THIS IS A BEE which I have had in my bunnet for some time now – but isn't it about time IFAB – The International Football Associations Board – FIFA's ultimate body as regards the Laws of the Game – earned its keep and made those Laws suitable for the game in the 21st century.
If we take 1863, when the Football Association was formed, as Year Zero for The Beautiful Game, then we've been playing the game for 163 years. In that time, it has changed to such a degree, those Victorian age pioneers who started things off, transported via time travel to watch a top league or international game today would be dumb-struck by what they saw.
The basic concept, they could still understand – the idea of the game being to propel the ball, mainly by foot, downfield to score goals by placing that ball into the appropriate goal. But, I dare say they would struggle to cope with the players' kit, the ball, some of the tactics, certainly the attitude of the players: while I fear the concept of VAR would be beyond them.
Over these 163 years there have been countless instances of what we might call “Shuffling deckchairs on the Titanic” but, no genine case of the game's rulers making a determined effort to introduce Association Football 2:0. I believe that time is now.
Perhaps the biggest talking point in Scottish Fitba at the moment is what some people are calling: “Celtic Time” - the way the defending Champions keep scoring winning or equalising goals in time added-on. Indeed there is even a social media meme which shows the Fourth Official holding up the board indicating how much time added-on will be played, that board reads: “Till Celtic score”.
This is nothing new in the game, it used to be, in England, time added-on was known as: “Fergie Time” due to the number of times Alex Ferguson's Manchester United would pull matches out of the fire after the clock ticked past 90 minutes.
Ninety minutes (to halves of 45 minutes each) has been the official time which a football match lasts, since Victorian days. Perhaps, more than 150 years into the evolution of the game, it is time for change.
The English Premier League takes careful note of statistics. The average top-tier English game, from kick-off to final whistle, lasts on average, 109 minutes; yet, the ball is in play for only 55 minutes. Effectively, for nearly half the time the game lasts, nothing significant is happening.
When you consider how much match tickets, programmes, food and drink in the ground costs, this is barely value for money.
Why not do what is the norm in North American sport and switch to Ball In Play Time? In sports such as American Football or Ice Hockey each game lasts 60 minutes, but, that represents 60 minutes of actual play; when the ball (or puck) goes out of play, or is “dead” or when play is being re-started after a goal, the clock stops and doesn't restart until the referee blows.
Football could also take a hint from other games, wherein when play stops, it has to resume within a certain time. In Rugby Union, for instance, the ball has to be put into a scrum or line out within 30 seconds of the game stopping, while place kickers taking a penalty goal or conversion also have to do so within a set time.
I would reckon, going to ball in play time would necessitate the use of specialist time keepers, perhaps even with a secondary time keeper to adjudicate in the time it might take to restart play. Football at the top level could easily afford this. The introduction of official time keepers would free-up referees from time-keeping to concentrate on actual play.
Why not also taking another cue from Rugby Union. There, when the 80 minutes match time expires, the game does not automatically end until the ball goes dead – introducing this would go some way towards ending the controversies over time added-on.
