[Law] Player Welfare .

[vimpe22]

A team complaints to the match commissioner that a player of the opposing team is infected with conjunctivitis (sore eyes) . This is reported to the MDD who wants a written complaint. The match starts and while the game is in progress the letter is given and player examined and found positive. The MC requests the referee to remove player.
Under player welfare on considering the contagious nature this should be right.
Is there any provision or guidelines to support this action.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

I guess it depends whether or not the form of conjunctivitis is contagious. Not all are. If it is a contagious form then I would agree on removing the player. Wuld a test be completed and the results returned during a game though?

 

[didds]

its not really overall a ref's call I woudnt have thought - if the chain of command has deemed it to occur then all the ref is doing is cofnorming to that?

didds

 

[Marc Wakeham]

If as a ref I was aware of a contagious infection, I would use my power to prevent them from playing. I owe the players a duty of care.

 

[didds]

That wasnt question posed by the OP though.

This decsion was made by others already.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

That wasnt question posed by the OP though.

This decsion was made by others already.

Nope fro the OP "...The MC requests the referee to remove player." Therefore, the referee is being asked to make a call. My call is no contageous infection is coming on the pitch. If it is not yet know wherther it is the contageous for mor the uncontageous, I will err on the side of safety. My justification is Law3.22.c.

 

[didds]

ah - good spot - apologies.

Id agree with you marc. the ref isnt a doctor, and "possible stuff" isnt covered anywhere specirfically - concussion aside etc.

didds

 

[crossref]

Nope fro the OP "...The MC requests the referee to remove player." Therefore, the referee is being asked to make a call. My call is no contageous infection is coming on the pitch. If it is not yet know wherther it is the contageous for mor the uncontageous, I will err on the side of safety. My justification is Law3.22.c.

Captain of team à tells you that five of team b's players is infectious. It's not known if this is true .. what are you going to do?

 

[SimonSmith]

"Thanks for your input skipper. What are you going to do now?"

I'll do everything in my power to make them make the decision.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

"Thanks for your input skipper. What are you going to do now?"

I'll do everything in my power to make them make the decision.

You have to make the call. It's not the oppositions call to make. It could lead to teams claiming the opposition star is infectious. You, with your (however) limited knowledge. have to say he is staying on or not. The complaining side then has a choise, they play or refuse and the game is called off / abandoned. If that is the case you file the appropriate report. The make the decision to play or not what they don't get to do, is make the call who plays for the other side.

The time line ( for me) is:

Team A complain about Team B 6
Ref Speaks to Team B 6 "Do you have it?" if he says yes then off he goes. IF he says no. Then can you see any signs to enable you to make a call (just as we would be Concussion). Obviously extreme care not guesswork is needed. if you know nothing about it (in most cases probable) then you can't stop him playing you have to be able to explain your call later.
You convey your decision to both sides.
They play or refuse.
You report as appropriate and let the authorities worry about it.

 

[vimpe22]

‘

You have to make the call. It's not the oppositions call to make. It could lead to teams claiming the opposition star is infectious. You, with your (however) limited knowledge. have to say he is staying on or not. The complaining side then has a choise, they play or refuse and the game is called off / abandoned. If that is the case you file the appropriate report. The make the decision to play or not what they don't get to do, is make the call who plays for the other side.

The time line ( for me) is:

Team A complain about Team B 6
Ref Speaks to Team B 6 "Do you have it?" if he says yes then off he goes. IF he says no. Then can you see any signs to enable you to make a call (just as we would be Concussion). Obviously extreme care not guesswork is needed. if you know nothing about it (in most cases probable) then you can't stop him playing you have to be able to explain your call later.
You convey your decision to both sides.
They play or refuse.
You report as appropriate and let the authorities worry about it.

I this case there was a Match Day Doctor who ruled that the player has sore eyes and cannot come on to the field. He did come previously for a blood bin. At this time the doc had not checked him.

 

[Marc Wakeham]

You'll need to tell us under what authority the MDD is appointed in your set up and what juristiction your union gives him. Those outside your union can't be expected to know your regulations.


You said "The MC requests the referee to remove player." Now you say "Match Day Doctor who ruled that the player has sore eyes and cannot come on to the field. " The two contradict each other.Either the MDD says no (with regulatory support) or the request (to the refer under Law 3) is that the player does not come on it can't be both.

For me at my level there is no "MDD", I am the only person who can refuse to let a player play or remove a player from the game. Of course if a club's medical staff say that their player can't continue I would never dream of overruling them. Off he goes.

Sore eyes is not exclusively prove of a contagious illness.

 

[chbg]

This is a matter for the two team captains to sort out, not the referee, and then the Match Organiser. Within the Laws: if possible concussion or an injury - remove the player for his/her own safety; if bleeding - remove the player for the safety of others. There will also probably become a COVID intervention under a nation's Regulations. But if Team B objects to a Player on Team A, then either Team A gives way; or Team B accept that he/she plays; or Team B refuse to play. All parties provide a report to the Match Organiser.

 

[SimonSmith]

If there's a Doc, then it's his/her decision.

I'm not sending anyone from the filed on an unfounded allegation from an opposition player. That way lies madness.
If the opposition feel strongly enough about it, then they can make their decision, I'll take notes and send to the Comp Committee.

Only exception: when I see concussion.