As far as outcomes on the field of play are concerned, there are many opinions of the truth. Nevertheless, it is only the Referee's decisive reflection in this footballing hall of mirrors that provides the authoritative answer.

For a Referee, common sense is the natural ability to use a combination of life's experiences and instructional training, to consistently produce expected outcomes on the field of play. An intelligent Referee is one who automatically knows when to use good or sound judgement rather than rely totally on his intelligence. This is not as easy as it sounds because each Referee has a vivid imagination, and a varying degree of knowledge and understanding.

Good or sound judgement, refers to the ability to trust and rely on your instinct when making decisions. The game of football, is a very fast moving sport, and a Referee does not have time to analyse each situation by referring to the Laws. He needs to make decisions at such a speed, that he does not even have time to think about it. The brain works at such a fantastic speed, that it can unconsciously make the decision for you, before your the conscious part of your brain has even begun to think about analysing the situation. Hence, a Referee who trusts in this phenomenon, will not go far wrong. In other words, when you have to make a decision, listen to your brain, and learn from that powerful onboard computer. The part of the brain that makes such conclusions like this, is called the 'adaptive unconscious'. It's like a kind of giant computer that quickly processes the huge amount of data that we need to function as a human being. It is a fascinating subject, and if you wish to know more, buy the book called 'Blink' The Power of Thinking Without Thinking, written by Malcolm Gladwell.

So just what a Referee's common sense?

Common sense is……………

• What you don’t have to say (or write down) because you expect others to know it already.
• A broad knowledge and acceptance about how the game should be played.
• The ability to represent and use knowledge about knowledge.
• A common store of skills, ordinary good sense, personal knowledge, sound practical judgement and experience gained with lessons learned in life.
• Another way of looking at things, instead of relying solely on the pure Laws of the Game or instructional training.
• The ability to quickly make a simple decision intuitively for every difficult scenario.
• The wisdom to be able to respond positively and to react correctly.
• Paying attention to the obvious and ignoring the irrelevant.
• A reasoning method built up over the years.
• The ability not to question the common certainties but rather to analyse them.
• Finding a solution based on paying attention to the obvious, whilst at the same time, factoring in an injection of realism - to produce a sensible conclusion.
• Being able to use the best practises of a material world and the retention of personal identity in the midst of continuous change.
• In Latin, sensus communis, defined not only common sense but also a sense of humanity and sensibility.

Learning the Laws and being successful in passing the Football (Soccer) Refereeing exam is the easy bit. Knowing the Laws, and being able to concentrate 100% whilst using sound judgement and (the keystone) common sense, are the foundations of successful officiating on the field of play.

Each game represents a different challenge. An astute Referee will always put into future practise, those positive experiences learned in each game. He is able to factor in the constantly changing Law, interpretations and man-management techniques - all held together by the 'glue' of common sense - thus keeping abreast of the latest changes and nuances of the game. Good Referees are able to discard any baggage from the past. They are able to isolate themselves from the distractions of the crowd and the constant moans from players and managers. Each decision is made as if it was the first decision that is made in the match.

The unwritten Law 18 - (unofficially and widely known as 'Common Sense'), is the framework that holds and integrates all of the other 17 Laws of the Game together. It allows the Referee, the players and the game itself, to retain the excitement of unpredictability. It is the most important of all the Laws; it can override, modify and control all the other Laws. Referees have a duty to interpret and apply the Laws to ensure that the decisions they make are not contrary to Law 18 - 'Common sense', and its partner the 'Spirit of the Game'. These are integral parts of football. Without them, football would not be the fantastic game that it is.

"Every Referee should have good eyes and bad ears!"

(Dutch FIFA Referee Jan Wegereef)

The Laws are written in such a way as to allow the Referee to use common sense by applying advantage and by allowing play to continue with the option of disciplining players later on, at a more convenient time.

The Referee is responsible for holding together the moral fibres that allow fair play to flourish. This cannot be done by application of Law alone. If this were the case, the game would be a series of constant stops and starts for every minor Law infringement. This would spoil the flow (and the enjoyment) of the game.

As the chief 'Chef of the Game', the Referee is encouraged to keep the juices of the footballing feast flowing. This increases the uncertainty of the game-action and ensures that every contest leaves a different taste (even though the 17 Law ingredients are exactly the same). The use of common sense to interpret decisions, is a key ingredient in of making football the most exciting game in the world - and long may it remain so.

