This is my last column of the season, which is almost over for most local referees. However, with six-a-side tournaments now seeming to take place all summer long, referees can still be busy.
Last summer on what must have been the hottest day of the year, I was officiating at one of these tournaments, when one team turned up in fancy dress. Is it all right to play like this? they asked. I told them that the Laws of the Game don't actually decree that all players in the same team must wear the same clothing, that was down to competition rules, but dressed as they were, I couldn't allow them to play.
The reason was very simple: they all had bare legs and the Laws of the Game state that players must wear stockings over shinguards. They protested vehemently to the organisers but they backed my ruling, no shinguards - no game.
The laws of football have always protected player's shins. The Cambridge rules of 1863 said, 'Holding, pushing with the hands, tripping up and shinning is forbidden.' The first set of laws adopted by the FA said 'Neither tripping nor hacking shall be allowed' and went on to define hacking as 'kicking an adversary on the front of the leg, below the knee'.
Why have the football law makers been so keen to protect the shin? Doctors will tell you that the front lower leg is all bone, with practically no flesh to protect the nerve centres. Without some form of cushion to absorb the impact of a flying boot, players risk lacerations or a broken shinbone.
An early Nottingham Forest player, Samuel Widdowson, patented his invention of the shinguard in 1874 but it wasn't until 1990 that the law demanded that shinguards be worn. Samuel Widdowson's shinguard consisted of strips of bamboo cane laid side by side and covered in fabric.
When I played as a boy there were similar shinguards available but we couldn't afford them. We settled for a copy of the Beano folded over and shoved down inside our socks. This wouldn't suffice today, for the law requires them to be made of rubber, plastic or other suitable materials. In fact a recent football equipment survey listed 36 versions of the shinguard, with high tech products such as 'air capsule gel', fibreglass and titanium. They were said to be, super lightweight, have shock dispersion zones, air cushioning, impact channelling and precise anatomical fit. I wonder what Samuel Widdowson would make of them.
Reading player, James Harper, always wears shorter socks than the rest of the team and seemingly no shinguards. Knowing the damage that can be caused to the shins, I'm surprised that the manager allows him to take the field like this. On the other hand he probably knows that although Harper runs about like a scalded cat, he never makes a tackle, lessening his chance of injury.
However I can't understand how referees allow it. It may be that Harper has ultra lightweight, super thin shinguards under his socks but that still doesn't excuse it. The law says that shinguards 'must provide a reasonable degree of protection' and by it's very name, it means of the shin and not the ankle, which is all Harper's socks cover. If he is prepared to take the risk, surely it is up to him, people will argue, as of course was the plea of the bare legged players at my small-a-side tournament. But that's not the case. The law on shinguards is a mandatory one and the referee is charged with ensuring that player's equipment meet the requirements of the law.
So if you are taking part in any six-a-side tournaments this summer, remember that, although things may be a little more relaxed, all the safety rules still apply. No jewellery, no dangerous studs and definitely - shinguards.