A&H

Weird technical one with equipment

Status
Not open for further replies.
Ciley Myrus said:
Totally disagree, sorry. As referee its not up to you to decide based on weather conditions what players can wear ?
On your rationale, you would allow running shoes on a nice sunny day yet if the park gets saturated say, 50-60 mins mark, you going to stop game and force players to change footwear? Sorry, that's not in the referees remit !!
I referee in black running shoes sometimes. If I can referee in them, and run more and twist and turn more than a player, then how can anyone stop a player from wearing them !!
Click to expand...

That is different, and this is a hypothetical situation.

Running trainers (not cross country style ones) have minimal grip, and on wet grass that diminishes even further, as a referee my prime responsibility is player safety, and I need to not only protect other players, but also protect players from themselves.

I would rather have an annoyed player/team than a broken ankle or dislocated knee.
 
The Referee Store
zarathustra said:
That is different, and this is a hypothetical situation.

Running trainers (not cross country style ones) have minimal grip, and on wet grass that diminishes even further, as a referee my prime responsibility is player safety, and I need to not only protect other players, but also protect players from themselves.

I would rather have an annoyed player/team than a broken ankle or dislocated knee.
Click to expand...


Again that may be your personal preference but its not enforceable in the LOTG. Well, obviously it as, as referee you can dictate but you would be wrong to do so. Again on your rationale, wearing the footwear that you deem suitable reduces or prevents injury. Until 2 mins in a player wearing something you deemed suitable breaks his ankle, rendering your previous considerations null and void.
 
Ciley Myrus said:
Again that may be your personal preference but its not enforceable in the LOTG. Well, obviously it as, as referee you can dictate but you would be wrong to do so. Again on your rationale, wearing the footwear that you deem suitable reduces or prevents injury. Until 2 mins in a player wearing something you deemed suitable breaks his ankle, rendering your previous considerations null and void.
Click to expand...

Law 4 would disagree with you:

Safety A player must not use equipment or wear anything that is dangerous. All items of jewellery (necklaces, rings, bracelets, earrings, leather bands, rubber bands, etc.) are forbidden and must be removed. Using tape to cover jewellery is not permitted. The players must be inspected before the start of the match and substitutes before they enter the field of play. If a player is wearing or using unauthorised/ dangerous equipment or jewellery the referee must order the player to: • remove the item • leave the field of play at the next stoppage if the player is unable or unwilling to comply A player who refuses to comply or wears the item again must be cautioned.
Click to expand...

A pair of boots with no studs would have absolutely no grip on any surface and would therefore be both dangerous to the player wearing them and other players.

A pair of flat soled running trainers on wet grass would not provide an adequate amount of grip and would therefore be dangerous to the player wearing them and other players on the pitch.

You keep changing the argument to suit your answer. If I make a player wear studs/molds on wet grass instead of his running trainers and he breaks his ankle there isn't much I can do about it.

If I allow a player to wear footwear which doesn't provide a suitable amount of grip in the conditions at the time then I have not done all that I can to ensure player safety.

I think this may need an email to IFAB, to see what they think the correct course of action would be.
 
If I can referee and do all the sprinty movements, twist, turn, run backwards and run for longer than a player, in my running shoes, without falling over, then I don't see how I can prevent a player from wearing them.
For me, even if am 1% minority, I don't feel its for me to decide how much or less grip a player wants. Sports science and all that
Plenty cases of top flight players blaming certain boots or pitches or both for say, ligament damage, I suppose someone somewhere could sue a referee for deeming the boots worn on the day to be suitable, when indeed, they were entirely not suitable for that player and indeed had he worn, say, running shoes, he would not have caught his stud in the astro and twisted his ankle.
 
Ciley Myrus said:
If I can referee and do all the sprinty movements, twist, turn, run backwards and run for longer than a player, in my running shoes, without falling over, then I don't see how I can prevent a player from wearing them.
For me, even if am 1% minority, I don't feel its for me to decide how much or less grip a player wants. Sports science and all that
Plenty cases of top flight players blaming certain boots or pitches or both for say, ligament damage, I suppose someone somewhere could sue a referee for deeming the boots worn on the day to be suitable, when indeed, they were entirely not suitable for that player and indeed had he worn, say, running shoes, he would not have caught his stud in the astro and twisted his ankle.
Click to expand...