By applying a mixture of Law and common sense, the Referee produces a nourishing stew of enjoyment that encourages the taste buds to seek second helpings. One of the duties of the Referee is to preside over a meal where players can enjoy their feast of football. He does this by firstly laying out the cloth of Law 1 by ensuring that the table (the players' field of play) is set out correctly, and by checking that there is nothing there that may cause indigestion or upset. Secondly, he is always sharp and ready to place the 17 sets of Law cutlery in the right places and at the right times. Finally, the Referee uses the condiments of common sense (Law 18!) to sprinkle a balanced amount of seasoning throughout the meal; thus increasing the digestive enjoyment of the players.

Over recent years, footballing authorities have endeavoured (by Law amendments) to make the game safer for players, and more enjoyable for spectators. Referees have a growing responsibility to try and make every decision as correct as humanly possible. It is a shame that the commercialism that has inevitably crept into the game has left the top Referees in a "no-win" situation - for there are always losers in commerce. A decision made in a split-second could have a most devastating effect on the finances of a professional football club; or lesser so, for a Sunday morning team fighting for promotion or battling against relegation.

Common sense used fairly, honestly and correctly, is the noticeable difference between an efficient Referee and a less efficient Referee. It is a quality, which thankfully most humans naturally have. It is built up from experience gained within football, (whether it is by watching or participating), and by experience amassed during officiated games. It is also a culmination of 'life skills' and 'people management' experience. A new Referee will have the support of colleagues and Referees' Societies during his initial first-game baptism of fire. If he is lucky, he will have an experienced Referee mentor to guide him through his early years. A great deal of experience can be gleaned from experienced officials. The new Referee will gain a great deal more experience (and common sense), as the number of games he officiates increases.

Professional Referees at the very top levels are increasingly being encouraged to perform within much stricter guidelines. This has resulted in a more uniformed delivery of common sense. Whereas a few years ago, Referees with individual characters abounded aplenty, these days, the efficient training received by the professional Referees has created almost faceless controllers of the game, devoid of personality - yet super efficient! This seems to be the way of the world. As Refereeing standards are increased, so the ability to be an individual decreases. This is good news for the players, as more decisions are made correctly. And consistency (that misunderstood and hated word in the Refereeing fraternity) is increased.

Top officials have been monitored, trained, cajoled, moulded, and turned into efficient (almost robotic) officiating machines. There is a potential danger that eventually they may all become "Law Books on Legs" instead of the loved (and hated!) characters of the past.

The momentum to produce super-efficient Referees is done to minimise and remove (or lessen) the potential for making wrong decisions. This is mainly driven by the importance of commercialism in football at the higher levels. Top Referees are under extreme pressure. They have all been through the treadmill of officiating at the lower levels - where the majority of their understanding of the game's common sense has been learned. Yet they may struggle for a time, with the conflict they see at the top levels. Common sense here, is not wholly what an individual has learned on his way up the ladder - but more of a common "common sense" approach dictated to them by their trainers and mentors at the top level. Common sense here, is not necessarily an individual's perception, but the historical result of what is best for the game. You could call it "cumulative common sense" as opposed to individual common sense. Cumulative common sense, is not necessarily a bad thing for the game, but it does lesson the natural human characteristic of wanting to "be yourself!"

Referees who "be too much themselves" at the top levels, will quickly learn that you can go down the ladder much quicker that you can come up it!

It is impossible for a Referee to believe that someday he will have learnt and seen everything that there is to now about the game an its Laws. This ideal Nirvana is unachievable. So instead of continuously pushing himself to the forefront of ability - he should consider taking a day off once in a while to contemplate that his completist paradise is just not going to happen. A Referee's understanding of the observable world, in which he moves in, can never be complete. When this has been understood, he can consolidate more on what he has already achieved without the constant pressure of "choice fatigue" and "information overload" that can sometimes make his learning task more difficult, rather that easier. A Referee is more likely to make a sensible decision if there are one or two choices to make rather than ten. An astute Referee has the ability to use common sense to turn the sensory mush of opinions into a hard-baked conclusion. This conclusion is inescapable: less choice makes a Referee perform better - and consequently, feel better.

