Question Number: 22359

Character, Attitude and Control 10/25/2009

RE: Competitive Under 17

Jake Royd of Toronto, Ontario Canada asks...

Hello fellow referees,

My question concerns the concept of 'Fair Play'. By this, I mean the general sportsmanship of players.

In recent years, this has become synonymous with the practice of clearing the ball out of play when a player is injured. Upon the restart, the ball is returned to the team who had possession of the ball prior to the injury.

Is this a concept referees should be teaching to young players? Until what age level should we expect to have to teach the players? Should the referee enforce Fair Play, or should they only actively encourage it?

Thank you all very much in advance for your time.

Answer provided by Referee Joe McHugh

Hi Referee Royd
FIFA and governing bodies now believe that the concept has gone too far and they are now trying to give the power back to referees to stop the game for an injury rather than allowing the teams to do it. In recent years players have been lying down for all sorts of spurious injuries. A survey at a recent WC showed that around 70% of injuries were not in fact injuries which then suggests tactical stoppages in play.
Now one has to take into account the different age levels. At underage levels I stop for every player on the ground. In senior game I make a call on whether the injury requires a stoppage. A head injury is an immediate stoppage. On the restart if a team wants to kick it back I just ensure that it is not done in a way that causes a problem such as a direct goal from the dropped ball.
I personally would rather see play continue at the referees discretion and then stop naturally so that play restarts without the dropped ball.
As regards teaching the concept I believe that its a matter for the teams and coaches not the referees. In the past I believe that the game had as much Fair Play with contested dropped ball restarts. I'm not a fan of teams making the decision to stop and while the ethos behind it is good it is abused by teams/players which is not fair play.

Answer provided by Referee Michelle Maloney

Fair Play = Sporting Behavior. Agreed.

Returning the ball/play to the other team is not the only manifestation of Fair Play, even if it is an obvious one. And as Ref McHugh notes, FIFA is unhappy with the results of team initiated 'fair play' on forced injury restarts where the referee is not the one who stops play.

Fair Play includes playing without diving, injury acting or other cheating behaviors that disgrace and destroy the beautiful game. It means playing hard and strong, with skill and intelligent tactics, but it doesn't mean doing whatever it takes to win.

While referees in younger and recreational games do have some role in helping players (and coaches) learn the Laws, and proper ways to play within the LOTG, it is not our job to teach Fair Play. Instead, it is our job to use the LOTG as intended so that the teams may play safely, with enjoyment and expectations of fair competition.

Answer provided by Referee Richard Dawson

I hold the opinion as the referee, stopping play is a REFEREE'S decision; referees should be concerned with neutrality, a clear understanding of the laws of the game, improved foul recognition and being focused on the players' safety! A referee does not ENFORCE FAIR PLAY! However as a human being and as a role model we all are on display for fair play principles by our conduct and character and to encourage fair play is a responsibility for all.

If a team explicitly says they will restart in a designated fair play manner a referee could hold them responsible and caution for USB if they do not! The premise of kicking a ball out of play is a foolish one no matter if a traditionalist will disagree. When the ball is not returned it will create even worse management issues. If you recall the debacle at the Portugal Holland WC match in which Deco was ONLY cautioned for a brutal scything tackle on Heitinga as a response to Holland NOT returning the ball and trying to attack on the restart.


Interpretation of the laws of the game and guidelines for referees
Cautions for unsporting behaviour page 115
There are different circumstances when a player must be cautioned for unsporting behaviour, e.g. if a player:
? attempts to deceive the referee by feigning injury or pretending to have been fouled (simulation)
? acts in a manner which shows a lack of respect for the game
? verbally distracts an opponent during play or at a restart


However, if the other team only expects them to do so the referee can do nothing if they choose not to except to make up a nonexistent foul or decide the restart was somehow improper and that is not being a neutral official.
What goes around comes around! The referee can not tell them what to do but it could be reasonable to explain the consequences and options
A referee has the discretion to drop the ball to no player, a single player, two opposing players or any number of players as a way of restarting after an injury stoppage in which the referee decided to stop play! That same referee cannot PREVENT any player from participating in said drop ball restart. This is because as a neutral official he cannot tactically instruct the players from creating their own problems or situations

Interpretation of the laws of the game and guidelines for referees
LAW 8 ? THE START AND RESTART OF PLAY page 97
Dropped ball
Any player may challenge for the ball (including the goalkeeper). There is no minimum or maximum number of players required to contest a dropped ball. The referee cannot decide who may or may not contest a dropped ball.

A referee is neither a medical genius nor a mind reader but any obvious serious injury like a snap of a bone, gushing blood, a head on head collision, etc... Is an obvious reason to stop play immediately! The referee cannot tell if the player is faking for a tactical stoppage nor can he tell if the injury is minor until that player dashes right back in as soon as play begins. He judges the incident on what he can reasonably see or hear! Referee discretion must be sensible given the varying degree of age and skill levels between the game standards of youth recreational as opposed to adult elite. We stop quickly for the hug and a tear wipe for the wee ones, at the teen age level I will ask if the youth can continue and stop only if it was obvious the adult player was in obvious distress!

By definition one might assume a serious injury must be life threatening but how should a referee view a temporary condition of pain that could prevent a player's from participating effectively in immediate play?

You catch a nub of a spike on the ankle it might not look like much but the pain is very real and a roll around clutching the hamstring or quad if pulled or Charlie horsed is certainly excruciating but is it serious? Given a player cannot effectively participate in active play is it UNFAIR for play to continue rather than wait for a natural stoppage??

FIFA might do well to consider a law change offering an INDFK or throw -in to the team with ball possession if play is stopped for an injury assessment!

At present if play is stopped for an injury where a player requires treatment he must leave the field of play and renter only after play has restarted with the permission of the referee!

It seems patently unfair to force a team to play short if the hurt player is receiving treatment while the perpetrator of that injury is still playing for the opposition! Then there is the opposite conundrum of faking or wasting time by those players who make a full meal deal out of a minor knock.

This is where teams are reluctant to stop play and feel cheated when it becomes obvious it was tactically induced rather than a true concern for the welfare of the player.

If a team feels they took an unfair advantage and scored a goal while the opposition has a struggling player on the pitch that the quote "nasty referee" did not stop play for they can allow their counterparts to score unopposed to make up for it!
That would be a real show of fair play!

Cheers