A&H

My game today

Oh here we go now, squaddies have a game now on the claim fo their compensation. Get a biff chit from the duty medic, have some free light duties for a couple of months and never pass a PFT again due to injury, then get their medical discharge and compo for something that could have ben their fault.

Here's the worlds smallest violin playing especially for him.......

Just to caveapt that before someone tries to send 2RGR after me - takes ones to know one!
 
The Referee Store
sorry I should have said earlier. It was an army game, we have what called army compensation scheme so he will be going for compo not to sue me.

I hope this game was on either the company detail or part one orders along with a list of players.

If not he may be disappointed.
 
Interesting yes, but I'm not sure how relevant it is unless you're refereeing in the US which, from what I can tell, that is not the case for majority of the contributors on here.

More relevant perhaps to a larger number of posters to this forum would be something like the following:
https://www.harpermacleod.co.uk/hm-...law-look-at-negligence-in-the-sporting-world/
https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=2Ep-AgAAQBAJ&dq=sports+fears+after+referee+decision

One phrase that stands out for me in looking at various cases mentioned in these sources is the following from Court of Appeal judge Lord Phillips MR which I think is relevant to the idea that FIFA Law 5 would somehow protect a football referee:
the law rarely if ever, absolves from a duty of care a person whose actions or omissions were capable of causing physical harm to others in a structured relationship into which they had entered....
While this was referring to a case involving a rugby referee (who was successfully sued by a player who sustained an injury during a match) if a rugby ref has a duty of care which leaves him liable in case of a breach of that duty of care, I'm pretty sure the same would be true for a football referee.

Having said that, in the two most high profile cases of rugby referees being successfully sued over player injuries, the referees involved were sued over refereeing decisions taken whilst play was stopped and because they had failed to enforce rules specifically intended to protect players taking part in a scrum. Football does not have comparable rules and most of the law articles I have read state that it would be very unlikely that a referee could be successfully sued over an injury sustained in a clash between players during open play, as described in the OP.
 
What about that old chestnut of a slightly frozen pitch, 90% want to play, a few are up in arms that it's unsafe. I've had it thrown at me a few times that if something happens I'm responsible! Blah, blah blah. Now, I'm not an expert on grass or ice physics but without any specific training that I can remember we are asked to make a very important judgement call... Tough one at times....
 
What about that old chestnut of a slightly frozen pitch, 90% want to play, a few are up in arms that it's unsafe. I've had it thrown at me a few times that if something happens I'm responsible! Blah, blah blah. Now, I'm not an expert on grass or ice physics but without any specific training that I can remember we are asked to make a very important judgement call... Tough one at times....

And believe it or not you've actually hit the nail on the head there...

'I'm not an expert on grass or ice physics'

So you are expected to make a gut decision based on your limited knowledge of icy football pitches. Should a player be injured (even discounting Law 5) the complainant would need to prove that you knew the pitch was unsafe and played anyway AND that the injury ONLY occurred because of the condition of the pitch - I.e. If it hadn't been in the condition it was the injury would not have occurred.

Oh and just how icy the pitch was at the exact time of the injury, for judge to see for himself.

All neigh-on impossible to do.

Case dismissed!
 
Not being a legal expert, I would expect that whether or not you could be sued would have something to do with whether you've completed your role (responsibility) in good faith. Don't do a pitch inspection and 2 minutes into the game somebody breaks an ankle on a hole in the ground? Or, in the aforementioned icy conditions, don't do any pitch inspection at all?
Of course anything can get tested in court, but I would argue that stating it's impossible for a referee to be held liable for anything would be reckless. However, as long as you've done your job then you've exercised your responsibility within the laws.
Given that no jewellery is permitted on the field, for instance, then I would imagine a referee who has acknowledged jewellery but said he doesn't care about it (and yes, it happens), then have a serious injury occur as a result, could have more to answer to than anything that has been mentioned here. Not saying he could be sued, but I would imagine that Law 5 would only protect the referee insofar as the referee is found to be doing the job. If a lawyer successfully argues that the referee hasn't fulfilled his requirements and/or Law 5 contravenes the law of the land, then there could be a problem.
Basically, do your job and I can't imagine you could face any problems. If, for instance, you're in 2 minds about the condition of a pitch but play it anyway, don't tell people that you're concerned about the safety of the pitch but you know the lads want to play. But of course, that's on par with jesting 'extra time? I don't do that - I make sure there's a penalty!'

