Question Number: 32841

Law 12 - Fouls and Misconduct 10/26/2018

RE: rec Adult

gary of nashua, nh usa asks...

This question is a follow up to question 32788

In context, the goal was score about two seconds after the defender charged the attacker. So, I could not tell there was blood while play was on. Also, the attacker had the ball at feet and was continually going to goal, So the likelihood of him being able to strike a defender with good force was very low.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Gary
Thanks for the clarification.
Obviously a blood injury requires a stoppage and as there was a goal scored within 2 seconds of the contact that easily meant that the player could get immediate treatment.
Just to be clear a player with the ball moving towards can easily strike or injure an opponent. In a recent EPL game a player raised his hand into an opponents face and his finger went into his eye. It was missed by the match officials yet replays showed the potential for a serious injury.
Obviously in your case you viewed it that the defender was the guilty party and so be it.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

HI Gary,
you can only call what you see. While it is good to get a clear view to make a clear decision you get the view you get. All the experience , training and evaluative methods only apply to what you see! Look at this idiot!

https://ca.video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?fr=yhs-iry-fullyhosted_003&hsimp=yhs-fullyhosted_003&hspart=iry&p=youtyube+soccr+players+punches+himself#id=1&vid=9bd2f7eda9c92ed59cd6e12000cd16fc&action=click

Cheers