Category: Injury

Injury

Goalkeepers

Keepers and Attackers

Posted on by

Stephen, a referee, asks:

I see plays like this a lot, and I don’t know what to do, or better, what to consider when evaluating this stuff.  Can you enlighten me?  Can a keeper make a save and then go hurling into the player?  Can a player get a last touch and go hurling into the keeper?  What gives?

Answer

The answer is simple but you may not appreciate what follows.  The way the answer is implemented “depends” on a host of factors which are totally dependent on what you see.  Indeed, to a degree, you have complicated the otherwise simple answer by using a couple of words which, individually, have a significant impact on how you implement the “simple answer.”

Players in general make contact with each other on a regular basic throughout a game.  And your specific scenario offers the arguably most difficult example.

In general – using, for example, a much easier scenario  — say you have a team A field player and a team B field player who  make contact with each other.  Is there an offense?  Could be but probably not. Let’s complicate things — suppose A runs into B.  Also possibly not an offense but is a bit more complicated – we now have a scenario which, by the words we used, changed the scenario importantly because now A as done something clearly to B.  As a result, we now have to decide why it happened (accidental or deliberate) and whether (either accidental or deliberate)  it happened for a reason.  What kind of reason – an inability to stop in time and/or a deliberate attempt to gain an unfair advantage.  If it was deliberate and for a purpose which is illegal, then we have grounds to punish A (or not depending on the flow of the play at that moment).

Now complicate things significantly and consider the same two opponents, one of whom is a keeper and the other an opposing attacker.  Adding a keeper into the scenario complicates the scenario greatly but for reasons which do not appear at all in the Laws of the Game despite having a long and/or practical history.  The main factor favoring the keeper is that, first, keepers often are forced to engage in actions which are inherently more dangerous than a challenging attacker and, second, keepers are more likely to draw support from teammates who are more likely in turn to increase the perceived level of possible danger, which leads to a greater likelihood of becoming more angry with the attacker.  Unfortunately, the reversal of this lays a greater burden on the attacker if he/she is the one being “touched” by the keeper.  Historically and manifestly, keepers gain an advantage even if their behavior is comparatively the same.

The only positive thing we can do as a referee when contact seems likely between an opposing forward and a defending keeper (with the ball on its way to one or both of them) is to quickly go to high gear to get closer and to a better line of sight on: (1) who is moving toward the other (perhaps both simultaneously), (2) who jumps (maybe both), (3) who makes contact first, (4) who uses greater force with respect to the contact, (5) what direction is each party looking just before the impending contact, (6) whether the keeper is going to ground or jumping up higher in order to gain possession of the ball, (7) the immediately following action by both A and B, (8) who is focusing attention on the ball (both or mainly one), (9) which of A or B is making an attempt to avoid impending contact (or whether both are attempting contact), and finally (10) whether contact by one is visible to the other or was out of the other’s view.  These ten elements can involve even greater complications if either (or both) are joined by one or more teammates added to the fray.

As you can see, the impending contact between keeper and/or attacker is simple in terms of specifying the parties involved but extraordinarily more complicated when it comes to a decision as to what exactly happened before, during, and immediately after the contact or possession of the ball.  Overall, however, there is a general and commonly held opinion that, of the two opponents we are considering here, the one who gains firm possession before any subsequent contact between the opponent (attacker or keeper) has the stronger case prior to the other player’s attempts to challenge for the ball.  However, there is an equally common opinion that the keeper encounters more personal danger in the process of challenging for the ball than does the attacker if both otherwise have a comparable likelihood of possessing the ball.

Note, however, that younger players require an even closer look and greater care because they generally lack the ability to understand “danger” — the older and/or more experienced the player the easier it is to take into consideration the ten elements offered above.…

Injury

Restarting After An Injury Stoppage

Posted on by

Marc, a U13 – U19 coach, asks:

 

In a U14 game, a team is in possession of the ball, and the referee stops play due to a serious injury. After the injury is taken care of, the referee goes to restart play with a contested drop ball. I mentioned that, in these situations, it’s customary for the opposing team to give the ball back to the team that had possession, and the referee indicated it’s against the Laws of the Game for him to ask the opposing team to do this.
1. Can you please advise if it’s against the Laws of the Game for him to ask or suggest this? I believe there’s a clause that indicates the referee shouldn’t specifically address players for anything not covered in the Laws of the Game, but I believe upholding the spirit of the game would warrant asking/suggesting giving the ball back.

