Super Eagles: 3 things Victor Osimhen would have changed against Madagascar

The Super Eagles got off to a winning start in their 2027 AFCON qualifying campaign against Madagascar, but Victor Osimhen’s absence raised an interesting question, Afrik-Foot reports.

George Ilenikhena and Moses Usor scored on their international debuts as Nigeria recovered from Ehsan Kari’s 16th-minute opener to beat Madagascar 2-1 in Uyo.

Ilenikhena, who started in Osimhen’s place, eventually produced a composed finish from Alex Iwobi’s defence-splitting pass, while Usor produced the individual brilliance that settled the game in the 65th minute.

Nigeria had enough possession and territory to win comfortably on paper, finishing with 55% possession and 22 shots. Yet, only four of those attempts were on target, underscoring the difficulty the Super Eagles had turning their dominance into clear-cut chances.

Osimhen was ruled out of the September qualifiers after suffering a muscle injury while playing for Galatasaray, ending hopes that he would recover in time to face Madagascar and Guinea-Bissau. The striker has scored 35 goals in 52 appearances for Nigeria.

Still, he watched from the stands as his side struggled to topple a Madagascar side placed 104th in the latest FIFA rankings.

3 things Victor Osimhen would have changed for the Super Eagles

1. Madagascar would have had to defend a different threat

The biggest difference would have been the problem Osimhen creates without necessarily touching the ball.

Against Madagascar, Nigeria struggled at times to break through a compact defence. Ilenikhena showed encouraging movement and scored the equaliser, but he was making his senior debut and was still learning how to operate alongside the players around him.

Osimhen would have offered Madagascar a different reference point. His pace behind the defensive line, physical strength and pressing would have forced the Barea to constantly account for his position.

That could have created more room for Nigeria’s attacking midfielders and wingers.

The Super Eagles moved the ball slowly against Madagascar, giving the visitors time to organise themselves. With Osimhen occupying the central defenders, even a simple pass into the space behind them could have forced Madagascar to retreat further.

That does not mean Osimhen would automatically have scored. Rather, his presence would have changed the decisions Madagascar’s defenders had to make.

And that could have made life easier for players like Ademola Lookman, Samuel Chukwueze and Alex Iwobi.

2. A more natural outlet when building attacks

Another problem against Madagascar was the lack of consistency in Nigeria’s attacking build-up.

Chelle’s team dominated possession without creating a clear sequence of passes that moved them towards goal. This was partly a midfield issue, but it was also related to what happened at the top of the pitch.

A striker like Osimhen gives the midfield an obvious target, because Akor Adams and George Ilenikhena mostly wanted ball to feet, instead of into space.

Nigeria can play into him, use his physicality to bring others into the game, attack the second ball or immediately look for his runs behind the defence.

Against Madagascar, Nigeria did not always have that reliable outlet, and the numbers show the consequence.

Ilenikhena did provide some of that movement, particularly for his goal, but expecting a debutant to immediately provide the same attacking reference as Nigeria’s established number nine would be unrealistic.

Osimhen’s availability would therefore have given Chelle another way to progress attacks when the passing game became slow.

It could also have reduced the temptation for Nigeria’s defenders and midfielders to carry the ball forward themselves in search of a breakthrough.

3. Osimhen could have freed up more space for other attackers

Perhaps the most interesting difference would have been indirect. Lookman endured a relatively quiet evening before being replaced by Tolu Arokodare, while Chukwueze was withdrawn shortly after the hour mark.

Usor’s introduction eventually gave Nigeria the directness they had been missing. That is where Osimhen’s presence could have altered the game.

Opponents cannot concentrate entirely on the wingers when there is a striker capable of attacking the space between centre-back and full-back.

If Madagascar had pushed their defensive line towards Lookman or Chukwueze, Osimhen could have threatened the space behind them.

If they had dropped deeper to protect against Osimhen’s runs, Nigeria’s wingers and midfielders could have found more room in front of the defence.

That is the value of having a striker who demands attention even when he is not receiving the ball.

Ilenikhena’s goal was a well-worked moment between him and Iwobi, but Usor’s winner came largely from his individual quality, carrying the ball from Nigeria’s half before beating defenders and finishing.

With Osimhen available, Nigeria would have had another established attacking relationship around which Chelle could build.

Victor Osimhen would not have solved everything

It is important not to turn the argument into a claim that Nigeria would have produced a completely different performance had Osimhen played.

The Super Eagles still had structural problems against Madagascar. The two-man midfield left spaces during transitions, the ball circulation was sometimes too slow, and the attacking combinations were not consistently convincing.

Osimhen cannot solve all three problems by himself. What his presence would have done, however, is give Chelle another attacking mechanism.

The striker’s ability to stretch defences, provide an outlet and occupy defenders could have changed how Madagascar approached the game and how Nigeria’s other attackers found space.

The Super Eagles won without Osimhen, but the 2-1 victory also showed why having their leading striker available could make the team a very different proposition.