But, as a referee you aren't going to be challenging for the ball, which does require an amount of grip to enable players to do so safely, on wet grass it is entirely possible that a player in running trainers would be unable to stop after sprint for a ball and could slide/fall into a team mate, opposition player, goal post or corner flag which could result in significant injury.

We are not expected to be experts on different types of footwear, and whether they would be suitable for different types of playing surfaces, but, I believe it would be entirely reasonable for a referee to believe that running trainers would not be suitable on wet grass or astro turf.

I have fired of an email to IFAB, its hypothetical, but is one of those questions which people aren't going to agree on, and I think it would be interesting to hear what the people who write the laws believe the correct approach would be.

Specifically, I asked if I would be correct in not allowing a player to wear running trainers if I believe that they would not give sufficient grip based on the state of the field of play, I used a wet pitch as my example.
 
It be interesting to hear the response
I just cant see how they can define who can wear what depending on what weather condition or surface (even to extreme of long grass, short grass,) or whether footwear would at one stage in the same game be considered acceptable but if say, park conditions changed in the same game, then the suitability or legality of the footwear would change also. I cant see how it can.
 
It appears that I am in the wrong, this is the reply that I got from IFAB

Dear Zarathustra



Thank you for your e mail.



The focus of your discussion should be in ‘dangerous and not ‘safe’ as there is a difference - subtle but important.



A player wearing trainers is not wearing anything which is dangerous to anyone else and if he/she and the coach are happy then fine. Indeed, on some surfaces (e.g. astro/baked mud) they may be the best footwear



Best wishes



David



David Elleray

Technical Director


The IFAB
Click to expand...

This has never come up in any of my matches, but I'm glad that I asked the question.
 
Hi
Regular spectacles are dangerous and the frames can cause puncture wounds. The glass is probably no longer an issue as they are made from hard plastic.
Saw this quote recently
**Notes on Safety - Always use eye protection, There are no workshop manuals here for eye repairs and replacements are not available !! **
My refereeing background immediately had me thinking about spectacles and eye injuries. When it comes to wearing glasses in soccer there is an inherent risk of getting hit with the ball in the face. It is for that reason that the safety sports goggles were introduced for those that cannot wear soft contact lenses. The frames of regular glasses can and do cause nasty puncture wounds. Stats worldwide show this as a major cause of eye injuries in A&E
Now I know many referees will not allow players to play with regular glasses while others will take the chance by ensuring that there is obvious risk such as flimsy metal frames etc. A friends son got hit recently with a ball in the face at school, on a yard kick about, breaking the frames of his glasses and giving him a small nasty cut close to the eye. While not serious it certainly highlighted the inherent danger of the frames causing injury to the eye.
While chances of an injury is low perhaps these questions might provide an answer to your question. Would a referee be happy to witness an eye injury in a game caused by glasses or be advised that a player is in hospital who received an eye injury in a game due to wearing glasses or to receive a claim for negligence in the post seeking compensation for an injury sustained by allowing a player to wear spectacles in a game. While we want to see everyone play we also have a responsibility for safety both to all the participants and ultimately to ourselves.
 
CapnBloodbeard said:
I disagree with the blame on the refs. The refs are supposed to catch it, yes, but the player knows the law. It's his fault - but the refs compounded it by not taking the required steps.

Let's think about the purpose of the caution here. Given that he only left the field without permission to minimise the impact of a Law 4 breach, I think there's justification to let him have that one and appreciate the fact that he caught it himself and took steps to resolve. Perhaps not the best ones, but he tried. We certainly can use our judgement here.

I feel like the AR should have noticed him leaving and been able to explain this to you - if you have something confusing like this, don't be afraid to go to the player/AR/coach and ask what's happening!
Click to expand...

No. You can't.

It's a mandatory caution, no wiggle room. You messed up by allowing them to start without mandatory equipment, now you want to compound that error by shirking your responsibility to issue a mandatory caution.

You can't have it both ways......blaming the player and not the ref, yet refusing to caution because it's not the players fault? Your argument contradicts itself.

Stop trying to find ways not to apply the LOTG and just do what you are there to do.
 
zarathustra said:
Yes, the footwear has to be suitable, and a pair of boots with now studs would provide absolutely no grip, and as such would pose a risk to the wearer and other players.

Running shoes? The provide more grip than boots with no studs, but, if it's raining and the pitch is soaking wet then I wouldn't allow them to play, again for safety reasons, as they would be like bam I on ice.
Click to expand...
Depends on the running shoe. I refereed in off road running shoes and have had many a player tell me I wouldn't stay on my feet on some greasy slippery pitches, guess who had the last laugh?

