U.S. international soccer player Ricardo Pepi helpfully explained recently that the World Cup is not the same as the Superbowl.
He’s right.
For a start, this year’s Superbowl had Bad Bunny and Green Day appear during the half-time show whereas the World Cup this summer will see Shaquira and BTS performing.
The socio-demographics of those who watch the two events differs and domestic politics formed a significant backdrop to this year’s American football spectacle, suitably illustrated by Donald Trump’s criticisms of the Puerto Rican rapper.
But FIFA has a bigger, more diverse global constituency to think about hence its half time show roster has a broader appeal and will no doubt be much less contentious.
Halftime differences
The differences don’t end there.
A Superbowl halftime lasts for thirty minutes and is renowned for the plethora of music superstars that have performed during its intervals.
The likes of Michael Jackson, Prince, Beyoncé, Lady Gaga and Taylor Swift count among the number who have appeared at America’s showcase event, but this will be the first time FIFA has staged this kind of show at a World Cup.
Soccer’s halftime break – no quarters in this sport – is fifteen minutes, although when the sport first began to codify in the late 19th century a referee’s discretion meant that halftime might last for as little as six or seven minutes.
Only later did the International Football Association Board create and consistently apply the rule that players are entitled to an interval at half-time not exceeding 15 minutes.
Now, with Madonna and Burna Boy also taking part in this year’s World Cup halftime show, it is reported that FIFA’s showcase final will be extended to twenty-five minutes.
If it becomes reality, this will horrify soccer purists across the world who already see this summer’s tournament as being a further encroachment of commercial influence upon the traditional game they love.
Game of two halves or four quarters?
We’ve been in such territory before; back in 1994, when the U.S. last staged the FIFA World Cup, the introduction of bigger goals and four quarters were discussed (but ultimately rejected).
Ahead of the tournament, there were concerns that American audiences would find the World Cup boring hence discussions about bigger goals.
It is worth remembering that the highest scoring Superbowl in history took place in 1995, when the San Francisco 49ers defeated the San Diego Chargers 49–26 (a 75-point game).
By comparison, the highest ever scoring World Cup final took place in 1958, when Brazil defeated hosts Sweden 5–2 (just 7 goals).
Adding fifteen minutes to halftime at the World Cup might be possible, especially if spectators accept the argument that sport and entertainment are converging and it is what people want.
However, replicating the Superbowl’s four quarters in soccer would appear to many fans like a death knell for their favourite sport.
An advertising bonanza
Having four quarters in American football has cultivated a symbiosis between the Superbowl and broadcast advertisements, the latter becoming an integral part of the event experience especially for those who watch at home or somewhere else outside the stadium.
Superbowl adverts in the U.S. have become such an institution that slots during the game can cost as much as $10 million for a standard 30-second advert.
Anyone who has watched the annual American football spectacle will know that every break in play typically results in coverage quickly cutting to an ad break, of which there can be many.
Indeed, one observer recently noted that during an entire Superbowl the actual football may only be in play for around eleven minutes, which creates a lot of space into which brands can project their messages.
This is in stark contrast to soccer, where growing concerns about the ball not being in play preoccupy officials in the sport.
At the 2022 World Cup, the average match saw the ball in play for 58 minutes, 4 seconds.
FIFA’s Chief of Global Football Development, Arsène Wenger, wants this number to be even higher and is examining ways of ensuring that games flow without interruption.
Introducing quarters would seem to be the antithesis of this, though one of the proposals Wenger has been considering is the reduction of match time to 60 minutes of ‘effective play’ (two 30-minute halves) where the stadium clock stops every time the ball goes out of play, a foul is committed, or a goal is scored.
As for current ad revenues, estimates indicate that a half time advert during the World Cup final is likely to cost little more than $1 million (although how packages are sold differs from the approach adopted by Superbowl organisers) – a long way short of its U.S. based rival.
Soccer will be in uncharted territory this summer and many of its fans across the world will be hoping that FIFA remembers Ricardo Pepi’s words.
As the governing body pursues new revenue streams, fans are worried that FIFA is taking the game away from them by introducing new developments that are more about entertainment and money than history and heritage.
With the World Cup apparently becoming convergent with the Superbowl, there’s a battle for the soul of the world’s favourite sport at stake.