2. Can you please advise what the recommended approach is for the ref when players may not be aware of this custom/tradition? If the ref is barred from asking/suggesting playing the ball back to the other team, an uncontested drop ball comes to mind, but seeing as the ref can’t limit the number of players participating in the drop ball, it doesn’t sound like this could be enforced.

 

Answer

 

Question 1 – It would be inconsistent with the Laws of the Game for the referee or any official to make such a suggestion, much less to enforce anything of this sort.  Indeed, other than exhortations not to commit an offense, it would be unprofessional for any official to offer any advice to any team, player, or team official pertaining to the manner in which they should conduct their play.  To make this point even more pointed, referees have long had an aphorism – if you don’t want the coach to tell you how to do your job, avoid telling the coach how to do their job.  This clearly applies to players as well.  There is no provision of the Law, however, which specifically prohibits it because, as with many other issues related to the Laws of the Game, the International Board did not feel it necessary to deal with something which would so obviously be a violation of professional ethics.

 

Question 2 – No, we cannot offer any such advice because doing so would aid and abet what we have already noted would be a violation of professional ethics.  If a team wanted to do so, there is no violation of the Law, just as there would be no violation of the Law if a team decided not to do so.  The same, by the way, applies to the so-called “preferential drop” when, say, an injury stoppage occurs with the goalkeeper in possession of the ball, thus causing a dropped ball restart contestable by both teams at a location which puts the goalkeeper’s team at a perceived disadvantage.

 

The “flavor” of the issue you have raised is strikingly similar to something that became a matter of concern for the International Board about 10 or 11 years ago.  It was commonly thought that a team had an obligation to restart play (which was usually a throw-in) by releasing the ball to the opposing team if that opposing team had kicked the ball off the field because one of its players appeared to have been injured (almost always this was done by kicking the ball across a touchline).  The team usually threw the ball in the direction of the opposing team’s goalkeeper and none of the thrower’s teammates were expected to contest for the ball.  Sparked by a spate of incidents (including one  in an English Premier League match) where this so-called “tradition” was or was not honored, the International Board declared in a Circular issued in 2009 that stopping or not stopping play for a possible injury (minor or serious) falls solely to the referee, not to a team, and this sparked an item in US Soccer’s annual Law change memorandum the same year as follows:

 

Reminder to referees

Referees are reminded that Law 5 states that the referee must stop the match if, in his opinion, a player is seriously injured.

USSF Advice to Referees:  This statement is intended to reinforce a guideline issued earlier by both the International Board and USSF that the practice of a team kicking the ball off the field to stop play when there is an apparent injury on the field detracts from the responsibility of the referee under Law 5 to assess the injury and to stop play only if, in the opinion of the referee, the injury is serious.  Referees are therefore advised to be seen quickly and publicly considering the status of any player seeming to be injured and clearly deciding whether or not the situation merits a stoppage of play.  The referee must control this decision as much as possible.

 

The topic and the brief statement above in red was issued by the International Board and the text following it in bold italics is the official explanation/meaning/impact from US Soccer.  A further reminder on this issue was considered sufficiently important that similar language was included in a later circular and memorandum a year or two later.…

Injury

Injuries and Obligations

Posted on by

John, a U13 – U19 referee, asks:

Team A has the ball. A player from Team B goes down injured. I stop play. Team B player then gets up after a few seconds on the ground. Restart is a drop ball, but to show good sportsmanship team A should get the ball back. What role can a referee play in letting this happen?

Answer

No role whatsoever, beyond allowing the teams to do whatever the wish.

First of all, if you stopped play solely for the injury (which is what would produce a dropped ball restart), the player must leave the field – if not substituted for, the player can return only with your permission and only once play has been restarted; if the injured player was substituted for, then the team is not playing down and the injured player can return to the field (as a substitute) only at some later legal substitution opportunity.  If the injury involved bleeding or blood on the uniform, then that must be taken care of before allowing the player to return under any circumstances.