These were my favourite....
https://www.bing.com/images/search?...electedIndex=2&qpvt=fuji+runnegade&ajaxhist=0
 
Ciley Myrus said:
Why would a missing stud be unsuitable ?
Click to expand...

Boots are designed for stability, hence why normal studs would have two longer ones at the back, in order to allow players to stop/control movement, if they have a back stud missing when they plant the foot it may turn causing injury to themselves or on softer ground may cause them to slide and not be bale to control it. Hence if a back stud is missing I would more than likely get them to put one in or change boots.

As someone rightly pointed out there are no specifications for 'footwear' however, if you deem that a player may cause injury to themselves or others by their footwear then you can ask them to change it. You wouldn't let a player wear slippers on a wet soft pitch....nor would you let them wear running spikes? Common sense is always applied and I carry spare studs with em although most footballers wear mouldies now, so less of an issue.
 
Ciley Myrus said:
If I can referee and do all the sprinty movements, twist, turn, run backwards and run for longer than a player, in my running shoes, without falling over, then I don't see how I can prevent a player from wearing them.
For me, even if am 1% minority, I don't feel its for me to decide how much or less grip a player wants. Sports science and all that
Plenty cases of top flight players blaming certain boots or pitches or both for say, ligament damage, I suppose someone somewhere could sue a referee for deeming the boots worn on the day to be suitable, when indeed, they were entirely not suitable for that player and indeed had he worn, say, running shoes, he would not have caught his stud in the astro and twisted his ankle.
Click to expand...
You won't be expected to make tackles and control them but!
 
Ciley Myrus said:
as confirmed yesterday by powers higher than (most?) folk on here, trainers are allowed.
I would allow slippers
Spike, no, they possess an obvious danger in name alone far less the actual spikes.
Click to expand...
I find that hard to believe that you would allow slippers especially on a wet muddy pitch and if you did then IMHO you shouldn't be refereeing. :facepalm:
 
Its already been established that, as referee, the weather conditions are irrelevant, as per a prev post, by you rationale, you are allowing, say slippers, on a nice sunny dry day yet if there is a downpour 60 mins in, are you going to insist players change their footwear? Thats not your call
Unless of course you are the expert, I, like 99% do not class myself as the god of footwear and if a player, coach , and too extreme, the club doctor are fine with it, then its fine with me. Plenty players have twisted ankle in say, studs on grass park, is the referee responsible, afterall, in my honest opinion, I saw no danger
 
Weather conditions are irrelevant? Serious, can't wait to watch your first game in three foot of snow, or two foot of water, rock hard frozen pitch? Seriously, weather conditions aren't a factor wise up! You are responsible for the health and safety of players on the fop if you don't feel that the footwear offers sufficient protection there is a health and safety issue and therefore your responsibility. Before you start you decide on whether players are allowed treatment on the FOP, check that the pitch is safe before matches etc or do you just not bother oh wait look a broken bottle all over the goalmouth lets ignore it cos it's not mentioned in the LOTG.

I don't class myself as a god of footwear or anything else but I know my responsibilities within the context of the LOTG and the spirit of the game, but hey you allow a player to wear slippers on a sodden heavy muddy pitch and see how many times you stop play for them to correct their equipment. Take that wee message to your look Association and tell them you don't carry out appropriate checks in line with the LOTG and let people wear whatever they like, if you were in my Association you would be laughed and kicked out.

Even better I hope you follow the LOTG in relation to referee's equipment as you won't be wearing any kit yourself just a whistle, watch(es) analogue not digital (as that is electronic equipment) carrying your red and yellow cards and notebook, now if you want to get smart and stupid we can. However, I would prefer to talk with people who take the matter seriously in a professional manner not some clampit trying to justify their lack of professionalism and demonstrating I'm in it for the money attitude. :wall:

Three foot of snow lets go lads, no need to worry there's a monsoon due but lets getting playing in your slippers, don't mind me being naked, I am wearing what the LOTG says is compulsory equipment:mad:
 
Ok your fishing and I will bite
Three foot of snow, footwear irrelevant because there woukd be no game
The referee cannot dictate who wears what based on whatever weather.

If you are referring to me as, clampit, or referring to me as anything, am classing it as personal abuse and the only thing being kicked out will be you, off this forum.
When you sink to personal abuse, you really are clutching at straws with your points
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top