Why City can't complain

21 September 2009

By Jerrad Peters

 

It's called "Fergie Time." It's typically added at the end of stoppage time if Manchester United are either behind by a goal or level with their opponents. As the man himself once said, when you come to Old Trafford, you play until United have won.

Jokes aside, I do feel badly for Manchester City supporters who were already celebrating a draw after the four minutes of added time had ticked off Martin Atkinson's watch. It must have been devastating.

Having said that, they—as well as United—had been given two additional minutes to score a match-winner. They didn't play to the final whistle; United did, and that was the difference. On the night, however, I felt City were outclassed at Old Trafford and benefited from a pair of sloppy goals. (Rio Ferdinand, for one, probably won't make a similar mistake for another two or three seasons. Ben Foster, on the other hand, worries me a great deal. I can't see how Capello will put him between the sticks in South Africa if he continues to struggle on the ball.)

As for the additional two minutes, I was initially unable to decipher exactly how Atkinson had come up with them. But after watching the final moments of the game a second time, I realized he was spot on. Craig Bellamy's celebration after scoring City's late equalizer took at least 30 seconds off the clock. United's Anderson-for-Carrick substitution claimed another 30, as did Shay Given's time-wasting before taking a late goal-kick.

That accounts for a minute-and-a-half, although the referee is well within his rights to allow play to continue beyond the posted amount of added time. After all, the term is "a minimum of four minutes of added time," not "exactly" four minutes.

FIFA frustration

Let me say at the outset that I admire FIFA and UEFA and understand that theirs is a most difficult job. But that doesn't mean I don't find both governing bodies to be overwhelmingly incompetent.

Just last month, we were all excited about UEFA's new crackdown on diving. They had just suspended Arsenal striker Eduardo for tumbling to the ground against Celtic (albeit three days after the fact), and forwards throughout the continent were being warned against leaving their feet too easily. Almost three weeks later, however, UEFA reversed course and let the Croatian off scott free. The anti-diving initiative is now a thing of the past.

So, too, is the joint initiative by UEFA and FIFA to eliminate child trafficking in football. Two weeks ago, all anyone could talk about was Chelsea's transfer embargo, similar allegations against Manchester United and the spectre of a worldwide revolution in player transactions. And now? It's yesterday's news.

This is why today's news that FIFA will investigate 15 "suspicious" Premier League transfers will be sure to cause more groans than raised eyebrows. Sure, they may very well investigate those transfers, but they're only doing so because the Football Association submitted them to football's world governing body for review. They would have never gleaned the data themselves. And after these 15 have been analyzed, the whole topic will probably fizzle out, just like diving and child trafficking.

Update

I have recently finished my book (entitled We Call it Soccer: Understanding the World's Most Popular Sport) and am hoping to update this space frequently throughout the season.

However, you can always find my work in the Saturday edition of the Winnipeg Free Press, the Aston Villa blog on ESPN Soccernet, Soccer 360 magazine, MySoccerMagazine, Soccer365.com and by following me at twitter.com/peterssoccer