A&H

Micro shin pads

CA1992 said:
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.
Click to expand...
If you look beyond the FA laws and look at actual UK Law then shinpads for football are classed as a cat2 piece of PPE. This means that they require CE Mark standard EN 13061 to be awarded by a Government-appointed independent organisation, and to sell/distribute a product that fails to conform to these regulations (when a regulation exists) is illegal. I believe this is why you don’t see any of the main retailers selling these micro shinpads. They know it would be illegal. Any retailer that does is committing an offence and can be prosecuted.
As such as referees you are well placed to report these instances to Trading Standards and/or the HSE. If you can provide examples of when injuries have occurred as a result of these products not providing adequate protection, then it would make the actual UK authorities such as HSE take note and take action to stop their sale in the UK.
 
A&H International
It's the same with all of these things. The authorities will wait until somebody is seriously injured before action is taken. We all know it's a matter of time !!
 
I am genuinely puzzled why this change was introduced. It sneaked into the glossary first. 'Sneaked' because no reasons are given for glossary changes. Then it got into the main law because it's already in the glossary.

Laws of the game refer to safety measures numerous times and in all cases enforcing them is put on referees explicitly, implicitly or through common understanding. Clearly having shinguards is a safely measure. If "players being responsible" means referees are not required to enforce it, this would be the only on-field safety measure referees are not required to enforce.

It's kind of like seat belts being compulsory and you must wear them, but you are responsible for choosing the material and police will allow shoe strings in place of seat belts.
 
Baffles me to be honest why so many referees are concerned by this. Nothing really has changed as law has never specified what size they should be, and if players at open age levels are stupid enough to wear really tiny ones, why should we be concerned? It's not likely to hurt us and it's not likely to hurt another player. They're the only reasons why I would be concerned.
 
RefereeX said:
Baffles me to be honest why so many referees are concerned by this. Nothing really has changed as law has never specified what size they should be, and if players at open age levels are stupid enough to wear really tiny ones, why should we be concerned? It's not likely to hurt us and it's not likely to hurt another player. They're the only reasons why I would be concerned.
Click to expand...
Personally, I don't like seeing players (particularly youngsters) getting hurt whilst playing the beautiful game. I've seen two broken legs since I began at U9's (i'm now in my 50's) and it's a horrible sight. If you're ok with that, then you're a different type of person to me
 
BCMilan said:
Personally, I don't like seeing players (particularly youngsters) getting hurt whilst playing the beautiful game. I've seen two broken legs since I began at U9's (i'm now in my 50's) and it's a horrible sight. If you're ok with that, then you're a different type of person to me
Click to expand...
I don't like seeing players get injured either, but I turn up to referee the match, not to act as safety officer. Certain aspects of player safety are under my control, fortunately, this is one that isn't.
If it's a child, then perhaps a different story, but in open aged football people are old enough to make responsible decisions themselves, if they choose not to I don't think it's upon me to tell them otherwise. Some people will only learn once they get hurt.
 
RefereeX said:
Baffles me to be honest why so many referees are concerned by this. Nothing really has changed as law has never specified what size they should be, and if players at open age levels are stupid enough to wear really tiny ones, why should we be concerned? It's not likely to hurt us and it's not likely to hurt another player. They're the only reasons why I would be concerned.
Click to expand...
Why were snoods banned? Why can't they wear flat wedding bands lotgfully?

Law did not specify size but it did specify "provide reasonable degree of protection" which pretty much ruled out micro shin pads. Even now the size is referenced in law. For obvious reasons the can't/shouldn't mandate measurements.

BTW, I think I just invented a new referee term 😄
 
one said:
Why were snoods banned? Why can't they wear flat wedding bands lotgfully?

Law did not specify size but it did specify "provide reasonable degree of protection" which pretty much ruled out micro shin pads. Even now the size is referenced in law. For obvious reasons the can't/shouldn't mandate measurements.

BTW, I think I just invented a new referee term 😄
Click to expand...

You've omitted the part that says 'made of a material that provides a reasonable degree of protection' which clearly doesn't relate to size.

Edit to add: I do like your new term though!
 
Last edited:
one said:
Why were snoods banned? Why can't they wear flat wedding bands lotgfully?

Law did not specify size but it did specify "provide reasonable degree of protection" which pretty much ruled out micro shin pads. Even now the size is referenced in law. For obvious reasons the can't/shouldn't mandate measurements.

BTW, I think I just invented a new referee term 😄
Click to expand...
They couldnt mandate a specific size as in length width, but they could mandate a minimum coverage such as percentage of shin to be covered or minimum distance between guard and knee/ankle.

