Firminho v Palace

[Paul March]

Lotg are pretty clear, a caution is given when a player refuses to correct his equipment, that includes jewellery. The law also states that referees must inspect equipment before the start of the game and when a substitution is being made

 

[GraemeS]

Lotg are pretty clear, a caution is given when a player refuses to correct his equipment, that includes jewellery. The law also states that referees must inspect equipment before the start of the game and when a substitution is being made

That's what I though. So if you instruct a player to remove some jewellery and he refuses, a caution is entirely appropriate. But that's not the same as the mandatory caution as soon as any jewellery is spotted on the pitch, which is what was previously suggested.

 

[CapnBloodbeard]

No, but the LOTG still leave that as an option - given it's a clear, deliberate and potentially dangerous breach of the laws.. As I said, there are several reasons why a player may wear jewellery onto the field at the start of the game which don't include the referee having checked that player but missing the jewellery.