A regular reader of this column tackled me last week about what he saw as an omission on my part. 'Earlier in the season' he said, 'you had a spell writing about all the changes to the Laws, but you missed one of the important ones. When I queried which one he meant, he told me that it was the change to the ten yard rule at free kicks. What he was referring to was the ability of referees to move a free kick ten yards nearer to the offending team goal, if players do not retreat the full distance or show dissent at the referee's decision.
I told him that the reason I had not mentioned it, was that there had been no such alteration to the laws of the game. 'But I have seen it happen.' was his astonished reply, 'Are you telling me that the referees made it up as they went
along?'.
Of course I could tell from this remark that he was someone who only watches football at Football League or Premiership level. How do I know that? Well, let me first repeat that there has been no change to the laws of the game regarding free kicks. What you are likely to see at the Madejski Stadium or on television is officially an experiment. Those referees like myself, who officiate in the lower echelons of football, are not empowered to use this sanction.
Experiments are carried out continually in football but this one has been going on for longer than most. It is taken, as most people will be aware, from rugby football where it has been in use successfully for many years. Any dissent in the oval ball game, any failure to walk away when a kick is given and the referee simply picks up the ball and walks ten yards further down the field of play.
This experiment in football started three seasons ago with all games played in the Jersey
F..A. league. It was extended last season into the Auto-windscreens
Shield and this season the experiment has been widened into its most senior competitions so far.
As I have said, the experiment allows the referee to move the ball forward ten yards from the place of the original kick. He can only move it once and, even if the move takes it into the penalty area, then it does not become a penalty but remains just a free kick. This means of course that defenders can stand inside the penalty area between the kick and the goal.
As referees we have campaigned for years for the introduction of this ruling, but we would wish it to follow the rugby lead even more closely before it is accepted universally.
Under the experiment the referee can only move the kick forward if he has first cautioned a player for dissent or failure to retreat the required distance. This is not necessary in rugby. Our contention is that it is cautioning for technical offences like this that annoys people most.
We would rather have the authority to take some action that will have some immediate effect and which will speed up the game. This we think is better than a caution which stores up trouble for the player at a later stage, and also means that there are two punishments for the same offence.
Apart from discouraging the form of cheating that goes on continuously, of players trying to delay free kicks for their teams benefit, we believe that it will also reduce the number of confrontations that some teams inflict on referees when they don't like decisions against them.
Will the experiment be converted into law? This depends of course on the International F.A. Board who make the laws. If they do have the guts to extend it world wide, let's hope they get it right.
Dick Sawdon Smith