The point that has to be emphasized here is that, if you stop play for an injury not accompanied by any other reason (e.g., no foul), under the Law that is by definition “serious” because otherwise you would not have stopped play for it.  Allowing the player to stay on the field despite the Law is incorrect even if that is because you felt “better safe than sorry” – which is not a bad approach – but, in any event, you are still bound by the Law.  You are not allowed to change your mind based on any subsequent judgment on your part.  You live with the consequences.

Just because you didn’t call anyone onto the field does not and cannot justify allowing the player to remain.  You are obligated the moment you whistled for the stoppage.  The Law provides for the departure because it assumes you called for outside assistance as that is your duty.  This is precisely the point.  Having stopped play solely for this reason, you have already declared it to be a serious injury and so, the moment you finished blowing the whistle, your next act should be to wave medical assistance (even if that is only the coach, trainer, or a parent) onto the field.  If they don’t come because they disagree with your decision or simply don’t want to do anything about it, that is their prerogative (you can’t make them do so, in which case the player has to leave on his or her own power) but make an appropriate note for your report in case you were right to begin with, but the player must still leave somehow.  What counts here is that you authorized their entry onto the field — after that, it is on their shoulders.

It is not your job to make any “final” determination as to whether the injury is serious or not – you did what the Law expected you to do when you made the initial decision to stop play.  The only time you get to independently decide whether to call for medical assistance and thus trigger the requirement that the player must leave the field is if the injury occurs at a stoppage.  Then and only then do you make some appropriate effort to determine whether outside assistance is needed (which doesn’t necessarily mean you even have to talk with, much less inspect, the player.  In fact, standard referee procedure is, if you stop play for an injury, you not only whistle, followed immediately by a signal for outside assistance, but you don’t even stay around after that, you don’t hover over the player, you don’t even stay in the general area – you use the time while the player is helped off the field (assuming the circumstances don’t include any of the reasons for allowing assistance to be rendered on the field) to do other things far away for the site – talk with your AR, explore the field, get a drink of water, make notes about the injury that would go into your match report, etc.

If you follow these well-settled protocols, there is no need to expect, much less have, either team feel obligated about the outcome of the dropped ball restart.  And there is certainly nothing you could or should do about it even if you personally felt a team should be obligated to do anything other than fairly compete for the ball at the restart within the bounds of the Law.…

Injury

Injury Issue and Absent ARs

Posted on by

Chris, a U13 – U19 player, asks

Two questions.  The first one is, if a coach yells from the sideline and the ref thinks he heard him say injured player, should he stop the play dead, give away our advantage, and then say, oh, I am sorry, I thought you said someone was hurt?   The second question is, for a u15 game, if the ref was the only official on the field, can he refuse any ARs?

Answer

We can only respond to what you have asked above, even though both scenarios are rather vague, but we’ll try, based on what we think are the real issues involved.

First, regarding the issue of an injury, the Laws of the Game lay the responsibility for stopping play solely in the hands of the referee.  It doesn’t matter what anyone might be yelling about an injury even if the message is totally explicit, concrete, and clear.  At most, it might result in the referee deciding to take a quick scan of the field.  People yell all kinds of things from off the field which in most cases the referee simply must ignore and should not ever by itself constitute a reason for the referee to actually stop play.

The referee should be aware of what is going on everywhere on the field (assisted, preferably, by two ARs who definitely can and should get the referee’s attention if there is an injury someplace where the referee is not naturally looking).  Where the referee is alone, hearing something that may or may not be an injury alert coming from a sideline (whether it is the coach or anyone else) should result only in the referee attempting to ascertain for himself what might be going on.

This is then followed by the even more pertinent decision (assuming that the result of this is seeing what might be an injury) as to whether the injury is serious or not.  The Law requires the referee to stop play only if he determines that there is a serious injury (keeping in mind that “serious” is a judgment call which is highly dependent on the age and skill level of the players).  If the injury is not serious, play continues.  “Advantage” is never an issue in the case of a serious injury – no player should want anyone on his team who is seriously injured to be ignored even if his team appears to be only moments away from scoring the game-winning goal … and this same attitude should apply equally to players on the opposing team.  This is one of the reasons why faking or simulating an injury can (and should) be harshly punished.