In time, the spirit of how the game is supposed to be played will have provided most of the answers for a Referee. But the inevitable evolution of Law changes means that the Referee will always need to find some of the missing answers for himself. He can do this, by agreeing in his mind, how he will react to given situations that have caused trouble in the past. In doing this, he has used common sense to provide a store of decision-making scenarios in his mind. These will be of more use to him in future games, than the easily understandable Laws of the Game themselves.

Reactions and confrontation will always form part of football - the high passions and lucrative financial rewards will inevitably produce ‘spilling’ emotions. After all, we are only human. Thankfully, the Referee is able to apply a modicum of common sense by injecting some wisdom when dealing with irate personalities on the field of play. This allows him to cajole the perpetrator into adopting better behaviour, without having to always resort to showing a card. Interacting with players has a calming effect that experienced Referees can manipulate to everyone's advantage. Of course, this man-management technique must be finely balanced with the need to take appropriate action in accordance with the Laws for aggressive instances concerning abuse and violence that merit proper disciplinary action. In other words, the Laws are written in such a way as to permit the Referee to make a suitable judgement that is not wholly based on Law alone. 

"Preventing incidents happening? - Where is that written in the Laws?"

Law 18 'Common Sense' of course!

By using common sense, astute Referees can almost sense danger. And by remaining calm, they can actually impart their relaxed attitude onto the players. The trick here is to prevent trouble, rather than wait for it to occur and then punish it. Common sense is a very good tool for those Referees who know how to get the best from it.

Conversely, some Referees use little or no common sense, and plenty of cards. Whether one system is better that the other depends on the individual Referee. It is a matter of personalities. If it works for you, then it must be OK. A mixture of the two is probably the best solution. Referees, who are too lenient with their cards, can get themselves a bad 'name' for being a 'push-over' - some players can manipulate this weakness to their team's benefit. Conversely, Referees who are renown for 'carding' every misdemeanour are not very well liked by players. This attitude can spoil the on-field relationship and interaction between players and the Refereeing officials.

• Law 1 (The Field of Play) stipulates that the line markings on the field should all be in place before a game commences. But at the lower levels of the game, a large number of grounds are in countryside villages, or located somewhere out in the 'wilds'. Invariably, some of the line markings might not be as clear as they could be. Or someone has forgotten to mark out the penalty area semicircles, and there is no white-line marking machine available. Referees should use common sense to decide whether the missing markings are sufficient excuse enough for not playing the game. Let's be honest, if you (the Referee) have travelled some 30 miles on a cold Sunday morning, and all the players are changed and waiting for you on the field of play, would you cancel the game because someone forgot to mark out the penalty spots? Many Referees would play the game if they reasonably could. But there are some Referees who would cancel the game on a minor technicality.

All Referees have common sense, but some Referees have more common sense than others!

• Competition Rules very often dictate which team should change their kit if there is a colour clash. Most teams at the lower levels do not HAVE a change of kit!. Common sense can be used when deciding which team should change. If the competition rules state that the Home team must change, but the Home team does not have a change of kit - BUT the Away team does have a change of kit - then obviously, the Referee should ask the Away team if it would mind changing. At the very worst, one team could turn their jerseys inside out; this very often serves the same purpose. Players will generally be happy to oblige where they can.

Some people might call this breaking the competition rules - I call it using common sense!

• If the Referee forgets to take out his coin, and suddenly realises this during the meeting with the captains immediately prior to the kick off, he can easily pick up a piece of grass, and place it for selection in a clenched fist behind his back. This does not mean that the very first line of Law 8 (The Start and Restart of Play) is breached - "A coin is tossed and the team which wins the toss decides which goal it will attack in the first half of the match". This is just another example of a Referee using common sense instead of the Laws.

• If whilst catching an uncontested high ball in his goal area, a goalkeeper injures himself whilst falling down with the ball under his chest - the Referee would normally stop play to allow for the injury to be treated. The restart is a dropped ball. But to have a contested dropped ball restart very near to the goal would give a much greater advantage to the attacking team. This would be unfair, and against the spirit of the game. An astute Referee will appreciate that the dropped ball restart procedure in Law 8 (The Start and Restart of Play) does not stipulate that a certain number of players need to be present. The common sense approach is for the Referee to drop the ball uncontested to the goalkeeper alone. Thus restarting play in a fair and sensible way, without actually breaching any of the Laws!

