Our Desk | Why Iceland proved you wrong

Renato Marques

As we all know, Iceland and Macau have probably little or virtually nothing in common, so to compare the country with our region would be a meaningless comparison. Still, if we focus on just a few examples, there are some small analyses that can be performed.

One of the virtues of the FIFA 2018 World Cup was to let the world know more about this island located in the Norwegian Sea in between Norway and Greenland, with a population of only around 337,000 people.

The fact is, with a small population and with the higher number of these (about 40 percent) in the age range of 25-54 years (male 68,579/female 66,899), the probability of making this a nation of highly ranked athletes, especially in team sports, was small; at least according to the theories that say that you need to have a large number of people that you can choose from in order to develop such skills to a very high level.

Apparently, that is not exactly how it works and Iceland proved it quite well.

The fact is, things do not just happen in a flash, and although the rise of Iceland was surprising, it is an outcome of hard work, persistence and a good dose of intelligence.
Six years ago, Iceland was lying in the 133rd place of FIFA rankings (in a position now occupied by Yemen) and in just six years rose exponentially to reach its current 22nd position. How could this happen?
Well, first of all, it happened because of favorable government policies that included a push to encourage new talent by training more coaches and building indoor soccer fields across Iceland. Most of these coaches travelled to England to train and sharpen their skills, visited football academies, and saw how things worked in other places.
Together with this measure, it was also decided that the country’s national team should focus on the maturation of a core group of players who have played together since their school years to develop strong defensive strategies to be able to face stronger opponents.

At the same time, dentist and national team coach Heimir Hallgrimsson entered the team as assistant coach.

Asked to provide some insight into possible problems stopping the team from growing, Hallgrimsson nominated the “lack of fan support.” At the time, Hallgrimsson noticed that people in Iceland liked the game, and there were even some supporters that would came to watch the games, but there was virtually “no fan culture,” that is, “no emotional investment between spectators and players.”

In an interview with the New York Times, he explained how he managed to pull a few “hard- core supporters” to build a strong core again.
This was a privileged group to which Hallgrimsson was unveiling information ahead of media releases, making them feel part of the team, or as he mentioned, using the base of the coaching philosophy that emphasizes the collective “us” over the individual “I.”

Ultimately, what Hallgrimsson created was what we can call the start of a football culture that can easily be expanded to other sports, games and activities. However, he could not have done that without the policies that opened the door for him to work and provided enough time to do so.

In this sense, the theory that Macau’s own football team cannot do better than its current 185th position in the FIFA ranking falls short, as recent results from Benfica de Macau in the AFC Cup demonstrate.
In the end, it’s about creating a culture and providing real policies that allow that work to be done.