Fair Play - At Least IFAB Is Trying

FAIR PLAY is one of those concepts to which governing bodies of sports pay at best lip service. Aye, we all want fair play, but, if we can sneak a wee advantage without straying too-far over the line – we will go there.

So, it was with what I feel was the necessary degree of cynicism, that I recently downloaded Fair Play, the latest IFAB (International Football Association Board) strategy paper. For those unaware of who or what IFAB is, and what it does, a quick explanation.

IFAB is the governing body of world football where it comes to the Laws of the Game. IFAB makes the Laws and changes them, then FIFA rubber stamps their decisions. One of the anomalies of IFAB is that the Home Nations – England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales, through their relevant Football Associations, are all represented on IFAB. Many of us feel it is the protection of this IFAB membership, the fact that on it, Scotland sits on its own right, which is the key to the long-held Scottish opposition to single UK teams competing in the Olympic Games.

The Hampden “blazers” reckon, if there was one single Team GB on the park at the Olympics, it would not be long before the rest of the world was demanding a single pan UK association in FIFA membership, whereas today there are four.

I suppose, therefore, we Scots should be proud that the sharpest brains along the sixth floor corridor at Hampden have such a big say in the Laws of the Game. No sniggering at the back there.

The strategy paper slits their recommendations into three sections - changes which could be made immediately, without changing any of the Laws: changes which will initially involve trial periods, prior to full implementation: changes which will involve further discussion.

The first thing IFAB wants to tackle is improving player behaviour and increasing respect, starting with increased responsibility for the team captain. IFAB wants team captains to be: the main point of communication with the referee; the only player allowed to approach the referee in a controversial situation; and, to help the referee to calm flashpoint situations and players.

All well and good, all perfectly acceptable, except, Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you: Captain of Celtic and Scotland, Mr Scott Brown!!

Scott Brown being diplomatic in a flashpoint situation

OK, Scottie today is not the harum-scarum Scott Brown of old, but, he still gives the impression of a rammy about to break-out in an empty hoose. I honestly cannot see Scott helping a referee to calm a storm in a European night at Celtic Park, which a Scott Brown tackle probably kicked-off.

Rugby has had this mediator/negotiator role for captains for years. Indeed, I recall a story which the late great Gordon Broon from Troon used to tell, about the aftermath of a severe outbreak of “handbags” during a Calcutta Cup match. When the punching had stopped, the referee called the two captains together and laid down the law – there was to be no more of this conduct, now go back to your teams and warn them, was the official's line.

Broon and the other Scottish forwards watched skipper Ian “Mighty Mouse” McLauchlan trot over to them. “What did he say 'Beastie'?” was Broon's question.

“Get stuck intae thae English bastards”, was McLauchlan's response.

 Ian McLauchlan, Alan Tomes, Alistair McHarg, Gordon Brown and David Leslie about to: get stuck intae thae English Bastards

Back to Fair Play. We can expect to see: referees dealing more-strongly with teams who mob officials, with more yellow cards being shown; only team captains being allowed to question or discuss controversial decisions with the officials; and, teams found guilty of “mobbing” officials to face fines or points deductions, following trial periods.

The document also seeks an increase in playing time, through the referee stopping his watch for such incidents as: the time between the award of the kick and a penalty being taken; from a goal being scored until the restart; when a player is injured; yellow and red card incidents; substitutions; and, pacing-out the distance which the offending side must retreat until a free-kick has been taken; more rigorously enforcing the “six second” rule for goalkeepers, whereby they have to get rid of the ball within that time period.

Again, all good, solid measures, with which nobody can argue, but, the implementation of which will call for a sea change in player behaviour.

As regards time-keeping, why not do the obvious and take time-keeping away from the referee to an official time-keeper. In rugby, the referee says: “time off or time on” when he wants the match clock stopped or re-started and the time-keeper does this. He then tells the official when the game has run its course – why cannot football also do this?

These are the generally cosmetic changes, a lot of which can be implemented either immediately or in short order. The document goes on to discuss ways of increasing fairness and the attractiveness of the game. I shall return to these, somewhat more-controversial suggestions, in a future post.