Former Bafana Bafana striker Katlego “Killer” Mphela believes the debate around Lyle Foster and Evidence Makgopa should not be framed as an either-or choice, insisting that Hugo Broos should take both men to the 2026 FIFA World Cup and add two more strikers for depth. As South Africa continues to shape its final squad for the tournament in the United States, Mexico and Canada from 11 June to 19 July, Mphela says Bafana need variety, not just familiarity, if they are to make a real impact on the global stage.
Mphela’s view has added fresh weight to the ongoing conversation around South Africa’s attacking options, especially with fans often comparing Foster and Makgopa as similar profile players. The former Orlando Pirates and Bafana frontman, who led the line for South Africa at the 2010 World Cup on home soil, says the national team should travel with four recognised strikers rather than a more conservative selection.
“Keep both Foster and Makgopa and add another two … different profiles,” Mphela told Sowetan, making it clear that he sees squad balance as more important than trimming the list for the sake of it. For Mphela, the issue is not whether the two can coexist, but whether Bafana have enough different weapons to deal with the variety of opponents they will face in North America.
Among the names he believes deserve serious consideration is Iqraam Rayners, who has been one of the more reliable finishers in domestic football and brings pace in behind defences. Mphela was especially firm on Rayners, saying the striker’s current form should have put him in the frame already.
“You have Rayners who’s in form and can run behind defenders. He can finish as well, so I don’t understand why we are not including him,” he said, pointing out that the forward was also overlooked for the recent Africa Cup of Nations in Morocco. That omission, in Mphela’s view, made even less sense given Bafana’s need for direct running and clinical finishing when chances are limited.
The discussion does not end there. Mphela also mentioned Tshegofatso Mabasa as a player who may not be an automatic pick in his eyes, but still offers something different when a match needs a solution. He is also keeping an eye on Khanyisa Mayo, though he added an important condition: Mayo would need to show stronger consistency before being trusted on the biggest stage.
“I like Mabasa but I don’t think he’s someone that’s in the mix. But if you talk about strikers who can come with solutions, he’s one of them. If Mayo was consistent, he’s someone I’d look at,” Mphela said.
That kind of assessment reflects the practical thinking that often shapes World Cup squad selections. Coaches do not just need form players; they need forwards who can adapt to the shape of the game, the opponent and the pressure. In that sense, Mphela’s call is less about names and more about roles. Bafana, he believes, should have a mix of runners, target men and poachers who can change a match from the bench or start if needed.
Bafana World Cup squad debate grows as Broos weighs attacking options
The Bafana World Cup squad conversation is also being influenced by the scale of the challenge ahead. South Africa will open its campaign against Mexico in Mexico City on 11 June, a fixture that carries extra symbolism because it mirrors the 2010 tournament opener. On that occasion, Bafana famously drew inspiration from home support and a charged atmosphere. This time, they will need composure and tactical discipline in a far more demanding environment.
Bafana’s Group A opponents also include South Korea and Czechia, both of whom will pose different problems. South Korea bring intensity, pace and movement, while Czechia are likely to offer physicality, structure and set-piece threat. For Mphela, those match-ups strengthen the argument for more than two options up front.
He is convinced South Africa can progress beyond the group stage, arguing that qualification itself is proof of the team’s growing strength. Bafana secured their ticket directly, unlike the 2010 squad, which entered the tournament as hosts. That matters, Mphela says, because it shows this group has earned its place on merit.
“Bafana have what it takes to advance to the knockout phase of the tournament,” he said. “I mean, for them to qualify for the World Cup means they are competent. They qualified directly, unlike us in 2010 who qualified as hosts, so they have a strong team that can come out of that group.”
There is no question that Broos will face pressure to get the balance right when he finalises his squad. Selection calls in South Africa always invite debate, and strikers tend to attract the loudest scrutiny because goals are the currency of tournament football. If the wrong profiles are chosen, the team can end up looking short of ideas when chasing a result.
That is why Mphela’s intervention matters. He is not simply lobbying for friends or trying to create noise. He is drawing from the perspective of someone who knows what it means to carry the attacking burden at a World Cup, and who understands that one style of striker rarely solves every problem. In his view, a successful campaign will depend on flexibility, form and the courage to pick players who offer different solutions.
As we have reported earlier, the debate around South Africa’s forward line is expected to intensify as the tournament draws closer and Broos trims his options. For now, Mphela’s message is straightforward: keep Foster, keep Makgopa, and add attackers who bring something different. If Bafana are serious about making noise in North America, he believes that is the kind of forward planning they will need.