Micro shin pads

[OnlyUseMeWhistle]

I’ve seen these micro shin pads advertised a few times on the app for young folk like me

Jokes aside these seem ridiculously ineffective and a deliberate attempt to circumvent the law that requires them. Now they’re being marketed to your Sunday footballer, is there anything we as officials can do to combat them? It’s going to lead to injuries, especially at grassroots

 

[CA1992]

In a word - no.

In law, shinguards are compulsory equipment that "must be made of suitable material to provide reasonable protection and covered by the socks"

Says nothing about how big, small, thick or thin they should be. If a player chooses to wear shinguards similar to the above and is subsequently injured, then that's the risk they take by wearing them.

 

[Kent Ref]

In a word - no.

In law, shinguards are compulsory equipment that "must be made of suitable material to provide reasonable protection and covered by the socks"

Says nothing about how big, small, thick or thin they should be. If a player chooses to wear shinguards similar to the above and is subsequently injured, then that's the risk they take by wearing them.

I wonder how "reasonable protection" is defined?

 

[ASM]

I wonder how "reasonable protection" is defined?

It isn’t.

As it is written, Law 4 only requires the material the shinguards are made from to offer reasonable protection so unless they’re something like paper or cloth then crack on.

 

[NOVARef]

I'm in the US. I asked 5 of my refereeing buddies if they'd allow these and they all gave an emphatic "No". My son wants a pair though! I'm torn.

 

[es1]

I'm in the US. I asked 5 of my refereeing buddies if they'd allow these and they all gave an emphatic "No". My son wants a pair though! I'm torn.

as a parent i'd want my kids to be adequately protected. i don't think these go anywhere near that level!

that said, as a ref you cant really do owt if the pros are allowed to wear them

 

[ChasObserverRefDeveloper]

Who will be sued when a promising young player breaks his leg in a tackle and blames these micro pads? The manufacturer? The club? Or, most likely . . .

 

[Kent Ref]

i'm going to ask for guidance on this as i'm not convinced.

 

[Mac]

The LOTG require shin pads to provide reasonable protection - there is no way these shin pads are providing reasonable (having sound judgement; fair and sensible/ as much as is appropriate or fair; moderate) protection. The players are breaching the LOTG wearing them and should be pointed to the touchline to get proper kit before being allowed to play.

 

[ASM]

The LOTG require shin pads to provide reasonable protection - there is no way these shin pads are providing reasonable (having sound judgement; fair and sensible/ as much as is appropriate or fair; moderate) protection. The players are breaching the LOTG wearing them and should be pointed to the touchline to get proper kit before being allowed to play.

You’d have thought but, as I said above, the wording of the law doesn’t actually say the entity of the shin guard itself must afford “reasonable protection” only that the material it is made from must provide “reasonable protection”.



Poorly written (nothing new there) but it is what it is. If a player wishes to wear them, that’s on them.

 

[CA1992]

The LOTG require shin pads to provide reasonable protection - there is no way these shin pads are providing reasonable (having sound judgement; fair and sensible/ as much as is appropriate or fair; moderate) protection. The players are breaching the LOTG wearing them and should be pointed to the touchline to get proper kit before being allowed to play.

Incorrect

 

[ARF]

I'm in the US. I asked 5 of my refereeing buddies if they'd allow these and they all gave an emphatic "No".

I suggest they re-read the LotG then!

 

[one]

I noticed a player in my game wearing something in similar size under his socks. Next stoppage I asked him to be shown the shinpads. He had actually cut a standard shinpad in half and put half a shinpad on each side

He was out of action for about 5minutes until he found proper shinpads to wear.

 

[ARF]

I noticed a player in my game wearing something in similar size under his socks. Next stoppage I asked him to be shown the shinpads. He had actually cut a standard shinpad in half and put half a shinpad on each side

He was out of action for about 5minutes until he found proper shinpads to wear.

And how are you justifying that in law?

 

[one]

And how are you justifying that in law?

Laws require shinpads to provide reasonable protection. Half a shinpad only provides half reasonable protection

 

[ARF]

Laws require shinpads to provide reasonable protection. Half a shinpad only provides half reasonable protection

As has been quoted above, law only stipulates that the material the shinpads are made of provides reasonable protection. Cutting the pad in half doesn't change what it's made of

 

[bester]

If a shin pad is made of carbon fibre how many layers of carbon fibre constitutes suitable protection?

 

[RustyRef]

Laws require shinpads to provide reasonable protection. Half a shinpad only provides half reasonable protection

No they don't, they only require a suitable material. If he'd put newspaper down his socks, which I have seen someone try, you would be justified to make him correct it. But a shinpad cut in half is exactly the same material as before it was cut, so under the law as it is written it is perfectly legal.

 

[Redster]

No they don't, they only require a suitable material. If he'd put newspaper down his socks, which I have seen someone try, you would be justified to make him correct it. But a shinpad cut in half is exactly the same material as before it was cut, so under the law as it is written it is perfectly legal.

I disagree.

If a shinpad has been manufactured to a particular size, I think a referee is justified in finding it is no longer the same item if has been altered in a significant way.

I'm certain that is what the manufacturer would say in answer to a claim.

It is not a shinpad. Much like if I were to cut a 4" hole in the top of my motorcycle helmet for improved airflow it is no longer a motorcycle helmet

 

[RustyRef]

I disagree.

If a shinpad has been manufactured to a particular size, I think a referee is justified in finding it is no longer the same item if has been altered in a significant way.

I'm certain that is what the manufacturer would say in answer to a claim.

It is not a shinpad. Much like if I were to cut a 4" hole in the top of my motorcycle helmet for improved airflow it is no longer a motorcycle helmet

I agree in principle, but the laws don't support that view. There is absolutely no requirement for what size the shin pads need to be, all that law says is they need to be of a suitable material.