Cry Spurs

[RustyRef]

No, you didn’t.

You quoted the passage about players being seen by a physio - not being checked by a referee.

Trolling me on multiple threads is irksome at this point.

Its part of the same law, arguably another one that is routinely ignored at all levels as almost every player that is injured and the physio comes on gets some treatment on the pitch.

It could be argued that he wasn't seriously injured and Oliver knew that he wasn't, but spirit of the game comes up. He's down after the ball was blasted at him, the ball is in a safe position, and the game is over. Why would you not stop play in those circumstances with a player lying prone in or near the penalty area?

In which case the other part of law comes in, if Oliver authorises treatment he has to go off, if he doesn't he can stay on.

 

[santa sangria]

Its part of the same law, arguably another one that is routinely ignored at all levels as almost every player that is injured and the physio comes on gets some treatment on the pitch.

It could be argued that he wasn't seriously injured and Oliver knew that he wasn't, but spirit of the game comes up. He's down after the ball was blasted at him, the ball is in a safe position, and the game is over. Why would you not stop play in those circumstances with a player lying prone in or near the penalty area?

In which case the other part of law comes in, if Oliver authorises treatment he has to go off, if he doesn't he can stay on.

“if he doesn’t he can stay on” - again, the law does not say this.

Of course you stop play if a player is seriously injured. And then the law says they have to go off. It is that simple.

 

[Degnann]

“if he doesn’t he can stay on” - again, the law does not say this.

Of course you stop play if a player is seriously injured. And then the law says they have to go off. It is that simple.

Do you have any examples of this happening?

I’ve only ever seen players leaving if a physio has came on

 

[socal lurker]

I agree that, as written, it’s really an either or—a player needs to go out if the R stops play for the serious injury or if the R permits someone onto the field to assist the player (which would apply when play was stopped for a reason other than the injury).

I guess the argument an R could make if he stops play and no assistance was needed would be that there was no serious injury to stop for, which makes the stopping an inadvertent whistle, and no one goes off and the restart is still a DB.

this is (yet another) place that small edits could make the Law much more clear as to what is intended

 

[RustyRef]

I agree that, as written, it’s really an either or—a player needs to go out if the R stops play for the serious injury or if the R permits someone onto the field to assist the player (which would apply when play was stopped for a reason other than the injury).

I guess the argument an R could make if he stops play and no assistance was needed would be that there was no serious injury to stop for, which makes the stopping an inadvertent whistle, and no one goes off and the restart is still a DB.

this is (yet another) place that small edits could make the Law much more clear as to what is intended

And this is kind of my point on it. There is what is written down, with two separate bullet points that seem to contradict each other, and what is the expected practice. When has anyone ever seen a referee make a player go off when there has been no physio come on, even when play has been stopped for it? It just doesn't happen, except perhaps when it is a head injury and the referee stops play and waves on physios before even checking on the player(s).

Combine those two bullet points into one and then it would become much more clear.

 

[santa sangria]

I thought it was enforced - used to be enforced - and very much is where I am - in order to deter players from feigning injury to waste time.

Perhaps our resident historian @Peter Grove could take us back to how the law on injury/treatment/removal/re-entry developed over the years?

 

[OssieSC]

Still on topic, why not allow treatment on the field aka rugby, whilst the game continues. My bet is there would be less injuries! Would be considered as a defender as non-active so couldn’t play any opposition on-side.

I don't necessarily think it would be a bad idea to discourage time wasting injuries, but I don't think it's very safe for the medical staff as the nature of football means where the game is being played can change very quickly, there's no real dead zones. Most rugby treatment on the field is behind play and the ball and players are generally only coming from one direction at a time , and referees are quick to stop play if there is a risk to the medical staff or they request it for a serious injury.

A friend of mine who works for PRO2 said they've been trialing an off-field treatment rule in the MLS Reserve League (https://www.revolutionsoccer.net/ne...w-competition-rules-for-second-half-of-season) which means anyone down for 15 seconds gets a medic on and then has to be off the field for three minutes, with some exceptions (e.g. head injuries and I believe reckless/sfp). He has said this has discouraged players from going down unnecessarily as they will disadvantage their team for longer than the time they must waste, obviously this is much easier to do with comms and a 4th official than alone so may not make its way down too quickly.

 

[GraemeS]

I like that idea in principal, but given it effectively acts as a 3-minute sin-bin, you don't want to go too far the other way and discourage players from requesting treatment when they actually do need it. And as you rightly point out, that's a fiddly thing to administrate for a solo ref.

 

[DJIC]

I like that idea in principal, but given it effectively acts as a 3-minute sin-bin, you don't want to go too far the other way and discourage players from requesting treatment when they actually do need it. And as you rightly point out, that's a fiddly thing to administrate for a solo ref.

I think at elite level it is getting ridiculous, any minor contact, the winning team use it to manage the game. I like the 3 minutes off if you require the medical team on. If you are otherwise injured/need a trainer’s sponge you can hobble off/go off & back on whenever you are ready, before 3 minutes, both with referee’s acknowledgment.

If you consider the medical team is supposed to come on to assess the injury, not treat it, but 95% of times the player returns within seconds & is 100% fit to complete a maximum sprint.

 

[RustyRef]

I like that idea in principal, but given it effectively acts as a 3-minute sin-bin, you don't want to go too far the other way and discourage players from requesting treatment when they actually do need it. And as you rightly point out, that's a fiddly thing to administrate for a solo ref.

And very harsh on a player who is winded, or gets the ball in the parts that no male players want the ball to hit. He isn't feigning injury, he is just catching his breath. Same when a player is accidentally caught by studs down their Achilles, anyone that has played will tell you how excruciatingly painful that is, and through absolutely no fault of their own they'd have to go off for 3 minutes

 

[JamesL]

And very harsh on a player who is winded, or gets the ball in the parts that no male players want the ball to hit. He isn't feigning injury, he is just catching his breath. Same when a player is accidentally caught by studs down their Achilles, anyone that has played will tell you how excruciatingly painful that is, and through absolutely no fault of their own they'd have to go off for 3 minutes

No. But what's a physio going to do about your painful balls???