Do fans genuinely enjoy poring over collisions in super-slo-mo or listening to radio shows and podcasts frantically trying to work out where the shoulder ends and the arm begins? There is a finite time to analyse a football match and the more time spent on that, the less time breaking down tactics, explaining why that player is free at the far post or simply enjoying a beautiful pass or turn or volley. There’s a real question about whether discussing contentious decisions is “part of the game’s enjoyment”. “For some people, this discussion is part of the game’s enjoyment and attraction but, whether decisions are right or wrong, the ‘spirit’ of the game requires that referees’ decisions must always be respected.” “As many situations are subjective and match officials are human, some decisions will inevitably be wrong or cause debate and discussion,” it says on the first page. Lee Child and Richard Osman can rest easy. It’s not a page-turner, it’s not “every bit as good as Grisham”. You can get a pdf from the International Football Association Board website if you want. Here’s the extraordinary thing about the laws of football. So often you hear nonsense: “there wasn’t any intent” – checks laws, can still be a foul “there was contact” – checks laws, doesn’t have to be a foul. It’s a perverse law when Tomori could have slid through the back of Mount, taken player and ball, been way more dangerous and possibly be shown a yellow card. Just because it’s not an act of severe violence doesn’t mean it isn’t a foul.

Fa online laws of the game