I hear there are plans afoot to trial 3 x 30 minute periods in a game instead of 2 x 45 minutes, with two 10 minute half times/time outs. It just smacks of commercialism to me. More TV adverts and more beer sold at games etc. Believe the trial is in one of the lower leagues-don't know which one, but I really wouldn't want this to come into effect at a higher level, as I can't see any football advantage. I believe its being "driven" by one of the TV Companies.
0
Comments
This is one of the perennial topics that's wheeled out to provoke a reaction. As far as I can tell, it last appeared in July 2011. telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/8621726/World-Cup-in-2022-could-become-a-game-of-three-halves-in-the-40-degree-heat-of-Qatar.html
And what - apart from the fact it's a bit different to what we're used to - is the problem with 3 x 30 minutes? Or its variant, 4 x 25 minutes?
On the plus side, you would have more chance to grab a beer, as there would be more breaks. The teams with the best tactical nous would benefit, as they'd get more dressing-room time. In-game injuries would have less impact on the outcome, as injuries would be proportionately closer to the next break.
All in all, it's broadly a good thing. There are plenty of benefits. Most people will oppose it, because "it's not traditional". And we'll all carry on as we are. Until it's brought up again...