As for the second question, it all depends on the local rules of competition.  If ARs have been assigned to the game, the referee has no basis for refusing to use them and any attempt to prevent their use would and should be reported to the assignor or local referee association.  However, if no ARs are assigned (or if two ARs are assigned but one or both don’t show up), there is no requirement in the Law that ARs must be used.  In fact, the Law is very specific that anyone brought on to assist the referee in the absence of one or both official ARs (meaning certified and assigned in accordance with local rules) comes with two significant limitations: (a) the referee agrees and (b) their role is limited to signaling only if and when the ball leaves the field.  Such a person is called a “linesman” and they are limited completely to this one responsibility.

So, the issue comes down to the basic question – were one or two ARs officially assigned to the game and were they present?  If so, they must be used – and the Law is clear that the referee must take their input into account in his decisions.  If not, and in the absence of local rules to the contrary, no one has to be used.  It has long been customary in lower level games (youth/recreational) to allow, but not require, the referee to request assistance in the absence of appointed ARs but the most assistance that any unofficial AR can provide is indicating if the ball left the field.  Some local rules provide for what is sometimes referred to as a “step-in assistant referee” which refers to a program which requires each team in the league to have at least one person on the sidelines who is a certified official who can and is willing to “step in” if an AR has been assigned but is absent.  In such programs, although the step-in AR is not limited to the ball leaving the field, it is quite common to not allow the step-in AR to signal fouls.…

Injury

Injuries and Type 1 Versus Type 2 Errors

Posted on by

Ken, a U12 and under coach, asks:

If a defending player is injured (non head injury) in a youth game and goes down to a knee, does the referee have to stop play right away? I had this happen where my left back was down and the attacking team continued to press and then score. The referee disallowed the goal when he saw the injured player was on the ground. We did not have an advantage at any point.

Afterwards he came up to me and said that the hardest part of his job is when he knows a player is injured and there isn’t anything he can do about it. Why would that be?

Answer

Stopping play for an injury is a referee decision and does not depend on anything the player may or may not do.  All experienced referees have heard the sideline call “if you’re hurt, go down.”  That is a bunch of (we’re going to use a technical term here) hooey.  “Going down” does not necessitate a stoppage, nor does not “going down” mean that play cannot be stopped.  Injuries come in all shapes and sizes — heatstroke, for example, can and should be recognized as serious with play stopped even while the player is standing up.

In the statistical analysis of data, there is something called the “type 1 versus type 2 error” — simplified, the first involves saying something is false when it is actually true while the second is deciding something is true when it is actually false.  Refereeing, plus a lot of other things in life, involve error.  Mistakes happen.  Given that we can be wrong either way, the intelligent referee has to decide which mistake has greater negative consequences and that, in turn, depends on the level of the game — U6 recreational game versus a World Cup final being an extreme range.

In general, stopping play for a possible but eventually not serious injury can produce less negative impact than not stopping play for a seemingly minor injury which turns out to be serious (at least from the point of view of the player’s health).  It also turns out that, again in general, the first mistake would be considered more tolerable in the U6 recreational game but could be career ending if made in the World Cup final.  You should take away from all this two principles.  One is that the decision depends critically on the age and experience of the players.  The other is that it is better to be safe than sorry.

Indeed, it is not unheard of that, for players under the age of 12 (nothing magic about that age break point), the greater danger of not stopping play if Johnny appears to be injured is that Johnny’s mom is likely to come running onto the field anyway, thus making stopping play mandatory.  (Our apologies to all “Johnny’s moms” — we love you but you can be very excitable.)  The higher the level of play (and experience of the players) the greater is the likelihood that you would be led into serious mistakes because “going down” is not unheard of as a player tactic to get you to stop play for the advantage of that player’s team (i.e., faking/simulating).  It’s bad enough to  make a Type 2 error but the decision is even more consequential when players themselves want you to make that mistake and are feverishly trying to help you make it.

Given your scenario, it would be even worse for a referee to decide to cancel a goal that was scored before the referee became aware of a player injury that was only then judged serious enough to stop play.  It would be ludicrous for a referee to decide that he or she wasn’t aware of the injury when it occurred and then, after the fact, decide it had been serious enough that he or she should have stopped play when it occurred, and then, to top it all off, negate anything that happened between the injury and the actual stoppage.  We don’t know of any experienced referee who would, for example, apply the same rationale for canceling a foul and/or a card! Unless there are facts related to play making it unassailable that the goal was scored only because everyone else on the field was affected by the player being on the ground, the goal should stand.

