I would (and did) stop play before it could become dangerous. And in my case, did a drop ball with a "suggestion" to kick ball back to team that had possession.
Absolutely agree. Either the injury warrants stopping the game or it doesn't. A non-serious injury cannot every create a "no-play zone" that the other team cannot use. The LOTG give the tool to handle injury situations that warrant stopping play. Calling the opponent for PIADM is flat out MSU.
Well I know that it is not piadm in the usual sense, but 1: the laws do not allow for the stoppage of play for minor injury. So making it serious all of a sudden because play approaches doesn’t seem right. The “right” answer is that play continues. And 2: if one takes a literal read of piadm, the verbiage is quite broad, isn’t it? “... any action, that while trying to play the ball, threatens injury to someone...” But, as is with many things, I will take the guidance as given
This is one of those areas that I look at OUTSIDE of the LOTG. From my first ref class - safety safety safety. When in doubt, err on side of keeping players safe. Now I don't want to stop play just because a player is down, but if play would appear to make it possible/likely to threaten safety, then I gotta stop play. Not gonna call PIADM. Just gonna get the player off the field and get the ball back to attacking team.
My personal LOTG give me the authority to stop play at any time for any reason or no reason and, absent something dictating another restart, to restart play with a dropped ball.
Serious is undefined and relative. Age and context matters. If you determine that the injury is serious enough that the player can't get out of a dangerous situation, it's serious enough to warrant stopping play. "and includes preventing a nearby opponent from playing the ball for fear of injury" PIADM is about unfairly disadvantaging an opponent. Besides, if we went withe PIADM theory on this type of play, we'd have a lot of faked injuries--not only is the attack stopped, but the attacker is punished.
ON the PIADM discussion, you have to remember, you do NOT KNOW how serious the injury is, you are making a judgement, so it can, and maybe should, go like this: - Hmmm, player down, I don't think it's serious, we keep playing - Attacker has ball, heading at 'down' player - Hmmmm, down player isn't getting up, even with ball/attack coming their way - Hmmm, maybe it's more serious than I thought --- tweeeet - Coach, come take care of you injured player and get them off the field - Drop ball, creatively worked to get fairness/control established again.
A general point on this topic: Even though you don't stop play, act like you care. I really screwed myself on this earlier this year. Knee to knee contact puts player down. No call. In front of parents at midfield. Attacking takes the ball straight in and scores. Team is howling. Parents are outraged. Somehow I let the uproar keep me from the player. Not good optics. While I obviously cared about the player, I didn't come off that way. So... don't do that.
Good point, but ... how? You mean run to the down player and demonstrate concern after the play is dead?
I will sometimes announce "I see you, I'll come back." while pointing to the player on the ground. Hopefully the AR behind me will then keep an eye on the player (if pregame is extended, I talk about it).
Yes, perhaps. This was exactly what was demonstrated to us at a local referee seminar a few years back. If you are letting play continue, start with some kind of demonstration that you've at least seen the player--point, verbalize, etc. like Dayton Ref mentions--and then sprint over to check on the player when play finally stops. As jayhonk said, sometimes it's more the optics.
But then get out of there when the coach comes out--don't make it an opportunity to whine at you instead of tending to the player.
Speaking of optics, I do not like at all when a referee motions or verbalizes for a player to get up - usually a method for the referee to indicate they have no foul after a player goes down. There is a lot of contact that of course is not a foul, and players may fall with no contact. In any instance they could be injured and telling them to get up or that there is "nothing" when there was "something" can lead to bad feelings as well. Hopefully there is no injury but if there is and you are motioning or telling them to get up - well - it just looks terrible.
Most anything but "get up" - personally I do a sort of safe signal, one or both hands palm down but no big wave back and forth.
Agree. I don't mind the "get up" - much - in a pro game, but I think it's inappropriate in anything south of that.
I think the get up is (or should be) reserved for "stop diving, you're lucky I didn't caution you." I've very rarely used it. As visuals, I don't typically do more than shake my head--I don't feel a need to draw attention to myself, but if someone is looking at me, they can see it. For verbals, I agree about "nothing"--there was something or no one would be looking at you. My preference is "not a foul," and sometimes "clean play" or "keep going." (Of course, avoid "play on" as that should be reserved for advantage.) For arm/hand contact with the ball that is not a foul, I like "not deliberate"--it conveys both that the R saw it and that there is a reason it is not being called.
As an AR, I saw a player go down "easily", on a team known for flopping. The ref saw it and followed play back the other way. As he was the 2LD, I stayed even with him. When his hands came up in a "C'mon ref" gesture, I motioned for him to get up. I could almost hear him thinking: "Oh, that ref that has seen us several times this year didn't get fooled. I guess I'll get up and start playing again."
I need to start saying "not deliberate" for arm/hand ball contact. Last night during my men's game, green shot the ball and the ball hit an orange player's hand that was at his side. Green starts yelling for a "handball," and I say, "Ball played the hand; hand didn't play the ball." Later orange kicked the and I called a green player for handling because he had his arm raised. After I made the call, he said, "But the ball played my hand!"
Yes, but.... That's usually the time that you're going to hear some wild theory that it's still a "handball" if they get an advantage, even if they didn't intend it, or unintentional contact is indirect, etc.
I shy away from "not deliberate" because I may make a call later in the match that *could* also be argued was not deliberate and I don't want to get into a debate about arm position or being able to determine a player's intent during the match. I just say "keep playing".