Physio comes on the field

[Chogan]

Blue player makes a tackle on halfway and gets knocked out. Play continues and red move left 10m with the next breakdown 5m further up the field.
Blue player tries to regain his feet, has minimal control of his legs and stumbles to the ground. He is now placed between the attacking and defensive backlines.
Physio runs straight to the distressed player. As she does this a pass is thrown right by red 10 to his centers. Ball hits physio knocking her med-bag to the ground but also makes it to the receiver.
She reaches the player needing attention and the ref plays on.
Red continue to move the ball out their backline, score in the right hand corner and the try is awarded.

What should have happened?

 

[menace]

As described?...what a comedy of errors. The referee should be dropped to U9s! and a video reconstructed on 'how not to do it'.

At what point didn't the referee not figure that an injured player between attacking and defensive lines wasn't going to be in the line of play??

 

[Taffy]

Scrum to red.

 

[Browner]

Ref should have noticed the player knocked out and stopped the match to check on the player.

 

[Taffy]

Ref should have noticed the player knocked out and stopped the match to check on the player.

It is tricky and one of those split second decisions. I have reffed only around 60 games and had players with three broken legs (one each before anyone mentions it) and one bad ankle injury. It was the shout and screams that I remember being the catalyst to stopping the game and a quick decision. Only last week I stopped the game as I heard that someone was knocked out and stopped a movement for a certain try, but as an advisor said to me "better safe than sorry". A fair assessment I felt.

 

[Browner]

It is tricky and one of those split second decisions. I have reffed only around 60 games and had players with three broken legs (one each before anyone mentions it) and one bad ankle injury. It was the shout and screams that I remember being the catalyst to stopping the game and a quick decision. Only last week I stopped the game as I heard that someone was knocked out and stopped a movement for a certain try, but as an advisor said to me "better safe than sorry". A fair assessment I felt.

The rule I always play to is.... always watch for the player not moving, he's my principal worry, the player banging his fist on the floor in pain is of less concern even if he's broken a bone, those not breathing/moving present the greatest risk and need immediate attention


......that's not to say when I hear a loud crack and then the yelp I don't blow, I did in my second ever match, turned my stomach - not an enjoyable view.

 

[Dixie]

As described?...what a comedy of errors. The referee should be dropped to U9s! and a video reconstructed on 'how not to do it'.

At what point didn't the referee not figure that an injured player between attacking and defensive lines wasn't going to be in the line of play??

So as described: player is out cold, medical attention is immediately on hand, the player is in no physical danger from the game continuing, but Browner for one would want to stop the game in order to check on him - presumably feeling that a female medic could not hold a candle to his own non-existent but obviously superior medical skills.

In what way is the player on the ground better off if the the game is stopped? Clearly the fact that the medic had to negotiate the continuing game in order to get to the player is a great reason to stop the game, and in this instance it should have happened. But if the medic had a clear run to the player and the player was not in danger of being trampled, play on in my view. This is where I think the ref in the Ireland v Italy game got it wrong - yes the Italian was receiving all the medical care he neede, but the location of the treatment room in that instance affected the game and put the player at risk - it should have been stopped. But those instances are rare, IMO.

 

[crossref]

i had an injured player on the ground yesterday and played on, much to the annoyance of the injured player himself, who felt the game should stop (shouting to me that he was injured)
He wasn't getting any medical treatment from his coach/physios, but I played on anyway...

 

[Taff]

... What should have happened?

From your description, I would have stopped play as soon as the play went anywhere near the knocked out player / physio and restarted with a scrum to the side in possession. All you need to say is "Safety stop boys. We'll restart with a scrum to Red - they were in possession". From my (limited) experience nobody ever queries it.

... In what way is the player on the ground better off if the the game is stopped? Clearly the fact that the medic had to negotiate the continuing game in order to get to the player is a great reason to stop the game, and in this instance it should have happened.

This is one of the 5 general points I now cover in my PMB. In a nutshell, I explain that the Physio has standing permission to come on for an injury BUT that play will continue as long as it's safe.

When is it safe? Well, there's no hard and fast rule but you just seem to know. Personally I would have stopped play in the Ireland v Italy game after I found myself shouting "Noooo" at the telly. :biggrin:

 

[menace]

Misread...never mind.