• This final example, is probably the biggest of all of the Referees' common sense assets - 
  "The Advantage Clause". Law 5 (The Referee) states that the Referee………..

  "allows play to continue when the team against which an offence has been committed will benefit from such an advantage and penalises the original offence if the anticipated advantage does not ensue at that time" 
  
  This does not mean that the Referee has to apply advantage ALWAYS. During most games, there will be periods when the contesting teams' behaviour needs to be reigned in by the Referee. To achieve this, the Referee can decide to apply NO advantage until the teams calm down and revert to playing the game properly instead of trying to kick lumps out of each other.

  It can be clearly seen in this last example, that the Laws cannot work properly in isolation, but rely on the fuel of common sense to steer the game along.

The "Spirit of the Game" – is recognised in other competitive sports as the term ‘Sportsmanship’ (also formally known as 'Gentlemanly Behaviour'). This is the act of playing fairly within the agreed set of rules (or Laws), and taking both collective responsibility and individual responsibility to ensure that the evolved game is played as it is meant to be played. But football is a combative sport where physical battles can seem to generate a 'win at all costs' ethos that appears contrary to the "Spirit of the Game". In other words, elements of cheating and corruption can appear against the "Spirit of the Game". It is therefore, the Referees responsibility to police the "Spirit of the Laws", and to encourage the "Spirit of the Game".

Referees need to get beyond the "them and us", the "good guys and the bad guys". The idea that Referees should appease players will not make life any easier. For nothing acts as a greater incentive to players, than the realisation that the Referee is weak and frightened. And it only weakens the Refereeing institutions (and the "Spirit of the Game") if colleagues fail to uphold and maintain a very high standard. Referees should not demonstrate to players that they are (as players frequently allege) too useless and too incompetent to be responsible for upholding the Laws as they are meant to be upheld, within the spirit of the game. A Referee is not just responsible for himself, but for every other Referee who comes along behind him.

The "Spirit of the Game" is the product of the written and unwritten codes of conduct that have evolved from the first set of Football Association rules established in London in 1863.

To aid common interpretation of differing practices, the International Board in 1957 provided the following counsel.

"The Laws of the game and the rulings of the International Board and FIFA cannot of themselves bring about the exemplary code of behaviour which is so often referred to as the "Spirit of the Game'. If football is to continue to be one of the great and most popular games in the world, then those who take part in it must keep up its great tradition. Everyone wishes to win, but true sportsmen can find small satisfaction in a victory won by unfair means. The 'Spirit of the Law' must be observed as well as the letter of the law."

In 1968, the International Board issued the following statement after its meeting in Dubrovnik.

"The International Football Association Board received many suggestions for improving the game and alterations to the Laws, and suggestions were carefully studied. It is the belief if the Board, however, that the spirit in which the game is played is of paramount importance, and that changes in the Laws to improve the game as a spectacle are of little value if "fair play" is not universally observed."

It is the Referees task to understand the spirit behind the Laws, and thus safeguard the "Spirit of the Game".

As highlighted in 1978 by Stanley Lover in his excellent book entitled 'Association Football Match Control', the three main ideals embodied in the "Spirit of the Game" are EQUALITY, SAFETY, and ENJOYMENT. These must be promoted at all times.

EQUALITY

Players should have an equal opportunity to demonstrate their skills against an opponent. Skill should be encouraged and admired, and thankfully they are not dependent on the physical size of an individual. Any attempt to cheat, or to apply different rules to different players will only lead to an unfair contest that will degrade the achievement of the winner. Actions taken by spectators, players, officials or administrators to flout the rules in favour of their team will also be against the nature of the spirit of the game. To promote equality, and to encourage individual skills, the Laws have evolved to outlaw certain acts such as hacking, tripping, holding and pushing. The modern game is a skilful contest compared to the ancient and sometimes violent 'rough-and-tumble games contested in the early years.

Referees must always apply equality in the way they officiate each of the contesting teams. Any previous match-history (or trouble with specific teams or players) must be totally expunged from the memory before each game. To do otherwise, gives the advantage to one team or another - and would be against the "spirit of the game".

Even though some games may resemble the heat of a battlefield, it must be played and officiated in the right spirit. Football is only a game. And life goes on after the game is over.

In the early days, the safety of players was not a consideration. In fact, violence was an accepted part of the game.

