After celebrating a goal by jumping on a fence, where his ring got caught, a player's finger was taken off when he jumped back down. The referee cautioned him for excessive celebration. http://soccernet.espn.go.com/headlinenews?id=318488&cc=5901 First of all, that's really adding insult to injury (literally). Second of all, why was he wearing the ring to begin with? Does anyone still want to know why we should be making these guys/gals take ALL their jewelry off?
Yahoo has the same story: http://sports.yahoo.com/sow/news?slug=reu-swissfinger&prov=reuters&type=lgns
As a player only, I've never felt that a wedding "band" has ever presented itself as a threat to my well being if an opponent or teammate has one. I think this is a very rare freak accident here with this story. I do recognize, and prefer, that all jewelry be removed as bracelets can seriously mangle fingers. Earings and finger rings with settings or designs (excluding generic wedding bands/hoops) can scratch up faces and arms etc.. I've never seen a necklace damage anyone but the person who had it break and start looking around for the pieces on the ground but I suppose they could; most breakaway very easily unles Mr T is out there with you. I guess some pro players put some tape around them and that's deemed as OK but I don't think even that would've help this poor chap.
Great Avatar. "This could go in Meyer's Face." Anyway, playing in adult leagues for a few years. Only once have we had a referee make the players remove wedding bands. As a goalkeeper, I take mine off all the time for the day when a finger jams or breaks. I could see it being a b1tch trying to remove after the fact.
You cant flip out and make a judgement because of a very obscure accident! I bet more players get broken noses from the ball then from wedding rings..........sorry my wife made me write that.....she says I cant take the ring off no matter what!
I was in the tunnel before the USWNT took the field for the start of WWC '99. The referee asked the players to remove their wedding bands. One of the US players (Joy Fawcett???) said "No way, I never remove my wedding ring". The ref allowed it, and the teams took the field. I'll try to pay more attention if I'm ever in the same spot again . . .
How do you make exceptions though? How do you tell an adult man that he can wear his wedding band and then turn around and tell a 13 year old girl that she has to take out the posts in her ears? My instructor told us that she probably wouldn't ask someone to take off their wedding band either. So, I guess the LOTG should be ammended? "The wearing of jewelry is up to the discretion of the head referee." Because that's what it sounds like to me.
One is an adult and another is a minor. An adult is aware that there is the potential for injury to himself or another player. He understands there are consequences to their actions or in this case lack of action by failing to remove jewelry. That is a difference between youth and adult matches. When refereeing matches with youth we must act as a defacto parent and err on the side of caution and a strict and literal interpretation of the LOTG. Typically in mens matches if a player has an earring I ask them to remove it. If they refuse, I tell them that I will allow it since they are adults, but caution them they assume the risk of injury. Sometimes they will remove it. Other times they apply tape over the earring, though that really is useless since with a hard shot, the earring post can easily puncture the tape and skin. There are differences in how much we as referees bend with regards to the issue of jewelry concerning adults. It may send a mixed signal to youth, but I am not about to treat adults capable of making rational decisions as children.
I actually had to argue with a coach about having one of his players (13 yr old girl) take her earings out instead of putting tape over them. There is no end to stupid people out there, so I agree, we have to make ourselves the defacto parents during a match and do our best to make sure everyone is safe.
Do you get them to sign away their rights to sue? __________________________________________ I can just hear a good trial lawyer: TL: "And you were the referee for the match in which my client was injured?" Ref: "Yes" TL: "And you are certified by USSF?" Ref: "Yes" TL: "Would you please read this portion of Law 5 from FIFA Laws of the Game." Ref (reads no jewelry) TL: "And you asked my client to remove his earring?" Ref: "Yes" TL: "And when my client declined to comply, you allowed him to wear the earring during play, contrary to TLOG?" Ref: "Yes" TL: "No further questions." _________________________________________________ Sure, we have a double standard for youth and adult players. But if that adult player is seriously injured while we ignore the clear instruction of the Laws, we can be found liable. And the Federation won't be lining their lawyers up to defend us.
I agree with the idea of allowing adults to take responsibility for jewlery that is dangerous only to themselves. That is why I allow them to play with tape over parts of their face or hands. I am not required to check what is under the tape. If so, I would also have to check for belly-button piercings or nipple rings or genital jewlery. If they come to me and ask if they can tape the earrings, I tell them that once I see the jewlery, it must come off but I won't ask what is under tape. I believe that relieves me of liability. None of this applies to youth. They must comply for their own good.
