Regular readers Leeds United’s matchday programme will know the club’s chief executive, Angus Kinnear, has found a source of irritation this season.
It’s not Maoism or the Great Chinese Famine, at least not again. football’s great reform debate is on the backburner.
Kinnear’s current bugbear is the time the ball is in play during Premier League games. Or perhaps, you should say so more clearly.
Hosts are ahead Aston Villa at the start of this month, Kinnear described the dark arts of time-wasting as “antithetical to everything that has made Premier League football loved across the globe”.
Kinnear once again wrote about this topic last weekend, seven day after a narrow 2-1 defeat. Crystal Palace at Selhurst Park had picked at the scab — in that match the ball was in play for just 44 minutes and two seconds.
“We can have no complaints around Crystal Palace’s obvious endeavours to win the game, but the ball was only in play for 43 per cent of the available playing time, compared to 72 per cent for the game in Premier League Matchweek 10, which had the ball in play the most.
“This seems to be an unacceptable spread for both players and spectators and is an issue we will continue to highlight with the PGMOL (Professional Game Match Officials Limited).”
Kinnear also mentioned another fixture: Manchester City’s 4-0 win over Southampton, the day before Leeds’ match against Palace. At the Etihad Stadion, the ball was still in play for 68 mins and six seconds.
Two Premier League games, a day apart and a 24-minute difference for what they call “ball in play time”.
One reason for lost minutes is goal celebrations (Photo: Visionhaus via Getty Images).
The disparity was not accidental. Manchester City was effectively victorious when they led 3-0 just after the half-time break and then spent the remainder of their one-sided match passing around passes.
Palace, on the other hand, held out in the final stages of play to secure a crucial 2-1 win. It was not a rush to resume play as a team held on to a narrow lead. It’s time-wasting, according to the losing team. The front-runners call it smart game management. It is not uncommon. It was only six Premier League games that saw the ball in play for less time than 44 minutes, and two seconds last season.
But Kinnear is not the only one trying to improve this spectacle that is watched by millions all over the globe. Pierluigi Collina is chairman of FIFA’s Referees Committee, raised concerns earlier this year.
“One of the things we are talking about is whether it is not worthwhile for all matches to have the same duration,” Collina told the Italian social media group Calciatori Brutti in April.
“If you look at the statistics today, you see that there are teams that play 52 minutes, others that play 43 minutes and others that play 58 minutes. Add all these times up and you can see the big difference.
“Another thing to think about is: I as a spectator pay a ticket, physically at the stadium, or at home, to see 90 minutes of football, but I see 44, 45, 46 played. My ticket costs half of the cost and is used for unplayed time. Most of the wasted time comes with throw-ins or goal kicks.”
Opta reports that the average time the ball was in play during Premier League games this season has been 55 minutes and 45 seconds. Last season, it was 55 minutes 7 seconds.
However, overall the trend is that Premier League matches have a shorter ball-in-play time. In 2013-14, the season average was 56 minutes and 43 secs.
The three years that VAR was introduced have not seen any significant changes. There has been additional time for its stoppages. But the trend is generally in the right direction.
This problem is not unique to the Premier League. The Premier League has offered its fans a fraction of the action in the Bundesliga (54 min 31 sec) and Serie A (54.9 min 30 sec) this season. La Liga is the worst with a season average of 54 minutes 28 seconds. Ligue 1 has the highest performance this season with 56 minutes 19 seconds.
It is an issue that the Premier League knows about. PGMOL, the English football referees group, met with all clubs at the start of the season. One of their main points was to be proactive and avoid restarts.
Premier League games introduced a multi-ball system this season. Eight matchballs were placed around the pitch, two behind each goal and two each side. The other was used during the game. Another one was held back by the fourth official.
Throw-ins and goals kicks should be completed faster to increase the time that the ball is in play. Officials are told to add time to each half for goal celebrations or substitutions. But it is often not enough to make up the lost minutes.
Substitutions can also lead to lost time (Photo by Dan Mullan via Getty Images).
Players are at the root cause of the problem. While they can be penalized with yellow cards for time-wasting and other infractions, the problem is that players have become adept at brinkmanship. Some players aim to disrupt the contests and prevent their opponents from achieving rhythm and fluidity.
“If we’re going to be a bit more precise, we’ll have to prepare ourselves for a nine-minute injury time,” says Collina. “Today nine minutes is eye-popping, but give those who want to see a spectacle the chance to see a bit more.”
There are many debates about the best ways to solve the problem of time-wasting in European football. Are you able to add on big increases in time? Are there stricter penalties for people who break the rules? Or, you can go nuclear and play 60-minute matches against a stop clock.
For some, the latter is not palatable. It’s not the football way. Too radical. To crack a nut, you need a sledgehammer.
It is supported by many, so the idea of 60-minute matches won’t go away. The English game has a particular support for this idea. They believe it is the only way to restore conformity. An invisible clock would show that the ball was out of play at any given time and then start up again when it is back in play.
This matter was discussed again at an advisory board meeting of the International Football Association Board at the beginning of this Month. Any changes would have to be approved by IFAB. This board oversees the game’s rules and the current picture is not encouraging for those who seek change.
The meeting voted to keep two halves of 45-minute each. There are no plans for 60-minute matches.
Do not expect the concept to disappear, but the IFAB has other short-term approaches that it intends to discuss with officials ahead of next month’s World CupQatar.
It is anticipated that there will be a stricter application, with goalkeepers being limited to six seconds at goal kicks. Substitute players will also be allowed to leave the field at the closest point to them. This avoids a lengthy walk to the fourth official. A sufficient amount of time will be added to account for injuries and goal celebrations.
All parties have the clear goal of keeping play moving. That is why the argument for eventually seeing kick-ins replace throw ins is so strong. Former players pushed the idea. Arsenal boss and FIFA’s head of global football development Arsene Wenger, will be trialled after IFAB authorised it earlier this year. Throw-ins can be regarded as the best way to slow down play.
Arsene Wenger, Pierluigi Kollina at a FIFA Event in August (Photo by Johan Ordonez/AFP via Getty Images).
“The target is to make the game more spectacular and quicker, and maybe with throw-ins you could play with your feet, but in a limit of five seconds for example, things like that,” said Wenger last year.
The goal of football has been to improve the spectacle. In 1992, the backpass rule was introduced to end time-wasting. Whether the answer is a stop-clock or kick-ins remains to be seen — Collina accepts “alterations are still unclear” — but there is a collective will to see more football and shorter interruptions. Kinnear is open to the idea.
(Top photo: David S Bustamante/Soccrates via Getty Images
