When ZIFA and BancABC launched the Roots Impact Programme in January, they did not present it as just another junior football competition.

They presented it as a blueprint for the future of Zimbabwean football.

The programme, backed by a US$200,000 sponsorship from BancABC, was designed to bring together Under-14 and Under-16 boys and girls from all 10 provinces in a structured national pathway linking schools, communities, provincial football and, ultimately, the national teams.

ZIFA has gone even further in describing the project.

“This is not a tournament, it’s Zimbabwe’s future,” the association said when outlining the programme’s architecture.

However, pictures that circulated online showing what football followers described as poor accommodation conditions have created an uncomfortable first test for a programme whose biggest selling point is not simply the football, but the promise of professional standards around young players.

In response, ZIFA and BancABC rejected the suggestion that the accommodation shown in the pictures was the final arrangement for the affected participants.

In their joint statement, the organisations acknowledged that concerns had been raised over accommodation during the Gweru matches but said their checks had identified a facility that did not meet the required standards.

“During this process, one of the facilities initially identified was found not to meet the standards required for participants in the programme,” they said. “The facility was therefore not used as the final accommodation for the affected participants.”

According to the organisations, alternative accommodation was secured after corrective action was taken.

“The affected participants were subsequently accommodated in suitable facilities,” the statement said.

“We will continue to conduct rigorous checks on accommodation and other logistical arrangements to ensure that all facilities used for participants consistently meet the standards expected of the programme,” they continued.

On paper, that is a reassuring response.

But the question now confronting ZIFA is bigger than whether one facility was eventually rejected.

It is whether Roots Impact can deliver the system it promised.

The inaugural Roots Impact leagues kicked off in July, with provincial teams competing in Under-14 and Under-16 boys’ and girls’ categories. ZIFA says the programme was created to provide regular competitive football while identifying and nurturing players for the national pathway.

Zimbabwe has no shortage of talented children who can play football. What has been missing is a reliable mechanism for identifying those players early, developing them consistently and ensuring that talent does not disappear because of geography, poverty or weak football structures — which is the problem Roots Impact is supposed to solve.

However, the reaction from supporters has also gone beyond the pictures. Muziwethu Hadebe believes Zimbabwe risks confusing activity with development.

“Copy and paste does not always work,” Hadebe said. “The idea might be similar to other countries, but for any football development, it’s important to appreciate your own landscape.”

He argues that Zimbabwe may have rushed into competitions without first addressing the weaknesses affecting grassroots clubs.

“I think we rushed into tournaments, including the Munhumutapa Junior Cup, without looking at the real challenges facing our development,” he said. “This is still surface development.”

His criticism is significant because Roots Impact itself says its purpose is to address the structural weaknesses that have historically limited Zimbabwe’s football development.

Hadebe believes the focus should extend much deeper into communities.

“Clubs in remote or underprivileged areas still lack proper facilities, training equipment and well-trained coaches,” he said.

And, in his view, coaching may be the most important missing piece.

“Coaches are key in this area, but most are doing it voluntarily,” Hadebe said. “They are playing a big role, but in the process, as they are not well trained, it could mean our boys are missing something at an early age, which affects us when they play for the national team.”

Another football follower, Tatenda Magaramo, said:

“The concept is good, but execution is not well thought out. Look at some of the teams; they don’t have matching socks for the kits,” Magaramo said.

“Are you telling me a national association can’t purchase football boots to cover each and every participating player?” he continued.

“It’s disappointing stuff and not a good representation of the entity sponsoring the tournament,” he said.

Michael Mushonganyika’s reaction went directly to the emotional heart of the controversy.

“I share your frustration, and I’m angry too. BancABC Roots Impact Programme is meant to build the future. Instead, we got photos of U14 and U16 boys and girls sleeping in squalor in Gweru last month.”