We don’t have the slightest idea what your referee meant when you report him saying “the hardest part of his job is when he knows a player is injured and there isn’t anything he can do about it.”  The fact of an injury is not the issue, it is the seriousness of the injury that has to be judged.  Furthermore, assuming the referee understands this part, it is not in the slightest way difficult to know what to do about it.  We train referees to exercise their judgment, which they must do throughout the game anyway, on situations involving possible injury.  The issue of concussions has been made very easy (a good thing) by declaring that ANY contact between the head and a hard object or surface constitutes a potential serious injury for which play must be stopped no matter the age or circumstances.…

Injury

Injuries

Posted on by

Dave, a HS and College referee, asks:

In a high school soccer match, a defensive player is hit in the face with the ball 30 yards from their goal. The ball pops over her head towards the goal. An attacker gains possession. Before the injured player sits down, her teammates rush over to her which gives an attacker a 1 v 1 with the goalie. The attacker scores a goal. This happens in the span of 5-10 seconds. Should the referee have stopped play for an injury before the goal was scored? (The play had continued a safe distance from the injured player.)

Do you typically wait a few seconds before stopping play for an injury when the ball is not near the injured player? The AR said the goal should be disallowed because the players were inexperienced and ran over to the injured teammate instead of defending their goal.

Answer

With as much emphasis that has been expressed in recent years regarding the importance of dealing quickly with potential concussion injuries, we are surprised that any referee would allow play to continue even seconds following a player being struck in the face with the ball.  It doesn’t matter when in the game it occurs, it doesn’t matter where on the field it occurs, it doesn’t matter what is going on in the game when it occurs. it doesn’t matter if the injured player “sits down” – play must be stopped immediately and medical assistance for the player called onto the field without delay.  No matter what happens after the decision is made to stop play, play has officially stopped – remember, play stops when the referee makes the decision to stop, not when the signal to stop is given.

Of course the goal should have been disallowed and any player who scored the goal should weigh her happiness at gaining a goal against the possibility that it might easily have been her face that had been struck by the ball.  There is no difference whatsoever regarding this issue among the three major sets of rules governing the game because (a) every soccer organization is equally concerned about the issue of concussions and (b) it is a simple common sense emphasis on safety.

We don’t care who might get upset (if anyone actually does, shame on them!), if the referee announces that, Oh by the way, the goal does not count because I stopped play before the ball went into the net … and then glare fiercely at anyone who might want to dispute the decision.  It has nothing to do with the experience level of the players – common decency alone would draw the attention of both attackers and defenders alike to the injured player.   And there is no weight whatsoever to the idea that “play had continued a safe distance from the injured player,” in fact what constitutes a “safe distance” anyway?  Far enough away that you could ignore the condition of the injured player?  Let’s get real here.…

2016 and Later Law Changes

Stopping for an Injury

Posted on by

Brian, a U-12 and under Referee, asks:

During a youth game (U-8 or U-9), there is a stoppage for an injury. The coach comes on to check on the player.  Since the coach entered the field to help the player, does that player need to step off the field before play resumes?  I know at older levels, this is the case, but am curious about at the younger levels.

Answer

Actually, some of your question assumptions are incorrect.  Under the Law, an injured player must leave the field if play has been stopped due solely to an injury.  It has nothing directly to do with the coach coming onto the field because, under the Law, the coach cannot enter the field without the express permission of the referee and no referee is going to give that permission until and unless play had already been stopped.  Some referees read the Law “sideways” and forget that the Law is expected to be understood as a whole, not in pieces.  So, the fact that the referee has stopped play solely due to an injury means by definition that the injury is serious because only serious injuries can be the basis for stopping play.

Where things get a bit complicated is if the referee stops play for some other reason (e.g., a foul) and then determines that a serious injury occurring during the stoppage or as a result of the foul that caused the stoppage in the first place.  Then and only then does the referee call for the entry of a team official (coach, trainer, etc.) – which, also as a result, requires that the player leave the field.  There are certain exception to this “must leave the field” requirement – e.g., the injured player is a goalkeeper, the player was injured in a “common collision” with a teammate, the injury was so severe that the player cannot be safely moved, or the injury was caused by a foul for which a caution or red card was given.

