Question Number: 25821

Law 5 - The Referee 12/7/2011

RE: Ref Under 13

Doug B of Irvine, Ca USA asks...

This question is a follow up to question 25806

I think it's a matter of 'hurt' vs 'injured.'

Hurt would be taking a hard tumble during the challenge, or getting a ball in the gut or face, stunning a player for a good 5 to 15 seconds. The player will recover and be back in play in no time.

Sometimes a goal is scored during this time, either for the hurt player's team, or against it.

If a goalkeeper is the one that appears to be hurt, and the referee feels it will be a quick (5 or 10 second) recovery, should that be treated the same?

Does it make a difference if there is threat on goal?

In other words, if the goalkeeper got a slow ball to the face, stunned for a few seconds, but the referee feels it's minor, and there is a shot on goal, how is that viewed?

Is that a case of 'tough luck' or 'should have stopped play for injury?'

Thanks as always for sharing your ideas and experience.

I

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Doug B
In the case of goalkeepers I always feel that 'fair play' also has to be taken into account. If the goalkeeper is 'down' injured that puts the team at a clear disadvantage. Okay there will be times when the play just happens immediately after the incident and the referee does not have the time to react and the outcome must be accepted.
However in other situations in my opinion the 'best' decision can be to stop play and deal with the situation.
The link here shows an incident that happened a few years ago in a PL game. You will note that the referee did not stop play yet Di Canio felt it was the correct thing to do. He won a FIFA Fair play award for this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bS1LuSiRrLI
Perhaps if the Referee had stopped play he might have been berated for it by the attacking team in such an advantageous position so many refs decide to see out the play. Its up to the referee to decide based on the circumstances. At underage player safety is paramount.

Answer provided by Referee Gary Voshol

Just because the goalkeeper is down, the referee doesn't have to stop play. Else, keepers would go down every time the ball came toward the net.

The referee has to believe that there is some form of injury to stop play. In the case of the goalkeeper we might be just a little bit faster in making that determination. But it has to be more than just 'Player down!' For example, a ball in the gut might cause the keeper to stumble or fall and be temporarily short of breath. But that's not an injury.

Answer provided by Referee Keith Contarino

If the keeper is knocked silly for 5-15 seconds such that he cannot participate, that's a serious injury in my opinion. Problem is, if you wait 15 seconds with no keeper in play, there's liable to be a goal scored. So, in answer to one of your questions, yes, most of us treat the keeper a bit differently in the interest of Fair Play