For a man who has spent 60 per cent of his life playing or managing in professional football, Arsene Wenger has some very odd ideas about what could make football better. Since taking his job as Fifa’s Chief of Global Football Development, Wenger’s proposals have included – but are not limited to – a World Cup every two years, allowing corners to go out of play before they come back in, shifting offside so any part of the body being on is onside and now, changing throw-ins to kick-ins.
There is a suspicion that Wenger has entered “Yes, Arsene” mode. He comes up with a suggestion, Fifa promise to discuss and trial it and vaguely talk it up – “Yes, Arsene”. Most people decry it as nonsense, the trial either doesn’t happen or discussions don’t get off the ground and eventually it goes away, added to the pile of discarded brainwaves; repeat the cycle. Perhaps his is simply a job title that must fuel itself – as soon as you stop talking, people wonder what you’re there for.
Some of these ideas are just bad. The aim of kick-ins is to speed up the game. Many teams would simply use it as a free-kick with no offside, which take time to prepare. Allowing the ball to leave the field of play while still being “in play” changes one of the fabrics of the game for – at best – a miniscule gain. Hosting the World Cup every two years, at a time when player burnout has never been more of a risk, was an abysmal idea and so was the reasoning.
But underneath all of these proposals lies a notion: that the next generation of football fan does not like football in its current state. That they are an indiscriminate, disloyal audience who will flit between interests when their concentration wanes. That football must compete with social media platforms, Netflix, PlayStations and goodness knows what else for their attention. That we need to somehow make football more sexy to attract them. We have Wenger’s word on that: “We want to help make the game more spectacular, quicker and more enjoyable to watch, and to play as well.”
More from Football
From Nunez to Haaland - The full list of Premier League done deals this summer17 June, 2022
Meet Fabio Vieira, the £34m playmaker set to join Arsenal after breakthrough year at Porto17 June, 2022
Fixtures reviewed: Arsenal to start fast, Man Utd's away-day blues, Liverpool's rotation worry16 June, 2022That is deeply flawed logic for a number of reasons. Firstly, football broadly remains as popular as ever. If audiences are dwindling (or ageing, which might be more of the problem), that likely reflects the rise in ticket prices, freezing out working-class families from attending live matches, and in broadcasting packages, which does the same for those watching at home. With the world in the midst of a financial crisis, making the game more accessible would be far more effective than changing it. But then that means deprioritising revenue.
If the next generation really are put off by football in its current form, these changes are unlikely to help. How many children in the 10-18 age bracket are thinking “I would go and watch my local team, but unfortunately I simply cannot abide the time it takes for throw-ins to be completed”? Instead you risk angering your current audience without achieving the original aim.
But the most pertinent frustration is that if you really want to know what the next generation wants, ask them. They might well have ideas and there’s a chance – although it’s a slight one – that some of those ideas crossover with yours. There is something particularly wearing about 60 to 70-year-old men in suits boldly stating what the next generation of fans want. Every child in my family either loves football or isn’t interested and that seems broadly reflective of the whole. The price of tickets is so high that they struggle to attend games regularly, but they love the sport for what it is – playing, watching, listening to, reading about, feasting upon.
Wenger, Gianni Infantino and anyone else preaching about how football must change the fabrics of its rules to create a faster, smoother, sexier, more spectacular product are missing the point. It is not the laws, the set pieces, the delays or the length of matches that disenfranchise younger people from absorbing elite football live, but the access. You can have all the kick-ins, shorter matches, holograms, TikTok celebrities and any other marketing gimmick you want. It still won’t make a difference if you’re charging an adult and child £100 to see them.
from Football | News and analysis from the Premier League and beyond | iNews https://ift.tt/OqQ0u2y
Post a Comment