MLS on Jomboy is how you know the league has made it A really this video drew my attention to the whole sequence on the winning goal. Availed just falls over from a cramp or something in the middle of he penalty area. Also, notice how he grabs his head to try to fool the referee into thinking it was a head injury? I’m surprised we don’t see more of that faking given that apparent head injuries are an immediate stoppage, it puts referees in a tough spot where they have to be aware of if the head injury is real or not. In this case, excellent work by Szpala and crew to play on and not take the bait.
We do see it fairly often. It should be a send-off offense but never will be. It is not only cheating, but it endangers the well-being of others who are legitimately suffering from a head injury as referees will not be as quick to blow the whistle.
See what? Like, truly, what are you talking about? This player goes down WELL before there's a dangerous attacking opportunity or OGSO. Had play been stopped, the ball would have gone back right to Atlanta in the exact same position they had it. What do you think is actually going on here? I can't even begin to wrap my head around the thought process that leads you to this conclusion. The player in question was substituted out immediately after the goal. He had an actual health issue. The player looks dizzy and wobbly on his feet before he collapses. There's a scenario where he's just grabbing his head because he has a headache or feels dehydrated or something similar. Sure, there's a scenario where he is faking something to get play stopped immediately, too. But there's also a scenario where this is a cardiac event and every second counts. Arguing that this is inherently "cheating" and should be a "send off" is mind-blowing to me. Again, he substituted off immediately after this. To @StarTime's initial point/post, yes, this is a very fraught issue and I am surprised that you don't this things similar to it a little more. The player's laboring prior to collapse (and while there is no real dangerous opportunity) makes me think the initial affliction or issue is genuine (and the subsequent substitution seems to confirm it). But then the grabbing of the head raises questions of if/when to stop play that are going to be a challenge for any referee because the repercussions of being wrong are really bad on either end. Either you stop play prematurely to take away a goal-scoring chance or you don't stop play and it's a serious issue that put player health at risk. No good answer on these. Luckily, it all seemed to work out here.
The question was about seeing it more often and what the penalty should be. I was addressing the generality rather than the play before us. Yes, we are seeing players grab their head when they don't have a head injury more often than before the directive, Yes, it should be given the harshest punishment available but that will never happen because even though there are send-off laws, the powers that be discourage their use so they aren't going to add another. It should be punished harshly because it is both cheating and makes actual head injuries questionable. I never mentioned this particular player.
That is one of the big issues with having a game that has relatively few stoppages. You have to really judge whether or not it’s worth stopping play. It isn’t like football with constant injuries but you can stop after every play. It’s really tough that referees have to be put in this position, determining whether or not an injury is “worth” stopping play for. This guy wobbly and stumbling around then going down could be an indicator of a more serious problem, but was ignored. Holding his head if he’s trying to “fake” a head injury to force the referee to stop play sucks. But you could just have this guy wobble and stumble around, then collapse frozen on his back like damar Hamlin did to fake a potential heart attack as well.
No one asked that question, but I've learned a long time ago that facts aren't going to matter here. Because that makes perfect sense.
Also, there's what I think is the reality here that if a player does need to go down from a non-contact injury or affliction, it might just be a quasi-natural reaction to hold or cradle your head. You are sitting by yourself on the floor of a stadium with 20,000+ people watching. There is an instinct, I think, to do something with your hands and not just lay there. Again, maybe out of dehydration or a headache, you do it almost out of reflexive necessity. But there's also a natural "what the hell just happened and how did I end up like this?" situation where you put your hands on your head like people do in a variety of other everyday scenarios where they face adversity or disappointment. Not everything is gamesmanship. Which is sort of the point here.
I agree, I’m more just complaining about the position we have to be put into as soccer referees. I don’t believe that most non-head injuries would be gamesmanship or anything like that. But I think seeing this guy wobbling and stumbling around for 10 seconds then falling into his back is distressing enough to be worth stopping play, but because of the location on the field and game situation, we just have to accept that since this isn’t a head injury, it “isn’t worth” stopping for as you have a guy lying on his back in the penalty area with play around him.
It is worth the historical reminder here that until recently, games were not stopped by the referee for injuries at all. Teams were expected to make their own decisions about when to stop, and opponents could kick the ball out if they wanted to. Of course, this led to gamesmanship, and in this game, the shenanigans in the previous goal are going to make it unlikely ATL would kick the ball out. Ultimately refs now have a bit more expectation for them to make the decisions on this kind of thing, and they are required to stop for head injuries. But I'd just say that in a situation like the ATL/MIA game above, it is not really the referee that is in a bad situation, but the team w the injured player. The expectation has to be on the team to recognize their own injured player and cover for him. They failed to do that, and instead had some hand waving and half hearted pleas for the offense to kill the play, but ultimately it is on the players, not the referee, and in as much as any players were banking of the referee to kill the play, they were wrong and paid for it with their season. The expectation has to be on a 10 or 9 to come back and cover. As long as that expectation remains, the incentive for gamesmanship on injuries is going to be smaller than maybe we'd expect.
I’m looking at it more from a human POV than a sporting POV. Szpala did nothing wrong per the laws and I know it’s the teams fault for not “covering” for their downed player and expecting a stoppage. But seeing a player hobbling and stumbling around for 10 seconds then lying down on his back and the sport expecting you just leave him there isn’t a good look
That’s a bit misleading. The LOTG has long directed the R to stop play for serious injuries. What changed was official disfavor on the courtesy kick outs and more of a softening on when Rs should recognize that an injury is serious.
Yeah, I agree I overstated it. But at the same time, the law does require referees to allow play to continue if a player is "slightly" injured. Of course there is going to be grey area between "slightly" and "seriously" as even in English those two words don't cover all possibilities (in fact most injuries probably fall in between those two). General guidance to the officials pairs it with a players ability to make it to the sideline. Ability to make it to the sideline means it is "slight," and of course that is general, and exceptions include head injuries. My point is that this is on the team to understand and respond. Obviously the scale will tip depending on age/level of play. What is a "slight" injury in MLS regular season would be serious in U12, and what is a serious injury in regular season might be "slight" injury in game 3 of a play off series, 2-2, 75th minute especially when that same player just jogged back 40 yards before going down. I'm not saying he was faking it or trying gamesmanship or anything like that... no way. The dude was injured for sure. But in that game situation, given the time and score and the fact he was mobile a second ago, there is no way the ref should stop play.
The courtesy kickout died because teams were abusing it. A player gets beat in midfield which could lead to an attack and the defender falls to the ground expecting the ball to be kicked out. I remember Italy abusing this back in the 2006 WC to the extent that their opponents stopped kicking it out and there being some pretty heated arguments on the field. That was the first time I really saw the abuse to a large extent.