The 16th Century writer 'Stubbes' describes below, the effects of the game in his days!

"So that by this means sometimes their necks are broken, sometimes their backs, sometimes their legs, sometimes their armes, sometimes their noses gush out with blood, sometimes their eyes start out, and sometimes hurt in one place, sometimes in another."As for some of the ancient manners of tackling he expands further:

"They have the sleights to meet one betwixt two (Note: The well-known "sandwiching" still practised sometimes these days!), to dash him against the hart with their elbowes, to butt him under the short ribs with their griped fists, and with their knees to catch him on the hip and pick him on his neck, with a hundred such murthering devices...."

Over the ensuing years, the players themselves have decided that although they wished the sport to remain commutative, it must be played in such a way that the Laws protect the safety of the players as much as is practicably possible - without compromising the enjoyment.

In more recent years, players have sued each other for injuries sustained in a tackle. The most expensive tackle in England, was made by Huddersfield Town defender Kevin Gray on Bradford Town's Gordon Watson in a Division One match in February 1997. Watson, whose leg was broken in two places, was awarded £909,143 in damages.

Matthew Holmes, a professional footballer, accepted a loss of earnings settlement of £250,000 on 23 Feb 2004 for the second most expensive tackle ever made. Holmes received a broken leg whilst playing for Charlton Athletic in an FA Cup fourth round replay. The tackle, made by Kevin Muscat, then a Wolves player in 1998, resulted in Holmes requiring four operations and a steel rod inserted in his leg. The injury was so serious, that at one time, amputation may have been a possibility. The defendants did not admit liability, and solicitors argued that the tackle was neither negligent or reckless, and that the resulting injury was an accident. Holmes only played 20 minutes for Charlton in the remaining two and a half years of his contract with them.

The Laws have evolved to minimise the hazards and to promote a healthy playing environment - without restricting the skills required as a footballer. For example, corner posts have to be a minimum of 1.5m high with a non-pointed top. This is not a measurement that was agreed around a committee table, but is the result of many years of football, culminating in a simple product that minimises injury to players. The dimensions of the field of play and the players equipment are another two examples of how the 'spirit of the game throughout history, has produced safer conditions. It is therefore very important that this 'spirit' be protected, else the injuries and the problems sustained by our forefathers will have been in vain. In the modern game - if a player wears a ring on his finger, it must be removed or padded to prevent injury. If a player has a ring hanging from a pierced eyebrow - then the Referee of today, continues the evolution of the SAFETY element of the 'spirit of the game', by insisting that the ring is removed. A further example of how safety (even after all these years) remains a major principle of the spirit of the game - is the drive towards safer goal posts and safety education to minimise any further deaths due to faulty or improperly erected goal posts. The Referee therefore has a great responsibility to actually check the goal posts properly - and not to just give them a passing look during field of play inspections.

To enable players to enjoy their vocation, utmost care must be given by all, in ensuring that the facilities, the equipment, and the way in which players behave towards each other, minimises any possible injuries from occurring. The Referee has a major part to play in this. Proper inspection of the field of play and the players’ equipment and in controlling irate opponents is an integral and essential part in promoting the spirit of the game.

Players have a right to expect the game and the environment to be as safe as possible at all times.

Football is also an enjoyable form of escapism from all the troubles of the World. Politics, religion, wars, and racial conflict can all be forgotten for a while; whilst the game is enjoyed by the participants and spectators. It is also a very good way of learning how to interact with other human beings by experiencing discipline, team work, reliance on others, combining skills, communication and enjoying each others' company - just to mention a few.

The spirit of the game thus allows many of life's troubles and questionable standards to be temporarily replaced by enjoyment and stability for all.

Over the years, the legislators of the Laws have identified acts that are ungentlemanly, unfair, dangerous, unsporting or just plain unacceptable. To uphold the spirit of the game, amendments and respective punishments have been brought into the Laws, to banish acts that detract from the enjoyment of the sport. This has provided a code of conduct who's aim is to protect and enhance the enjoyment of those playing and those watching. The Referees task is to police any new Law amendments thus enhancing and protracting the ongoing evolution of the long-established spirit of the game.

Players play football for enjoyment. It is supposed to be fun. Actions taken by spectators, players, officials or administrators to curtail the enjoyment of one team in favour of another, is against the nature of the spirit of the game. The Referee must promote the enjoyment of players – and he can do this by officiating as efficiently as he can, without dictating the Laws piecemeal.