Much has been done to make football safer in terms of education around what is and isn't a red card.
BCMilan said:
Personally, I don't like seeing players (particularly youngsters) getting hurt whilst playing the beautiful game. I've seen two broken legs since I began at U9's (i'm now in my 50's) and it's a horrible sight. If you're ok with that, then you're a different type of person to me
Click to expand...
I'd be interested if those two broken legs would have been avoided had a different shin guard been worn?

No one is "ok with that" but it's also not lotgfully (😁) our problem. Adults have to make their own responsible decisions, and where the players are youth then I'm afraid those decisions are the responsibility of the parent.
 
JamesL said:
They couldnt mandate a specific size as in length width, but they could mandate a minimum coverage such as percentage of shin to be covered or minimum distance between guard and knee/ankle.

Much has been done to make football safer in terms of education around what is and isn't a red card.

I'd be interested if those two broken legs would have been avoided had a different shin guard been worn?

No one is "ok with that" but it's also not lotgfully (😁) our problem. Adults have to make their own responsible decisions, and where the players are youth then I'm afraid those decisions are the responsibility of the parent.
Click to expand...
They were a long time ago now. One was a pure accident (twist), but I dread to think how bad the other would have been if he was wearing one of these micro ones (striker clean through on goal and the keeper rushed out and caught him at full pace). Apologies for the "ok with that" remark. But, when you've seen it happen you'd like to think the powers that be would tighten up on the laws.
 
Lc77 said:
If you look beyond the FA laws and look at actual UK Law then shinpads for football are classed as a cat2 piece of PPE. This means that they require CE Mark standard EN 13061 to be awarded by a Government-appointed independent organisation, and to sell/distribute a product that fails to conform to these regulations (when a regulation exists) is illegal. I believe this is why you don’t see any of the main retailers selling these micro shinpads. They know it would be illegal. Any retailer that does is committing an offence and can be prosecuted.
As such as referees you are well placed to report these instances to Trading Standards and/or the HSE. If you can provide examples of when injuries have occurred as a result of these products not providing adequate protection, then it would make the actual UK authorities such as HSE take note and take action to stop their sale in the UK.
Click to expand...
Great post. I am going to ask my higher ups about this. I live in a country where I think this info (the CE mark) would get used;)
 
The two worst leg breaks I have seen have been where players were wearing traditional large shin pads. The biggest risk for a leg break is a tackle coming in from the side, and no shin pad, no matter how big, is going to help with that. Think probably the worst one of all time, Dave Buust for Coventry against Man Utd, no protection is saving him there.

Short of mandating full body armour there will always be risk. I knew the referee who was on the game where a keeper came out to challenge an attacker and the ambulance crew had to scoop his testicle from the pitch following the challenge. Should it be argued that keepers should wear cricket boxes as that risk is clearly there? If players want to wear mini shin pads let them get on with it, it really isn't a refereeing issue.
 
RustyRef said:
If players want to wear mini shin pads let them get on with it, it really isn't a refereeing issue.
Click to expand...
I don’t 100% agree because it increases the number of injuries for non-reckless tackles and then you get players doing the whole “look at my leg, is that not a yellow” spiel even more. Just makes our lives harder for no reason or trade off benefit.
 
I had the unfortunate experience of falling down a manhole beside an AstroTurf once where the corner of the cover slice through my leg.

Thankfully I was wearing proper shin guards as they actually stopped a far worse injury and infection if I wore tiny ones...
 
RustyRef said:
The two worst leg breaks I have seen have been where players were wearing traditional large shin pads. The biggest risk for a leg break is a tackle coming in from the side, and no shin pad, no matter how big, is going to help with that. Think probably the worst one of all time, Dave Buust for Coventry against Man Utd, no protection is saving him there.

Short of mandating full body armour there will always be risk. I knew the referee who was on the game where a keeper came out to challenge an attacker and the ambulance crew had to scoop his testicle from the pitch following the challenge. Should it be argued that keepers should wear cricket boxes as that risk is clearly there? If players want to wear mini shin pads let them get on with it, it really isn't a refereeing issue.
Click to expand...
I was a GK for years and have been a WK for even longer. Never hesitate to wear a box keeping wicket but never once thought of using one in goal, despite countless balls/boots into the nether regions. I think this is a cracking idea and am going to suggest my 12yo - who also keeps wicket - starts wearing one in goal.
 
The Gump said:
I was a GK for years and have been a WK for even longer. Never hesitate to wear a box keeping wicket but never once thought of using one in goal, despite countless balls/boots into the nether regions. I think this is a cracking idea and am going to suggest my 12yo - who also keeps wicket - starts wearing one in goal.
Click to expand...
Having been on the receiving end of many cricket balls in that region, it definitely does save lives 🤣

Would it be that effective though against a much larger ball?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top