Change, they say, is good, but they also say it could be incredibly difficult to accept, and nowhere is the latter aphorism as truthful as in the world of football. In the last few years, football has proved it wouldn’t embrace any attempts to alter its long-standing traditions warmly — at least not without a fight.
Indeed, unhappy were many when the ‘golden goal’ — and later the ‘silver goal’ — was introduced to decide the winners of games that extended beyond 90 minutes. And when the matchball for the Fifa World Cup was made considerably lighter for the competition’s 2010 edition, people complained. Goal-line technology and the presence of an additional assistant referee behind the goal-lines, though now fully incorporated threads in the football fabric, took a while in coming and some do still have their reservations about those novel concepts.
Football, to put it mildly, is highly resistant to change, and the latest instance — that of the video assistant referee (VAR) — at the ongoing Fifa Confederations Cup in Russia has, true to form, caused no mean a storm. The period of cruel uncertainty between incidents and the VAR’s reaction times has left many feeling they — and football — would be better off with its many flaws, unless the latest innovation’s own troubling errors are ironed out.
For the conservatives (the vast majority of those who have found joy in the beautiful game over the years, really), though, there may be many more months of heartache and accustomization ahead. Should the sport’s lawmakers, the International Football Association Board (IFAB), have their way, football would soon give its pretty coat one trim too many.
Among a raft of alterations to be made to existing football laws aimed at addressing the game’s “negativities”, IFAB hopes to make it possible: for a player to be able to dribble straight from a free-kick; for a player to pass to himself at a free-kick, corner-kick and goal-kick; to fix a stadium clock which stops and starts along with the referee’s watch; for a goal-kick to be taken even if the ball is moving; for a goal-kick to be taken on the same side that the ball went out on; for a “clearer and more consistent definition” of handball; for a player who scores a goal or stops a goal with his hands to get a red card; for a keeper who handles a backpass or throw-in from a team-mate to concede a penalty; for the referee to award a goal if a player stops a goal being scored by handling on or close to the goal-line; for referees to blow for half-time or full-time when the ball goes out of play; that a penalty kick is either scored or missed/saved and players cannot follow up to score; and for a game to be played in two 30-minute halves.
Now while the objectives toward which all that is geared is certainly noble — namely, “improving player behaviour and increasing respect, increasing playing time, and increasing fairness and attractiveness” — the actual measures meant to lead football there aren’t exactly going to please everyone; tell me you didn’t find quite a few somewhat ridiculous and barely imaginable as you went through them. Implement these and, at least at the outset, many fans, players, managers and journalists would almost certainly raise one loud, deafening howl in protest, even if — as with every form of change the world has ever experienced that stuck — with time we’d be forced to accept, if not love, them.
Football is already great as it is — though requiring the odd tweak here and there — but somebody shouldn’t have forgotten to attach that ‘DO NOT TAMPER WITH’ tag to the package.