Sadly, the modern game has seen a decrease in the enjoyment of players. This has been replaced with a steely determination (sometimes against the spirit of the game) to 'win at all costs'.

If the Referee can keep smiling when all around him are ‘sniping’, then perhaps his enjoyment may reflect into the players themselves.

The 'Spirit of the Game' is also a million other things. A few of which are listed below, and apply to players and Referees and managers and spectators!

The spirit of the game is therefore an essential and integral part of the game. It is so important, that the Referee uses it to override and temper the written Laws themselves. It plays an important role in ensuring that the application of the "letter of the Law" does not restrict the flexibility and flow of the game.

It adds an element of unbiased unpredictability that is crucial for the enjoyment of all. One of its greatest assets, is the ability for players (and Referees) to discover its unwritten rules by learning from experience. These unwritten rules then become just as important (if not more) than the actual written Laws themselves. The ability of the Laws to work efficiently in tandem with the spirit of the game results in a unique sporting environment.

Football was always meant to be played in a fair and 'gentlemanly' fashion. The 'gentlemanly' manner has all but disappeared - but thankfully, the spirit of the game and its ideals still remain. For example, when a player is obviously injured, and the opposing team retain possession of the ball, they will invariably and purposefully kick the ball out for a throw-in, to enable the injured player to receive immediate treatment. In return, when the game is ready to restart, the ball is then throw back to the team who originally had possession. This is just one gesture of goodwill that exists within the spirit of the game's unwritten rules. It is this ethos that is admired in the way that it encourages others to behave.

Question 1a: During the taking of "Kicks from the Penalty Mark", the first penalty taker approaches with his socks rolled down and NOT wearing his shin guards. What action should the Referee take?

Answer 1a: The Referee should ask the player to put his shinguards back on, in accordance with Law 4 "players must wear shinguards covered by stockings". Taking (common sense) action before the penalty kick has been taken will prevent the situation described in the following question occurring!

Question 1b: During the taking of "Kicks from the Penalty Mark", the first penalty taker scores a goal. After the goal has been scored the Referee notices that the player was NOT wearing shinguards. What action could the Referee take?

Answer 1b: The Referee could ask the player to retake the penalty kick again in accordance with the Penalty Kick Law 14 that states: "The player taking the penalty kick infringes the Laws of the Game... the referee allows the kick to proceed......if the ball enters the goal, the kick is retaken".

Because the player had also infringed Law 4. the Referee could also ask the player to leave the field of play to correct his attire, and allow re-entry during the next stoppage! BUT the players taking the penalty kick are supposed to remain on the field of play!

Phew.... let's have a bit of common sense here. At the very top levels of football, one would hope that the players and managers know how to behave themselves properly, and that this situation should never happen. At the lower level, where the majority of Referees officiate - some common sense should prevail in situations of this nature where a minor Law infringement has no bearing on the resulting play. The Law 4 stipulation about wearing shinguards is there to prevent players getting broken legs, and has nothing to do with taking kicks from the penalty mark - unless of course the ball is hit so hard, that it rebounds back off the crossbar, hits the kicker's shin and breaks his leg ;-) !!!!!!!!

I'll leave you to make up your own common sense answer to this question!

Answer 2: Common sense says that this game should not be played. If the Referee allows this match to be played on an unsafe field, he would have been accepting responsibility for its condition, and for any injuries incurred as a result of those field deficiencies - even though all those concerned said they were prepared to accept the consequences of any accident. The Referee has a duty of care, to closely inspect the condition of the field of play before every game The Referee must always consider the safety of the players. If the Referee has any doubt as to the safety of the players because of the field of play deficiencies, then he should not allow the match to take place. It can be very difficult for the Referee to go against others' wishes. Common-sense advises, that Referees should rely on their intelligence and not the persuasion of others. It is usually blatantly obvious when a field condition is dangerous. Players and managers are always very friendly when they want something, but they can turn monstrously dangerous in an instance, if one of their players suddenly breaks an ankle because of stepping into a deep rut - especially if you (the Referee) sanctioned the field of play as safe, before the game started.

