for every missed opportunity. International football often turns on a handful of decisive moments, and players must demonstrate composure when those chances arrive. Even the most sophisticated tactical system will fail if attackers cannot convert clear openings.

The responsibility must therefore be shared. Queiroz must develop a more flexible attacking structure, improve the connection between midfield and attack, and ensure that Ghana is not overly dependent on counter-attacking football. The players, meanwhile, must become more clinical, make better decisions in the final third and take greater responsibility in front of goal.

As Ghana prepares for the 2027 Africa Cup of Nations and pursues the longer-term objective of competing at the 2030 FIFA World Cup, the debate should not be reduced to a simple choice between tactics and finishing. The evidence suggests that both areas require urgent improvement.

Queiroz may retain the confidence of the football authorities, but the patience of supporters will ultimately depend on performances and results. The mission may be continuing, but unless the Black Stars begin creating better opportunities and converting them consistently, questions about the team’s direction—and the man leading it—will only grow louder.