Can someone explain why we don't have dedicated timekeepers in football yet? Just about every other sport in the world has them, yet football still insists on assigning timekeeping duty to the referee.
The official rules say football is played in two half spanning 45 minutes each, but in reality, the is no official duration. How long a half goes for is entirely up to the referee's discretion. While added time is meant to account for stoppages, it's entirely vague as to what actually constitutes a stoppage, or dare I say it, if stoppages are really what prompts the referee to extend the duration of a game.
Today's game, Brighton vs Manchester United is a prime example. Everyone is being distracted by the post-match VAR penalty, but forgetting what should be the real story: the referee added 5 minutes of stoppage time, and Solly March for Brighton scored with the clock at 94:40. Assuming the proceeding goal celebration is a stoppage, that leaves +20 seconds on the clock for the game to be played, yet the referee allowed play to continue for a solid minute, until Manchester United got a corner, then a penalty.
Why was play allowed to continue for that long when there should've been 20 seconds left? You can't tell me it's because of the corners and throw-ins that occurred throughout the original 5 minutes, because 90% of the time the referee blows the whistle the second that time is elapsed, regardless of throw-ins/corners.
This is obviously nothing new, we've seen this exact story with regards to referees manufacturing additional time. Man City vs Man United about 10 years ago would spring to many peoples' mind, and also Arsenal vs Liverpool back in 2011, where Liverpool were given a penalty in the 101st minute after the referee added only +8 minutes of stoppage time. That being said, I'm still yet to hear a single logical answer as to why situations like this continue to occur. Is it tradition? Then explain why VAR was brought in relatively recently (to very mixed results). Is it to make games more exciting towards the end? That's my guess, but you can't deny it would heavily undermine the integrity of the sport.
If all of the footballing bodies across the world were prepared to bring VAR to the game, why can't they bring in a time keeper? Or even attempt to make the timekeeping discretion a little less vague?
The official rules say football is played in two half spanning 45 minutes each, but in reality, the is no official duration. How long a half goes for is entirely up to the referee's discretion. While added time is meant to account for stoppages, it's entirely vague as to what actually constitutes a stoppage, or dare I say it, if stoppages are really what prompts the referee to extend the duration of a game.
Today's game, Brighton vs Manchester United is a prime example. Everyone is being distracted by the post-match VAR penalty, but forgetting what should be the real story: the referee added 5 minutes of stoppage time, and Solly March for Brighton scored with the clock at 94:40. Assuming the proceeding goal celebration is a stoppage, that leaves +20 seconds on the clock for the game to be played, yet the referee allowed play to continue for a solid minute, until Manchester United got a corner, then a penalty.
Why was play allowed to continue for that long when there should've been 20 seconds left? You can't tell me it's because of the corners and throw-ins that occurred throughout the original 5 minutes, because 90% of the time the referee blows the whistle the second that time is elapsed, regardless of throw-ins/corners.
This is obviously nothing new, we've seen this exact story with regards to referees manufacturing additional time. Man City vs Man United about 10 years ago would spring to many peoples' mind, and also Arsenal vs Liverpool back in 2011, where Liverpool were given a penalty in the 101st minute after the referee added only +8 minutes of stoppage time. That being said, I'm still yet to hear a single logical answer as to why situations like this continue to occur. Is it tradition? Then explain why VAR was brought in relatively recently (to very mixed results). Is it to make games more exciting towards the end? That's my guess, but you can't deny it would heavily undermine the integrity of the sport.
If all of the footballing bodies across the world were prepared to bring VAR to the game, why can't they bring in a time keeper? Or even attempt to make the timekeeping discretion a little less vague?