Will we ever see a provision added to the LotG which reads something like: At the discretion of the referee, a player must leave the playing field for the sole purpose of evaluation of a potential head injury and be temporarily replaced by a substitute. - If, within 5 minutes of exiting the playing field, said player, having passed the evaluation, returns to the playing field with the referee's permission, the temporary substitute shall leave the playing field and not be counted against the team's substitute player allotment. - If, after 5 minutes of exiting the playing field, said player, does not return to the playing field or fails the evaluation, he will be deemed to have been substituted, the temporary substitute shall remain on the playing field and be counted against the team's substituted player allotment. The wording is not perfect, but do you think we will eventually see a provision for handling head injury evaluations that both gives sufficient time for an evaluation and does not penalize a team for making such an evaluation? Would you be supportive of such a provision?
It's a tough one, because then everyone would simply use this as an excuse to give their star players a break late in the game. As a referee, I'm never going to argue with a coach if he says the player is coming off to evaluate a head injury, even if I'm 99.99% sure he's faking it, because I'm not a doctor and I don't want that liability on my shoulders. Now, it would then become a question of whether or not this potential problem would be worth protecting the long-term health of the players.
I think we will see something. I think the US is ahead of the rest of the world because of the NFL when it comes to concussions. I suspect within a decade something will happen though.
Something has to be done about head injuries. I'm not sure your solution works as sjquakes points out, but I'm not sure I know the right answer either. What if the team is already out of subs when the player goes off to be evaluated? Also, from listening to Taylor Twellman, he says its more like 10 minutes. I think at a minimum 15-20 minutes is more reasonable. There is no need to rush an eval like this. As I've seen in other threads, I think the best solution is a medical official, who is impartial to both teams. He decides when a player needs to be evaluated and sends them to the "Quiet room". In hockey, thats a minimum of 15 minutes. Player stays there until cleared. Just some ideas to throw out there. Like I said, I've had a few days to think about this and I have no idea what the best solution is.
I think two things have to happen. First the rest of the world needs to catch up with the US on the significance of concussions. Second, I think the game has to make some accommodation for injury substitutes in excess of of the standard 3. One possibility would be that for each player in excess of 3 replaced in a game, one of those replaced players would be ineligible to play in the next game. That would help keep the teams honest about only replacing actually injured players.
Something does need to happen, however at levels such as the WC, there's no way you can put this on the referee because cries of favoritism would happen. At youth levels, I've had it explained to me like this: - referee decides if a player is "hurt" and needs to be looked at. - Player comes back in, referee can look at him, ask him a question and decide he needs to be evaluated again - wash, rinse, repeat until player stays out Not sure how well that would work in reality, but long term effects of concussion are becoming more known. Another path this MIGHT head down is head gear. Hockey used to now use it. As a youth I always needed a helmet, but not a face mask or mouth guard. When I wrapped up my hockey career in high school, you had to have a helmet, full face mask and internal mouth guard. I see soccer heading down that path more than a medical path.
This is what I posted in another thread. Similar to what Sport Billy suggested. I really believe that FIFA will be forced to address this situation. I also agree with code1390 that the US will take the lead. At this level, easy enough to have a 5th official (medical) with the 4th. He is in charge of examining any player with head injury and determines if said player can continue. Team free to sub for player (takes 7-10 minutes to properly determine extent of head injury) and does not count against 3. If player can't continue, sub stays on with no sub counted. If player is cleared, he exchanges places with his 'replacement'. Concussions/Head Injuries are very different than other injuries. One time, a player will stay on too long and get seriously (long term) injured or killed. Many studies have shown that people are much more susceptible to further injuries after the first concussion if it isn't dealt with properly. As far as teams 'cheating' with this issue, I don't see how it would realistically benefit a team to do so. If they want to rest a player, there is nothing in the laws that says he can't ask to leave the pitch, sit on the sideline for 'treatment', and then ask to come back in any time. Secondly, it is readily noticeable if a player who hasn't had any head contact in quite some time suddenly comes down with one. There are specific physical items that doctors look for regarding concussions that would be almost impossible to fake. Even if a team is able to cheat it once in a while, it is much better than some of the stories coming out now about the German player not remembering anything after his injury in the WC Final. Great thread, SB. This is a very serious issue (while leg injuries suck, they aren't life threatening).
