U.S. Soccer Position Paper: March 26, 2009

[RSSJ91]

From what I've heard, a ref must stop the match asap if it involves head injury.

Is this true?

[defenceguide]

@RSSJ91 no

[chetumalkid]

The ref should have stopped the match. Medical assistance is crucial to avoid permanent injury.

[hedak7]

that was the right call even though it was dangerous for two of the defending teams players to be down, good call the ball had remained in the box.

[maisis00]

I think the ref made the right call here. He waited until the attack was over and blew his whistle. From what I saw in live play it just looked like the on defender closet to the camera got his bell rung a bit.  I did not immedaitely see it as a major head injury.

[buccos2324]

The ref must immediately stop play if there is a severe head injury. I'm a ref, and all refs are taught safety first, no matter what level!

[AntoKneeo619]

the referee should have stoped the game no matter what!

[guitarfoool]

the ref has the discretion to stop the game or not! its all up to the ref!

See Law 5 of FIFA Laws of the Game 2009/2010, where it states, "The referee must adhere to the following procedure when dealing with injured players: play is allowed to continue until the ball is out of play if a player is, in the opinion of the referee, only slightly injured [and] play [may be] stopped if, in the opinion of the referee, a player is seriously injured."

[GiftsOfSin]

If it is a big injury then yes the ref can stop the game. But this seemed like it wasn't too big, it is up to the other team to play the ball respectivley out of bounds. I mean it's classy if you do so. If not it's a good scoring chance.

[St8rD3str0y3r]

Obviously the referee was trying to maintain the flow of the game without realizing that SAFETY > all in soccer. Head injuries are of paramount concern. It was a mistake that many referees make at the youth level as well--indicating that a reminder is necessary for all US referees. I hope this is a learning experience for us all.

[ANESTORLAK]

dude the ref can stop the game. when there is an injury i seen that happen plenty of times.

[tudzman]

Even if ref didn't know it was a head injury, I don't see why he didn't immediately stop play when DC United had the ball.....instead he waits to call the trainers onto the field when there's a foul on the field.

[stevepiercyweb]

I think I saw brains underneath that flap of scalp and red liquid. YUK!

The referee should have stopped the game immediately for a serious injury, especially a head injury with lots of blood.

[KevinMMcManus]

Commentators on this game noted how ref should have stopped game immediately for serious head collision. To do otherwise is dangerous and foolish. I agree

[polandsprings00]

The referee should have stopped the game immediately......USSF is pushing referee to stop games immediately with hard hits that result in bad injuries

[buccos2324]

Play should have been stopped!

[tommillercharternet]

WOW!

[abishopobispo]

English would be nice.

[soc2002]

No kidding. US soccer is using video coverage from a spanish station? Sad.

[albalution]

OUCH!!

[liverpoolcCU]

well i didn't see any explanation in this video, but i know the rule. basically there was no foul, because the collision was between two teammates. the game was only stopped, because one of the players was holding his head. any other injury play would continue until a normal stoppage.

[soc2002]

Well dur. The problem is that the ref waited way too long to stop the game to begin with. It was pretty obvious the two players were down and not getting up. Why wait til an actual foul in a later play to stop play in the game? How are the trainers supposed to take care of the obviously injured athletes if the ref has his head up his ass about stopping the game for obvious injuries?

[abettertitum]

Because a ref just cant stop the flow of game unless its a foul. It doesnt matter if they are down, it is the team with the ball decision whether to pass it out of bounds or not. If they have the potential of scoring, well sucks for the injured players.

[ToMii23q]

or if the ball is out of play

[dippaul21]

WRONG. the ussf states that when a referee sees an injury on the pitch and ESPECIALLY when it's a head injury, the referee is to stop the game and call trainers on to the pitch. that is what is written in the laws of the game. now, referees are told to give the teams an opportunity to kick the ball out of play as an act of good sportsmanship, but in this case clearly the teams weren't kicking the ball out and the players were down for a good 20 seconds, indicating they need attention.

[lydayjr]

its the refs call to determine if he thinks the player is in need of immediate attention and if that is enough to stop the flow of the game

[St8rD3str0y3r]

No hard feelings, but the US Soccer Federation issued a memoranda saying that injuries, especially head injuries, override the "flow of the game." Minor injuries, yes, maintain the flow. A head on collision, however, is always grounds for stopping play.

[lydayjr]

you cannot stop the came in that situation unless the player is extremely hurt- tht means broken limbs kind of stuff. if the play is in the penalty area you dont want to stop the game because of advantages and obvious goal scoring opportunities. I guarantee that if the ref world have stopped the game right there, he would have been in big trouble by both his job and the fans