So as described: player is out cold, medical attention is immediately on hand, the player is in no physical danger from the game continuing, but Browner for one would want to stop the game in order to check on him - presumably feeling that a female medic could not hold a candle to his own non-existent but obviously superior medical skills.

In what way is the player on the ground better off if the the game is stopped? Clearly the fact that the medic had to negotiate the continuing game in order to get to the player is a great reason to stop the game, and in this instance it should have happened. But if the medic had a clear run to the player and the player was not in danger of being trampled, play on in my view. This is where I think the ref in the Ireland v Italy game got it wrong - yes the Italian was receiving all the medical care he neede, but the location of the treatment room in that instance affected the game and put the player at risk - it should have been stopped. But those instances are rare, IMO.

Dixie...you quoted me with your response? Not sure what you're trying to suggest with my quote?

 

[leaguerefaus]

Am I a bad person for laughing at that? The referee seems hopeless.

 

[Chogan]

As an observer and not the referee in this instance I felt play could have continued.
However, once the ball touched the physio that was the decision made.

 

[Lee Lifeson-Peart]

From your description, I would have stopped play as soon as the play went anywhere near the knocked out player / physio and restarted with a scrum to the side in possession. All you need to say is "Safety stop boys. We'll restart with a scrum to Red - they were in possession". From my (limited) experience nobody ever queries it.


This is one of the 5 general points I now cover in my PMB. In a nutshell, I explain that the Physio has standing permission to come on for an injury BUT that play will continue as long as it's safe.

When is it safe? Well, there's no hard and fast rule but you just seem to know. Personally I would have stopped play in the Ireland v Italy game after I found myself shouting "Noooo" at the telly. :biggrin:

I will get the team's physios and tell them they can come on when needed. If they are about to get engulfed in men I will stop the game (this usually raises a smile of relief or disappointment) similarly if the striken player is sparko or squealing like a stuck pig with feet pointing in unnatural directions I will "generally" stop the game.

 

[Chogan]

i had an injured player on the ground yesterday and played on, much to the annoyance of the injured player himself, who felt the game should stop (shouting to me that he was injured)
He wasn't getting any medical treatment from his coach/physios, but I played on anyway...

If the injured player is able to shout at you to stop he's grand in my book. He may not be able to play on but he's unlikely to be in any serious danger. His main concern is that his team are now a man down.

 

[crossref]

If the injured player is able to shout at you to stop he's grand in my book. He may not be able to play on but he's unlikely to be in any serious danger. His main concern is that his team are now a man down.

that's what I thought. The only reason for stopping, that really tempted me was to give him a YC :wink:

 

[Ciaran Trainor]

As described?...what a comedy of errors. The referee should be dropped to U9s! and a video reconstructed on 'how not to do it'.

At what point didn't the referee not figure that an injured player between attacking and defensive lines wasn't going to be in the line of play??

must have been watching st Nigel

 

[Simon Thomas]

As an observer and not the referee in this instance I felt play could have continued.
However, once the ball touched the physio that was the decision made.

play should have stopped before the ball got that close to the physio

 

[TigerCraig]

You need to be careful in these situations - we have had a physio sue a referee for being hurt in a collision

http://rugbyreferee.net/2013/05/30/injured-physio-sues-referee-implications/

 

[Browner]

So as described: player is out cold, medical attention is immediately on hand [OP didnt say that] , the player is in no physical danger from the game continuing, but Browner for one would want to stop the game in order to check on him - presumably feeling that a female medic could not hold a candle to his own non-existent but obviously superior medical skills. .

Dixie, Tut tut tut , don't be a plonker rodney.... In the OP, the player was supposedly knocked out , then after a period of play he got to his feet, & then after collapsing the medic arrived .......... i'd assumed the player knocked out meant he was not moving ...ie OUT ...for a period of time .... In which case I'm blowing & attending - unless "knocked out " means "not knocked out " in which case i'd amend my reply, and yours isn't quite as crass !!

 

[Browner]

You need to be careful in these situations - we have had a physio sue a referee for being hurt in a collision

http://rugbyreferee.net/2013/05/30/injured-physio-sues-referee-implications/

did she win her case?