Reading RA - From the Middle

Direct or indirect, ref?

The free kick is the most common sanction, yet not always fully exploited by the players and frequently misunderstood by the fans. Everyone knows there are direct and indirect free kicks but after that it all tends to get a bit fuzzy.

The better option

Clearly the direct free kick is the better option (for the side offended against) and logically it penalises the more serious misdemeanours, e.g. if a player holds an opponent, handles the ball deliberately, or makes contact with the opponent before touching the ball when tackling to gain possession. (For this, what the player intended is not relevant now). And if any of these offences occur in the penalty area, it's the most serious free kick of all, the penalty.

Punishing the less serious offences

Indirect free kicks are most often given for offside, obstruction (now 'impeding the progress of an opponent'), goalkeeper's misdemeanours, like handling the ball directly from a (kicked) pass back, and 'dangerous play', like 'foot up'. Although the result can be injury, why is dangerous play treated relatively leniently? Because 'dangerous play' applies only to play that is unintentionally dangerous. If the referee thinks otherwise, he awards a direct free kick and might well take further action.

The kicks themselves are often misunderstood too. Even if players don't know the Laws well (and most of them don't), they should recognise the indirect free kick by the referee's raised arm. Interestingly, the habit of one player just touching the ball at an indirect free kick for a colleague to shoot has now been made legal - before this season it should have moved at least its own circumference (68cms). And if the player taking the kick shoots and the ball simply touches a player of either side and goes into the net, it is a goal.

Give me 10 yards

Now what about the ever-contentious 10 yards? (As the English version of the Laws now uses metric measurements, I should really say 9.15 metres but it doesn't quite have the same ring - 'Right lads, give me nine point one five metres'!).

10 yards applies to both types of kick* but, at set pieces, referees at the highest level can be seen to be getting it wrong. The whistle is a signal for the kicker and players in the wall should not move forward until the ball has been kicked. Aren't the world's top referees capable of judging 10 yards? We have to assume they are. Of course, they sometimes allow the kick to be taken because they can allow advantage. But the kick should then be retaken if no advantage occurs and that doesn't seem to happen too often.

I recently heard a suggestion that all referees should carry one of those electronic measuring devices estate agents use, but specially designed to bleep loudly at 10 yards so that everybody knows. Maybe it wasn't such a bad idea after all ...

Brian Palmer

*The exception, which does sometimes happen, is when an indirect free kick is awarded nearer to the opponents' goal line than 10 yards. The defence is still allowed to make a wall on the goal line.

Back To Contents