A&H

Head injuries

I think you are probably right technically - BUT - with the responsibility for player safety in mind... if (theoretically) a player is stumbling around the pitch after a head collision, and it was so obvious to me he was unwell, and if the team refused to treat him or sub him I would stop the game and insist on treatment and not allow the player back on. I’m with you as I’m struggling to tell you where in law I’m entitled to do that but I have no problem making up a law or stretching my interpretation of our responsibility for player safety in this situation
Absolutely! As referee you can abandon a match for any reason. I would suggest a 'threat' to abandon unless you are satisfied that proper treatment has been administered will be enough in most circumstances, but god forbid any of us are ever involved in situations like this Aylesbury GK
 
The Referee Store
I think you are probably right technically - BUT - with the responsibility for player safety in mind... if (theoretically) a player is stumbling around the pitch after a head collision, and it was so obvious to me he was unwell, and if the team refused to treat him or sub him I would stop the game and insist on treatment and not allow the player back on. I’m with you as I’m struggling to tell you where in law I’m entitled to do that but I have no problem making up a law or stretching my interpretation of our responsibility for player safety in this situation



It reads the same as say, a drunken or suspected drunken player. Hopefully you would try deal with it respectfully and recommend his involvement ceases, and if it got to the stage the team or player were not complying then you are within your rights to stop the game until he is removed, and if he still is not removed, you have a responsibility to yourself, his team, the other team and of course him, to terminate the game on the grounds of safety.
I cant see how anybody would not back you up on this, if this was a concern but Law 5 for me would do it

Decisions of the referee
Decisions will be made to the best of the referee`s ability according to the Laws of the Game and the spirit of the game and will be based on the opinion of the referee who has the discretion to take appropriate action within the framework of the Laws of the Game.

as referee, if I have deemed a player too unwell to play then my appropriate action if all else had failed would be to suspend the game.
 
There is a fine line though and a certain degree of certainty. If the star goalkeeper who has made half dozen spectacular saves has a clash in the 75th minute and you think he is too unwell to play and say he has to come off for the game to continue. The manager doesn't want to but does it to get the game going. Then the opponents score two easy goals and win 2-0. A qualified doctor form the crowd examines the keeper immediately after the game and says there was nothing wrong with him. Where does that leave any appeals for replay?

I wouldn't direct any player to be subbed. I would strongly recommend it. And if I have that much certainty, I don't see why they wont agree. Where it gets tricky is when the everyone wants to sub the unwell player but the player doesn't want to be come off. That's when I would go with suggestion above of suspending.
 
There is a fine line though and a certain degree of certainty. If the star goalkeeper who has made half dozen spectacular saves has a clash in the 75th minute and you think he is too unwell to play and say he has to come off for the game to continue. The manager doesn't want to but does it to get the game going. Then the opponents score two easy goals and win 2-0. A qualified doctor form the crowd examines the keeper immediately after the game and says there was nothing wrong with him. Where does that leave any appeals for replay?

I wouldn't direct any player to be subbed. I would strongly recommend it. And if I have that much certainty, I don't see why they wont agree. Where it gets tricky is when the everyone wants to sub the unwell player but the player doesn't want to be come off. That's when I would go with suggestion above of suspending.

Agree, we are referees not doctors. No problem is highlighting that a player has a problem or even suggesting he goes off, but enforcing it could leave you on a very sticky wicket.
 
  • Like
Reactions: one
Agree, we are referees not doctors. No problem is highlighting that a player has a problem or even suggesting he goes off, but enforcing it could leave you on a very sticky wicket.
But could not enforcing it leave you on an equally sticky wicket.??? I’ve certainly insisted a few times from memory! Not sure if that’s legit but it certainly seemed right to me at the time!
 
But could not enforcing it leave you on an equally sticky wicket.??? I’ve certainly insisted a few times from memory! Not sure if that’s legit but it certainly seemed right to me at the time!
Every case is a different case. I don't know about your cases but in my case in post #4 and a few other times I suggested someone should come off, no one disagreed.

Surly player welfare is also the priority of the manager and if the referee sees something serious is visibly wrong with a player, they should be able to see it too.
 
With the probable unavailability of a qualified medical person and the potentially biased view of a player or coach that a potentially concust player is OK I certainly looked on it as a serious responsibility that every effort was made to ensure you are everyone is happy including myself for a player to continue.

I’d ask the how many fingers question or see if they would involve in conversation or their balance looked suspect. It’s a hard spot but there are signs that should be viewed carefully. Any doubt or signs and he’s not playing for me whether he liked it or not!
 
Back
Top