I personally would prefer a referee be aware (perhaps incorrectly) of the possibility of legal action if he isn't doing his job, versus a referee (perhaps incorrectly) be told that no matter what he can't be sued.

Because ultimately, stating that a referee couldn't possible be sued is providing legal advice. And is anybody on here capable of providing that advice?
 
The only grey area for me on this subject is where it's kids football. People are happy to find a responsible adult to blame for anything where youngsters are involved and, rightly or wrongly, our Nanny State society seems to support that ethos. For that reason, I'm always water-tight with the basics regarding any youth match I might do ie playing/weather conditions, pitch condition, player's equipment.
With open age football, I'm no legal beagle but adults are responsible for themselves and the physical actions they take during a game of football.
So what if the pitch is a bit slippery!!? Don't make the risky challenge then fella! It ain't rocket science. I'd suggest there's far more chance of an injured footballer successfully claiming against an opponent for an injury than against any referee. There will always be individual exceptions to every case scenario but outside of basic checks as per the LOTG (things like goalposts or perhaps broken glass on the pitch? ) I fail to see how any court/judge/whatever could blame a referee for an injury that occurred during a game of football. :)
 
Well, as I implied above and as Matthew (who sounds like he has some knowledge of this area) stated, it appears that a claim against a referee for negligence in relation to an injury sustained during a game would be very difficult to prove but despite that, the limited amount of reading I have done on this suggests that those who believe that FIFA Law 5 provides some kind of iron-clad legal immunity might (to continue with a wintry theme) be skating on thin ice.
 
Well, as I implied above and as Matthew (who sounds like he has some knowledge of this area) stated, it appears that a claim against a referee for negligence in relation to an injury sustained during a game would be very difficult to prove but despite that, the limited amount of reading I have done on this suggests that those who believe that FIFA Law 5 provides some kind of iron-clad legal immunity might (to continue with a wintry theme) be skating on thin ice.

You'd be spot on in that assumption.

Law 5 is by no means a blanket protection for referees. As I stated above, anything that even attempts to exclude negligence will be void if considered in a court of law; in theory, a referee CAN be sued for negligence. Proving that negligence, however, would IMO be virtually impossible.
 
Just to come at this discussion from a different angle, I have some familiarity with the problems that exist in this area. A few years ago a young player I know sustained what were nearly life-changing facial injuries, as an opponent was accused by the family of deliberately stamping on him during play. This was supported with claims that the player had threatened the boy earlier in the match. However, the factors of the boy's age, the refusal of the offending club to talk to the police and let them interview the player (the police didn't have a warrant to insist in this case), and county obfuscation around the referee (who had not conducted a mandatory stud-check before kick-off) all conspired to kill any judicial process in the egg. It's not exactly an equivalent situation, but I think the idea that anybody could successfully administer legal action over a football match is fairly unlikely.
 
Last edited:
I am aware of a recent case where a case was brought against the provider of the facility where a game was played, the company responsible for maintaining the surface, the County FA (representing The FA) and the referee. The allegation was negligence as there was no proof that the referee had conducted a pre-match field inspection, yet the judge ruled on the first day that the County FA and referee had no case to answer and responsibility lay with the first two named parties AND that the player had some culpability in the case.
 
I am aware of a recent case where a case was brought against the provider of the facility where a game was played, the company responsible for maintaining the surface, the County FA (representing The FA) and the referee. The allegation was negligence as there was no proof that the referee had conducted a pre-match field inspection, yet the judge ruled on the first day that the County FA and referee had no case to answer and responsibility lay with the first two named parties AND that the player had some culpability in the case.

To clarify: the case was an injury to a player, the claimant alledging the surface was unfit to play?

Do you know the end result?
 
basic checks as per the LOTG (things like goalposts or perhaps broken glass on the pitch? )
Is checking for broken glass on the pitch the duty of the referee?
That's an interesting one.
Is the condition of a goalpost the duty of the referee - if it snaps and impales someone after contact?
Hmm
(Surely these are the responsibility of the home team and impossible for a referee to assess and control?)
 
Is checking for broken glass on the pitch the duty of the referee?
That's an interesting one.
Is the condition of a goalpost the duty of the referee - if it snaps and impales someone after contact?
Hmm
(Surely these are the responsibility of the home team and impossible for a referee to assess and control?)
Funny you should mention that as I prepare for Day One of the FA Course for New Referees I'm leading on Saturday. This is Lesson 5. We try to replicate the things that will be found during the Pre-Match FOP inspection. You'll see bottles are mentioned.
upload_2016-5-31_20-1-59.png
 
Back
Top