I don't think it will be a referee issue if FIFA addresses it. If FIFA addresses it, I think it will be in ROC for international play and in encouraging competition authorities to adopt appropriate provisions in the ROC for their competition. For international/professional games, I would expect the development of either neutral doctors or established protocols. If the NFL can put in protocols that keep concussed players off the field, so can soccer.
Exactly. If this happens, I believe this is the way it will go down. FIFA and the IFAB are not going down the path of allowing conditional or additional substitutions or otherwise tinkering with the Laws on this. It's too much of a slippery slope. It is open to manipulation and it puts referees in potentially impossible situations. I'd also add that domestic leagues might be the driving force behind this. How did we get magic spray at the international level? Years of use in CONMEBOL and then MLS. You could see the same with concussion protocols. I wouldn't be surprised if one or more major or mid-major domestic leagues adopt concussion policies before the next World Cup. A successful and working policy could then form the template for implementation in 2018, which could then lead to more universal application thereafter.
See, but I hate this. As a referee, I absolutely do not want ANY kind of expectation that I should be evaluating injuries. I'm not a doctor, I don't know the kids, their parents don't know me, and I already have enough stuff to worry about. Once it becomes the norm that coaches rely on referees to tell them when the kids have had a head injury, the first time a kid dies because he continues playing after receiving one, people are going to look at the referee when they start pointing fingers. My policy as a referee is to always let the coach know if I see a player get hit in the head, in case they didn't see it. I'll usually say something along the lines of "it'd probably be pretty smart to get that checked out". But unless the player is wobbling, I'm going to leave the diagnostics to the coach beyond that.
100% agree, but what about "that coach" who the kid goes down wobbling, goes off, 3 minutes later he's back on, because he's the goal scorer and after all this is the end of the world game for this U13B div 5 team. You mention "wow, how's the head" and he answers something like "fine, but it's a great day to be at the beach, I might go swimming" as his eyes roll around clearly not focused. Now what? That's the scenario I am concerned about.
Maybe my sample size is too small on this, but I have to say that I've never had a youth coach not be cooperative when a potential head injury was suspected / identified. I do the youth circuit in Colorado, ranging from U9 to U19, from rec to high-level college showcase / State Cup / ECNL / DA. I am sure there are coaches out there that won't cooperate and that some of you have had experiences that don't match with mine; in reffing for the last 15 years, I do not recall a single coach not responding positively when I said, "Coach, let's make sure his/her head is
Isn't there some policy in NFHS for high school soccer about players with concussion symptoms not playing for the rest of the day?
I don't have my book, but concussions have been a major point of emphasis in HS. If a player has a potential head injury, the referee should stop the clock and have him subbed out. He can not sub back in until checked out by health professional. Most bigger schools have a certified athletic trainer assigned to soccer games.
