[Football] Bristol City won't kick the ball out of play

[GT49er]

This does not make sense.

It absolutely does. What is so difficult to understand? Your player is down, you think he is hurt but the ref. hasn't stopped play - you just boot the ball out of play as far upfield as you can get it, or alternatively you just grab hold of the ball.
Play is then stopped, and is re-started by a throw in or a free kick to the other side.

 

[Easy 10]

It absolutely does. What is so difficult to understand? Your player is down, you think he is hurt but the ref. hasn't stopped play - you just boot the ball out of play as far upfield as you can get it, or alternatively you just grab hold of the ball.
Play is then stopped, and is re-started by a throw in or a free kick to the other side.

Or a penalty if the player grabbed hold of the ball in the box.

 

[GT49er]

Or a penalty if the player grabbed hold of the ball in the box.

Well yes, it's a matter of choice. but hacking the ball into row Z would seem, in those circumstances, and after careful consideration, to be the optimum answer. Corner at worst.

 

[Bodian]

The ball has to go in the net!

Don't think so, the way it's written implies that if team possession changes after hitting the ref it's a drop ball. So, the defender would have to hit the ref, then none of his team mates pick up the rebound.

 

[schmunk]

It absolutely does. What is so difficult to understand? Your player is down, you think he is hurt but the ref. hasn't stopped play - you just boot the ball out of play as far upfield as you can get it, or alternatively you just grab hold of the ball.
Play is then stopped, and is re-started by a throw in or a free kick to the other side.

That I get, it's the implication that Derby's stance means that they won't do this for their own players that doesn't make sense.

 

[GT49er]

That I get, it's the implication that Derby's stance means that they won't do this for their own players that doesn't make sense.

Derby as in Bristol City?

Anyway, for your own players, it's your choice. Nothing has changed. Stating in advance they won't do it for the other team is fine. Very good idea.

 

[drew]

Don't think so, the way it's written implies that if team possession changes after hitting the ref it's a drop ball. So, the defender would have to hit the ref, then none of his team mates pick up the rebound.

Thanks, misread it. Still doesn't make sense that you would kick the ball at the ref when in possession in your own penalty area.

 

[drew]

ACL injury isn’t life threatening. Whether they get treated in 10 seconds or 60 seconds is irrelevant.

Where did I say life threatening? What about a broken leg then. Not a head injury so you just leave the player on the pitch. Maybe if they have a dislocated ankle they can wait for a break in play!

Players will treat their fellow professionals the way they would want to be treated if in the same boat. Ignore those that persistently feign injury and put the ball out for those genuinely needed attention.

 

[FatSuperman]

Surely it’s a matter of opinion whether a player is genuinely hurt or not - so the most consistent and sensible thing to do is just play on as if they are fine, if you’ve even noticed.

Nothing stopping any particular player making an exception the to general rule of someone has very clearly been hurt, perhaps two players collide at full pelt, that’s obvious enough. But those situations are so rare it just doesn’t make sense to do anything but play on.

The current situation just leads to people being pissed off when they’ve been hoodwinked, and had a potential strong attack turned into simple possession in a useless area.

 

[Da Man Clay]

To be fair it says in the BBC report that Bristol’s city will play on even if it’s their own player. Not sure how that will actually play out in practice.

 

[Mellotron]

Where did I say life threatening? What about a broken leg then. Not a head injury so you just leave the player on the pitch. Maybe if they have a dislocated ankle they can wait for a break in play!

Players will treat their fellow professionals the way they would want to be treated if in the same boat. Ignore those that persistently feign injury and put the ball out for those genuinely needed attention.

Why the **** isn’t the ref stopping the game if a player has a broken leg?! Doesn’t matter what the players do if the ref stops the game, and he’s the only one with power to. It’s really simple.

 

[Mellotron]

To be fair it says in the BBC report that Bristol’s city will play on even if it’s their own player. Not sure how that will actually play out in practice.

The ref will stop the game if they deem the player to be needing immediate treatment. How it should always have been.

The players shouldn’t be making a decision either way, it’s not their job to. They’re there to play football.

 

[Stat Brother]

Derby as in Bristol City?

Anyway, for your own players, it's your choice. Nothing has changed. Stating in advance they won't do it for the other team is fine. Very good idea.

The difference would come from how the ball is returned into play.

If Bristol City kick the ball out for their own player my guess is they'll expect to be attacked, from the off, hopefully.

 

[drew]

Why the **** isn’t the ref stopping the game if a player has a broken leg?! Doesn’t matter what the players do if the ref stops the game, and he’s the only one with power to. It’s really simple.

They probably would in most cases but might not always be up with play.

 

[GOM]

They probably would in most cases but might not always be up with play.

If they fail to see that then they shouldn't be refereeing

 

[drew]

If they fail to see that then they shouldn't be refereeing

Not all broken legs involve the leg being at an odd angle or bone protruding through the skin!

 

[Easy 10]

Not all broken legs involve the leg being at an odd angle or bone protruding through the skin!

So how do you expect a player, in the middle of a game and possibly nowhere near the incident, to make an accurate and informed diagnosis then ?

Its not his business to. The ref is in control of the game, and if in HIS opinion the injury isn't serious enough for the game to be stopped, then everyone should play on. If a ref can't recognise a serious injury and has to rely on opposition players taking it into their own hands, then perhaps he shouldn't really be refereeing.

More often than not the ball soon goes out anyway, or is intercepted by one of the injured players team-mates, who then puts it out of play. But I see no reason why a promising break or attack should automatically be binned off, just because a player is down injured and the ref hasn't blown. Its a nonsense.

Keep it simple and play to the whistle. Absolutely nothing wrong with that whatsoever.

 

[Gritt23]

Think this is a great idea. They've decided it will be a club policy to play to the whistle and have emailed other clubs to tell them this in advance:

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/bristol-city-written-every-club-3174864

"Bristol City have taken the unusual step of writing to every other club in the Championship to explain that they will not kick the ball out of play, unless a player has suffered a genuine head injury. Head coach Lee Johnson revealed the decision, as he answered questions following the Robins' 3-1 defeat to Leeds United on Sunday."

Good! Everyone should follow suit.

Make it the refs decision only, and if the ref feels he was "duped" into stopping play, when the player wasn't really injured, they should be encouraged to book the player for "ungentlemanly conduct".

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Think this is a great idea. They've decided it will be a club policy to play to the whistle and have emailed other clubs to tell them this in advance:

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/bristol-city-written-every-club-3174864

"Bristol City have taken the unusual step of writing to every other club in the Championship to explain that they will not kick the ball out of play, unless a player has suffered a genuine head injury. Head coach Lee Johnson revealed the decision, as he answered questions following the Robins' 3-1 defeat to Leeds United on Sunday."

Quite right too. Even at the Amex pre-season game, Valencia were clearly honing their rolling around skills. Without exception they all bounced right back up, right as rain, as soon as they realised nobody was taking them seriously. Just looked pathetic.

 

[Munkfish]

Still think Physios should be allowed on to treat players as long as they are not near play, this call can be made by the 4th official.

If they then interfear in play the referee stops the play and the ball is conceeded to the defending team.