While I am not a lawyer, (but my wife is) I doubt that any lawyer is going to admit his client refused instruction from the ref. Also, look at the pro leagues and international games. Every game I have ever seen there has been at least one player wearing some form of jewelry. Finally, the ref is covered by USSF insurance.
There is no mention of jewelry in Law 5. Under law 4 - players equipment, is the following passage: It doesn't say anything about equipment (including any kind of jewellery) that is not dangerous to any player.
I never once thought of it that way. It makes sense. Thanks for the clarification. Now, what's dangerous to other players? Is a stud-style earing really a danger? How 'bout a small hoop? I wear a couple and I can't imagine it hurting anyone. A ring I suppose could really hurt if someones hand came down on the side of your face. So they should not be allowed? Oh wait, adults are allowed to wear them. All they have to do is tell the offical that they won't take it off.
A couple of points. Many youth leagues have NO JEWELRY rules. If you're officiating one of these games, do not allow players to wear jewelry. If you miss it on check-in, send them off the field to remove and require proper re-entry. For adults, it's the opinion of the referee. I would never prevent someone from wearing a simple wedding band. Anything larger, I evaluate. It also depends on the level of competition. For coed rec leagues, I'm pretty liberal with females' rings. I've seen what happens to necklaces, and don't want them flapping.
I have heard about basketball players degloving fingers from rings getting caught on the rim or in the net a few times. I never thought about it in terms of a soccer player, but it can happen.
Of course it could possibly maybe in a million years if the right circumstance maybe happens and the gods are angry. But lets be realistic. How many players are injured each year from playing soccer with a wedding band on? If we truly want to remove ALL danger from sporting events we will have to do alot more thing before we get rid of the ominous wedding band.
I don't have a problem with wedding bands, but everything else I have issues with. If it is easily removable, there is no reason to wear it. Girls who think they have a right to wear earings get a good chuckle from me.
Agreed on wedding bands they are snug and rounded. I would have a problem with a jewel or some other projection. My favorite peeve regarding this topic are the girls that got their ears pierced just before the start of soccer season and now "cannot" remove the earrings. I have had several arguments with parents and coaches opn this matter. 1. In the course of a hour or hour and one half game the piercing will not close. 2. Parents don't want to be bothered because most youngs kids complain the piercings hurt when they try to remove them and that is why they lie about not being able to remove the earring. At least I've had several parents admit that it's a chore to remove and place the earrings back on. 3. I have asked parents why they would wait until the start of soccer season to pierce their daughters ears being aware of the no jewelry requirement for youth soccer. I've gotten some very dirty looks and some Dads have said, it wasn't my idea my wife did it. Regardless, people do not think.
Our nationwide directives are very clear: All jewellery of any kind must be removed, with two exceptions: 1. Plain, flat wedding bands 2. Medical Alert necklaces/bracelets These must be fully taped up to minimise any potential danger. In the case of the bracelet/necklace, the Alert symbol may be left exposed for identification purposes. Aside from a normal equipment check and asking the players, referees are not required to check for concealed jewellery (e.g. belly-button rings or tongue studs). However if they become aware of them then they must ensure that they are removed. Personally, I think it's a reasonably sensible and practical policy.
Exactly. These kids do not have super healing powers. The funny thing is, if we let them keep them in after their complaints, and they got hurt, they would blame US!
A couple years ago I had the "but I just got them pierced" plea from a U12G. I asked her, "How long have you been playing?" About 4 years. "And how many times have you heard the referee say no jewelry?" Case closed - but only as far as I was concerned. I heard from both parents before we got the game started.
Actually, All FIFA santioned games have a no jewellery policy some leagues will reiterate that with a directive though. Youth or adult, male or female, the law's quite simple. It comes out. If you think that an adult player won't be able to sue you for allowing him to wear jewellery because he's old enough to know the risk then I think you're being very naive - in this litigous society personal responsibility means zip. You also have to remember that jewellery can injur people other than the wearer. Most directives, I believe, allow for medicalert bracelets/necklaces (for obvious reasons) which must be taped, and plain flat wedding bands (i'm not sure if that's due to social convention, or because sometimes they simply can not come off). Although, strictly accoding to the laws you would be within your rights to refuse the latter. I always encourage them to come off, but state if they won't then tape them. Although ,realistically speaking, wire from a fence could easily penetrate the tape. This isn't an isolated incident, wedding bands have caused injury on a number of occasions over the years. A colleague saw one get stuck on the hooks for the goal net once. There's also the issue of what happens if that finger gets broken... I would like to add that while christians will often insist you let them wear their crucifix (no dice, jewellery isn't part of their religion), there is one religion that does mandate the use of jewellery (although I forget what it is), so I think you'd have to allow them to wear it.