Question Number: 14482

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 11/20/2006

Gil Acedo of Pasadena, CA USA asks...

This question is a follow up to question 14459

Re: question #14459

In reading the original question I could not find anything that referred to the players' ages, but all responses make me think they are U9 or U10.

Our #1 priority, even before properly applying the LOTG, is to protect the safety of the players, though proper application usually serves to protect the players.



First, this may not be as simple as it seems. What if:

The sequence of play developed so quickly that the ball entered the goal before the 1-2 seconds that even the most compassionate and safety-conscious referee needs to evaluate the situation and make the decision to stop play. The ball could be in the goal even before the referee realizes that the player is injured, seriously or not. The ball could have rebounded off of the GK's face directly to the feet of the oncoming attacker and a quick touch could have put the ball into the goal before any one could react, including the referee. I may be inclined to allow the goal and then tend to the injured GK, or at least waving the coach onto the field.

If the play were slower to develop, say several seconds and a GK, or any player for that matter, was lying face-down and unmoving in the path of play, I would run to the spot as quickly as possible blowing my whistle loudly and shrilly to stop the game and hopefully, protect the prone player. In this game, assuming I decided to stop the game before the goal was scored, no goal.



I find it ironic that the first point mentioned by the concerned parent that the referee should not have allowed the goal and only then that the direction of play was toward his son and could have proven hazardous.

Thank you for the fine job all of you are doing.

Gil Acedo

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

Hi Gil. The questioner said this was U9 Rec which is why I went ballistic and would do so again. This referee said he allowed advantage and allowed play to continue with an 8 or 9 year old prone on the carpet. I find that unacceptable. If what you described happened I'd also allow the goal as it all occurs before I'm blowing my whistle. I was of the opinion that this referee chose to NOT deal with a possibly seriously injured child because someone might be able to score a goal. Again, that is simply not acceptable. Always good to hear from you.

Answer provided by Referee Chuck Fleischer

Gil, we can tell the age of the players if the writer puts the information in the blocks. He did and we came all unpuckered because it just sounded like he didn't care about the flat on his face goalkeeper.

Have been that player before, at about the same age. Came on as a right back in the last 5 minutes for a first cap. Got in the way of a wicked shot and fell asleep right then and there. Next thing I know Mr. Lane is saying "Charles, spit out your teeth". I told him they weren't loose. Then the sucker said "Well then, get up and play on". On a minute then napping for two or three makes for a short match.

Regards,

Answer provided by Referee Ben Mueller

I agree with my colleagues. At this age, stop the game and deal with the injury.

The following questions were asked as a follow up to the above question...

See Question: 14510