And we would never say that “the coach comes on to check the player” because you have already performed such a “check” and thus the coach does not.  There are no circumstances under which a coach can decide whether or not a player is to leave the field if the referee has (a) stopped play solely for the injury or (b) waved the coach onto the field for an injury caused by an opponent’s foul.  The player must leave according to the Law.  The only time a coach has any “say” in whether the player leaves or not is if the injury has occurred under circumstances where the Law itself does not require the player to leave (e.g., the goalkeeper was injured).  In short, if the Law says the player has to go, the player goes.  If the Law says that the player doesn’t have to go, the player doesn’t have to go unless the coach/trainer/parent wants the player to go.

Everything said above applies to all age groups, not just for U-littles.  The only decision in which the age of the player is relevant is your decision as to what constitutes a serious injury in the first place.  Once that decision is made, all the rest of it happens strictly in accordance with the Laws of the Game — neither you nor the coach (or anyone else) has any subsequent say in it.  This is one of the reasons why we train officials from entry level upward that, if play is stopped solely because an injury has been determined by you to be serious or if it is already clear to you at the moment of stoppage for a foul that the resulting injury is serious, your very first task after whistling for the stoppage is to wave someone from the injured player’s team (coach, trainer, etc.) onto the field — not to “assess the injury” because you have already done that, but to arrange for the safe removal of the player from the field (unless one of the exceptions applies).…

Injury

Goalkeeper Safety

Posted on by

Tabithia, a parent of a U12 player, asks:

My son is a goalie and like most of the kids he plays pretty rough.  At his last game I noticed that the attacking team would continue to kick the ball once he had his hands on it in an attempt to kick it out of his hands. He nearly got kicked in the face. Is this legal?

Answer

First, at the U12 recreational level of play, no one is supposed to play “pretty rough” — it is not expected and it should not be condoned with the argument that it’s simply playing “like most of the kids.”  If this is the case, it is the fault of everyone involved in the match — the parents, the league, the coaches, and the referees.

Second, what you describe is illegal at all levels of play, from little kids all the way up to the professionals and international players.  The Law requires that, once the goalkeeper has taken hand control of the ball, all challenges against the goalkeeper must stop and may not even be attempted, much less performed, so long as that control continues.  There are no maybes here.  In fact, the younger the players involved in the match, the more tightly this rule must be enforced.

Having the ball controlled by hand means that the goalkeeper is holding the ball with one or both hands or is holding the ball against any part of his body or against the ground or a goalpost.   Being “in control of the ball” also includes the goalkeeper bouncing the ball on the ground or tossing it up in the air and catching it or tossing it even slightly in the process of preparing to punt the ball. During this entire time, no opponent can challenge the goalkeeper in any way.  “Cannot challenge” means there cannot be any attempt to cause the goalkeeper to lose control, whether by charging or tackling, much less by kicking the ball which is, by itself, very dangerous.  If no contact is made with the goalkeeper, this is at least a dangerous play and the goalkeeper’s team would get an indirect free kick where the action occurred.  If there was any contact with the goalkeeper, it would be a kicking foul and at least a caution, if not a red card, should be shown, followed by a direct free kick for the goalkeeper’s team.

Referees must respond quickly and firmly to any illegal contact or attempted contact by an opponent against a goalkeeper who has hand control of the ball.   At the U12 age level, we would expand that to cover even a situation where the goalkeeper is about to take hand control of the ball (remember, the game at this level is all about safety because the players are neither skilled nor experienced).

A soccer ball is not a golf ball and a goalkeeper should not be seen as a tee.…

Injury

GOALKEEPER INJURY

Posted on by

Question:
Normally, if a player has a minor injury, I would allow them to step off the field, receive treatment, then reenter with my permission, or be subbed at the next stoppage. If a goalkeeper is injured but wishes to remain in the game, does he have to give his jersey to another player while he is being treated and can he go back to keeping goal at the next stoppage?

