Akosua Addai Amoo Writes: Analysis Of The GFA Presidential Debate

The unprecedented Ghana Football Association Presidential debate happened at the Conference centre with five out of the six candidates participating in the dialogue.

Although the debate would have little or no impact on the 120 delegates set to hit the polls on Friday to elect a President. It was a firm step at awakening public interest on the battered Ghanaian Football brand.

This report will assess; the knowledge, clarity of expression, body language, rebuttals, analysis of the issues of the candidates.

Kurt Okraku–
Knowledge
His knowledge on the game of football was quite evident in the debate. His ability to trace the loopholes and problems affecting the game all showed the vast experience he has acquired in active roles in the Ghana Football Association.

Clarity of expression
For a communicator, this should have been his strongest point, unfortunately, clarity of expression was par and sometimes he veered off from the questions. Hence there wasn’t really much a connection between him and his audience although he had the knowledge of what he was saying.

Body language
He had a cool demeanour all throughout the debate and barely seemed rattled by the questions posed at him.

Rebuttals
Made quite some salient points in his rebuttals.
Analysis of Issues
This was his Achilles heel, analysis of the issues left much to be desired off from someone who has a huge in depth knowledge of how the game of football is run in the country. The expectations were high from him.

George Ankomah
Knowledge
He showed a satisfactory understanding of the issues confronting Ghana football and was quick to lace them with pragmatic solutions although not really privy to the day to day administration of football in the country.

Clarity of Expression
This was his strongest weapon at the debate. It was easy to grasp what he was saying, with minimal effort.

Body language
He exuded confidence and was very much calm when questions were posed at him.

Rebuttals
He didn’t make much rebuttals.
Analysis of Issues
He was able to break down the issues and give simple approaches to them, very much reasoned approaches.

Amanda Clinton
Knowledge
Her knowledge on nuances of the game was very poor. Although an outsider to how football is run, there were basic issues she was found wanting. There were few traces of knowledge but not good enough for a presidential hopeful.

Clarity of Expression
Her lack of knowledge affected her expression as well. Although very eloquent, she couldn’t effectively communicate because most of the time didn’t have the backstory.

Body language
Her body language was awful, giving away the fact that she lacked the basic understanding about most of the issues.

Rebuttals
Her rebuttals weren’t anything to write home about. There was one instance where she couldn’t remember what she wanted to rebut.

Analysis of Issues
In all a very below the par analysis of Issues. She had her moments but the bad far outweighed the good.

Nana Yaw Amponsah
Knowledge
His knowledge on the game of football was very impressive. Especially with issues confronting players, having a rich history as a football intermediary.

Clarity of expression
He made excellent strides here, he communicated effectively and was able to draw others to understand his perspective effortlessly.

Body language
A very confident body language throughout the debate and it never waned no matter what question was thrown at him.

Rebuttals
His rebuttals were very much concise.
Analysis of Issues
Where others struggled, he made a huge mark, being able to smoothly blend the problems with solution with a firm understanding of the game.

Fred Pappoe
Knowledge
His rich experience came to bare in this debate, clearly an institution of knowledge on the game of football in Ghana. This was his strongest point.

Clarity of expression
A satisfactory performance here, he didn’t have the charisma but effectively made his points known.

Body language
Very composed throughout the debate and very calm in his tackling of the questions.

Rebuttals
He had the strongest rebuttals and his knowledge of the game oozed in his rebuttals.

Analysis of Issues
He didn’t have a problem at all analyzing the issues and giving away his knowledge on what it should be.

In all it was a great exercise and gave an overview of what the presidential aspirants can bring to the table.