Question 3: Following a careless tackle on an opponent, and after play had restarted, the Referee was seen running alongside the perpetrator, giving him a quiet lecture about something or other? The player had obviously breached Law 12, and a caution could have been awarded. Why did the Referee not take the required action by cautioning the perpetrator?

Question 4: The Assistant Referee raises his flag to indicate that an attacker was in a ‘clear offside’ position in the penalty area. The ball carries on through safely to the defending goalkeeper who gathers it into his arms. The Referee acknowledges, and overrules the Assistant Referee by raising his arm, and allows play to continue without stopping the game. Why didn't the Referee stop play and award the defending team an indirect (offside) free kick?

Answer 5: Most Referees allow some latitude on the exact positioning of throw-ins. More so, if the location is further away from the goal and nearer to the halfway line. This allows the ball to be thrown back into play as quickly as possible. Players are usually receptive to this type of common sense, and are less interested in adhering strictly to the Law about the exact minute positioning of a throw-in in areas where there is no immediate threat. Players do not often argue over such action; this is all part of the accepted spirit of keeping the game flowing whenever possible, and will normally have little or no effect on the result of a match. Referees should use common sense in deciding when a player has travelled further than a sensible distance. But prevention by the Referee in these situations - is better than the cure!

A little ‘pip’ on the whistle along with a helpful "Just there please, fellow." Along with "lovely, lovely" or "That’s far enough!" will help Referees keep control over the positions taken at throw-ins and free kicks.

(Thanks to Paul Faulkner from Essex England for the advice provided immediately above)

If the throw-in, is taken in such a position (nearer to the goal) that could affect the outcome of a game, the Referee should ensure that the thrower does not gain an advantage by moving further along the touchline to be yet even nearer to the goal. For example - when a team has a long-range thrower and the throw location is near to the corner arc.

Some Referees are more particular about making players take the throw from the correct position every time - but this (along with the finicky and minutely accurate positioning of free kicks) can frustrate players.

Answer 6: There will always be some discretionary time due to earlier delays in the game, that an astute Referee can add onto the end of a half, that prevents having to end the half whilst the ball is very near to one of the goal areas. There have been many famous disputes in the past, where Referees have disallowed very important goals because they have blown their whistle a millisecond before the ball has entered the goal.

A far more high-profile decision in such circumstances was made by Welsh referee Clive Thomas at the 1978 World Cup in Argentina. Sweden were leading Brazil by one goal to nil when from a corner, a Brazilian player headed the ball into the goal. Clive blew for full-time as the ball was entering the goal, hence the goal did not stand. Clive did not Referee another game in the tournament and many Referees took that as meaning that FIFA disagreed with his decision made in the dying seconds of the game.

Referees have learned by these historical mistakes, and rarely will you see a half end when the ball is anywhere near either goal area. If a goal is scored right at the end of a half, Referees will sometimes wait until after the ensuing kick-off and at least a couple of more seconds before blowing the final whistle ending the half. Only the Referee knows how much lost time he is aggregating on at the end of the each half, so they can feel confident in allowing a little bit of additional time and common sense to prevail. Players also seem to respect this common sense approach. It certainly prevents some of the worst situations arising in the Referees' lot!

Note: Referees are strongly advised not to use (or set) watches that emit a clear signal on 45 minutes. Having a watch that bleeps on 45 minutes could prove troublesome for the Referee if whilst the ball is on its way into a goal during the last seconds of a game, the watch suddenly gives out a loud beeping sound. Referees are also advised to take the following action immediately after they blow for the end of each half. Reset the watch (or at least the watch used to stop/start time during the game) to zero time. Players on the losing side have a nasty habit of trying to see what time is showing on the watch - this could lead to arguments about the amount of added time played in a game.

Answer 7: One of the greatest battles a Referee has, is balancing the need to be able to control the game by proper application of the Laws, in conjunction with the understanding that this is a game where players should enjoy themselves. Common sense says that the incident mentioned above is more likely to be a ‘bit of fun’, and to caution a player may cause more trouble for the Referee than it is worth. If a Referee thinks that the player might have done this act purely as a derisory action against the opposing team, then a strong public word with the perpetrator should suffice. One of the saddest aspects of top level football these days, is the lack of any enjoyment on the players faces. Referees should not make matters any worse by being Killjoys!

The more ‘Dwight Yorks’ there are with smiling teeth – the better it will be!

Even the Referee should smile when he can - and try to enjoy it.