USSF answer (September 10, 2011):
Unless a goalkeeper is so seriously injured that he or she must be removed from the game and taken for more complete medical attention and care, the ‘keeper will be treated on the field. If the ‘keeper needs to be treated off the field and might return after the treatment, then an outfield player must assume the uniform and duties of the goalkeeper. See the following excerpt from the Interpretation of the Laws of the Game and Guidelines for Referees in the back of your Law book, under Law 5:

Injured players
The referee must adhere to the following procedure when dealing with injured players:
• Play is allowed to continue until the ball is out of play if a player is, in the opinion of the referee, only slightly injured
• Play is stopped if, in the opinion of the referee, a player is seriously injured
• After questioning the injured player, the referee may authorize one, or at most two [medical staff persons], to enter the field of play to assess the injury and arrange the player’s safe and swift removal from the field of play
• Stretcher-bearers should only enter the field of play with a stretcher following a signal from the referee
• The referee must ensure an injured player is safely removed from the field of play
• A player is not allowed to receive treatment on the field of play
• Any player bleeding from a wound must leave the field of play. He may not return until the referee is satisfied that the bleeding has stopped. A player is not permitted to wear clothing with blood on it
• As soon as the referee has authorized the doctors to enter the field of play, the player must leave the field of play, either on a stretcher or on foot. If a player does not comply, he must be cautioned for unsporting behavior
• An injured player may only return to the field of play after the match has restarted
• When the ball is in play, an injured player must re-enter the field of play from the touch line. When the ball is out of play, the injured player may re-enter from any of the boundary lines
• Irrespective of whether the ball is in play or not, only the referee is authorized to allow an injured player to re-enter the field of play
• The referee may give permission for an injured player to return to the field of play if an assistant referee or the fourth official verifies that the player is ready
• If play has not otherwise been stopped for another reason, or if an injury suffered by a player is not the result of a breach of the Laws of the Game, the referee must restart play with a dropped ball from the position of the ball when play was stopped, unless play was stopped inside the goal area, in which case the referee drops the ball on the goal area line parallel to the goal line at the point nearest to where the ball was when play was stopped.
• The referee must allow for the full amount of time lost through injury to be played at the end of each period of play
• Once the referee has decided to issue a card to a player who is injured and has to leave the field of play for treatment, the referee must issue the card before the player leaves the field of play

Exceptions to this ruling are to be made only when:
• a goalkeeper is injured
• a goalkeeper and an outfield player have collided and need immediate attention
• players from the same team have collided and need immediate attention
• a severe injury has occurred, e.g. swallowed tongue, concussion, broken leg.

…
"Inventive Coaches"

WHEN IS DECEPTION REWARDED?

Posted on by

Question:
In a recent viral video of a Conway AR high school match shows the center awarding a free kick to Conway and the Conway players setting up. Two players approach the area of the ball as if both are going to initiate the kick with one passing by the ball and then colliding with the other approaching player and both collapse on the ground while a third player initiates the kick. A score resulted.

Question is, has an offence been committed? My input would be yes that it is unsporting behavior in that the collision was set up as a distraction that is staged, much like a player taking an obvious dive after contacting a player of the opposing team. I can’t see the trickery rule applying because it only addresses playing the ball back to the keeper and trying to circumvent a law of the game. I believe the goal was awarded. Not that it matters to me being I have no interest or contact with any team in Arkanas. Just discussing it with some current officials on how we would have called it. I am a laspsed official (not one of the choices below)

USSF answer (May 19, 2011):
Ah, deceit, the mother of legal gamesmanship. The kicking team is allowed to engage in its little bit of deception at almost any restart. Provided that the players who collide don’t turn the event into a moaning, groaning, shrieking distraction, this was likely legal. Some playacting is certainly acceptable, but when an event is played to the hilt it could be seen as constituting either (a) exaggerating the seriousness of an injury or (b) the equivalent of shouting at an opponent to distract (either of which would be unsporting behavior). It all depends, of course, on the opinion of the referee, which would be based on how out of the ordinary the actions of these players were.

The Laws of the Game were not written to compensate for the mistakes of players, in this case the defending team that did not continue to pay attention to the subsequent kicker, the runner, and the ball itself.

CAVEAT: Please note that this is a high school game played under NFHS auspices, and not necessarily in accordance with the Laws of the Game. And the referee might be especially cunning and preempt any problems by stopping play for the “injury,” which occurred before the ball was in play, have the players attended to, and restart with original free kick.

A video clip of this incident may be seen at this URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haxdJT6MBoE&feature=player_embedded…