Agree with MrPerfect. In my organization, all head coaches are now all required to read the literature about concussions and follow the standard protocol (mostly means that any head injury requires player to sit out rest of game at minimum). I was very lucky that I had a girl join at U-10 who's parents were both doctors. Her mom was one of my 'STARS' (got Ref training) and was very involved in concussion diagnosis/treatment very early on. Any player who even had an inkling of head/brain trauma (even over-heating) went to see Dr. Liz and would not be able to play until she gave the OK. /Quick Story: Playing in a tournament in PA w/GU-15. Top player from other team collided head to head with one of my players (no foul, just hard play). Both down on field. She went out to look at both of them and would not let other coach move player, even though he was very vocal she was OK and ready to play. Dr. Liz called over CR, explained both needed backboards due to serious (possible) injuries, and would not leave until medical help arrived (from her view, both appeared to lose consciousness for a bit - turned out my player didn't, but I don't mind the extra safety). Both players left in Ambulance and to hospital. Turned out our player had minor concussion (grade 1), other player had Grade 2-3 level concussion (diagnosed at hospital). She stayed overnight. I know that because her parents sent me/Dr. Liz a long letter, thanking her for not putting her daughter at more risk. If this girl had been allowed to play - she was up and talking when Ref got there - she could have suffered long-term injuries. I am very mindful of these injuries as my 20 year old son got a pretty bad one last Fall playing Hockey. He was out for 4 months. Head injuries are NOTHING to treat lightly./end Quick Story
It is pretty amazing that we whistle for fouls when one player gets the ball cleanly and another arrives late and kicks the player. Yet, there is rarely if ever a foul call on a player who arrives late to a header and only contacts the opposing player, who has won the ball. We never call fouls on clash of heads. We hear announcers say he only had eyes for the ball. So, what? He was always going to be late and maybe in the long run the answer is we have to start calling fouls against a players HEAD. You know there are rarely 50/50 balls, right? Usually, one player is going to win it. Most of the time a clash of heads is someone's fault, but yet we don't whistle or currently think of it that way. Maybe, that's a start. A foul by a player against an opponents head by being late or short or whatever to a header is as serious a foul as one to the legs. Yes, coaches want their players to attack and be aggressive but if they can't tine it or win it without bashing their opponent in the head, what good is their aggressiveness? We whistle when a payer gets kicked, but a head pop goes unpunished. Why?
The only conclusion I can reach is that since both players have left their feet and no longer in "much" control.... who do we call it on? Most of time it is very difficult.
Yes, and that's the point! But, one of the players is probably committing a foul! Yet, because he jumped to head the ball we are letting this "foul" slide. Why?
I hear what you are asking. If one player jumps straight up and the other jump into them, we call the foul on number 2 because player number 1 has position. My point was, sometimes it is very difficult in this fast paced game of ours to determine that. Plus, there may be many shades of grey depending on the level and age of players.
But we don't do that when someone kicks someone, do we? We call fouls. But, with regard to a clash of heads, no fouls are called. The guy who heads the ball away should get the free kick if his head was hit by the other guy. But that call is never made.
Not every collision is foul. But I think you are right that we need to be aware of the late player and concious of fouls in aerial combat -- including the late challenge, coming in carelessly/recklessly against a stationary opponent with position, undercutting a jumper, or going over the top of an opponent.
I understand what you're getting at, but most of the time in actual clash of heads situations, the late-arriving player is the one who suffers the injury. Or the more serious injury. No, that doesn't really speak to the technical nature of whether there was a foul (I guess you'd be at carelessly jumps at or carelessly striking, right?). But if this discussion is emanating from a concern about player safety, it does feel a little weird that one of the potential remedies is to punish the player that--for all intents and purposes--accidentally injures himself. Oh, and I would quibble with the use of "never" here. If a player truly does jump at his opponent who has position on a header and is late, I'm calling the foul most of the time if there ends up being serious physical contact--whether it's with the head or just the upper body in general. But if you're advocating non-deliberate head-to-head contact on an otherwise fairly contested header as some sort of striking foul, I agree that doesn't get called. And starting to do so would be completely out of whack with player expectations.
But, in the current climate of concussion related injuries, shouldn't the players take a less risky approach to that contested header? I don't remember seeing as many head clashes on the professional level than the last couple of years. Maybe, like the challenge from behind, this has to be somehow eliminated. I don't think anyone is going into a header looking to bash himself up against an opponent, but if caution is allowed to be thrown to the wind, why wouldn't they go in full tilt? A good many of the bashes to the head seem to be because the bashee is late and won't win it. So, should we treat the air like we treat the ground, I guess is my question.
Yes, I agree. But most of the collisions on the ground ARE fouls especially if you don't win the ball! I think we, as players, coaches, and referees look at headed collisions as a risky part of the game instead of what it has become, very dangerous. Athleticism plays a major part in this. Think of 10 years ago. As many head injuries from open play? Probably not. Strikers and defenders are taller, stronger, faster with better leaping ability.