A&H

Shin Pads

zarathustra

zarathustra

RefChat Addict
A random question that has been rattling around my brain since the start of the season:

How do we (can we) decide whether shin pad provide suitable protection?

while watching Gillingham vs Lincoln I noticed one of the Lincoln players had teeny tiny shin pads that looked like they covered maybe 3-4 inches right at the bottom of his shin (I couldn’t find any decent picture online).

Ive never had it in any of my games, but is it just a case of any shin pads are OK?
 
The Referee Store
For me, they'd have to be made commercially and unmodified.

The only time I ask to see them visually is if I know they have forgotten it and desperately looking for a pair. I've had players using cardboard which were flatly refused.
 
zarathustra said:
A random question that has been rattling around my brain since the start of the season:

How do we (can we) decide whether shin pad provide suitable protection?

while watching Gillingham vs Lincoln I noticed one of the Lincoln players had teeny tiny shin pads that looked like they covered maybe 3-4 inches right at the bottom of his shin (I couldn’t find any decent picture online).

Ive never had it in any of my games, but is it just a case of any shin pads are OK?
Click to expand...
The LOTG states:

• shinguards – these must be made of a suitable material to provide reasonable protection and covered by the socks.

All comes down to 'what is reasonable?'

For me, if they are there and covered by the socks, despite the size that's reasonable, especially in adult football where the players are old enough to make their own decisions.

In kids football, you have to balance safeguarding as well, however the younger the players the less force is used in challenges.

In a nutshell, don't go looking for problems...
 
In the US, high school soccer is outside of FIFA with its own rules. I don't know if they still have it, but they had established specific rules for the mandatory size of shin guards based on the height of the players.

But as others have noted, per FIFA, it is a "reasonable" standard. With older youth players I have commented that they might want to stop using U8 sized shin guards and actually protect themselves, but I haven't prohibited them from playing. (I did have one knucklehead who was trying to use a stack of napkins as shin guards in a 16U game . . . )
 
I'd like to see some Law or Rule that mandates that football socks are pulled up. We're all checking the finery of studs on everyone's Puma Kings whilst players are running around with pads so small, two thirds of their shin bones are fully exposed
 
Big Cat said:
I'd like to see some Law or Rule that mandates that football socks are pulled up. We're all checking the finery of studs on everyone's Puma Kings whilst players are running around with pads so small, two thirds of their shin bones are fully exposed
Click to expand...
On this point, has anyone actually questioned a player on their studs or stopped using particular boots/studs? It seems like a dated concept to me
 
Justylove said:
The LOTG states:

• shinguards – these must be made of a suitable material to provide reasonable protection and covered by the socks.

All comes down to 'what is reasonable?'

For me, if they are there and covered by the socks, despite the size that's reasonable, especially in adult football where the players are old enough to make their own decisions.

In kids football, you have to balance safeguarding as well, however the younger the players the less force is used in challenges.

In a nutshell, don't go looking for problems...
Click to expand...
I wasn’t planning on looking for trouble, this particular chaps shin pads caught my attention as they were/are so small.
 
Big Cat said:
I'd like to see some Law or Rule that mandates that football socks are pulled up. We're all checking the finery of studs on everyone's Puma Kings whilst players are running around with pads so small, two thirds of their shin bones are fully exposed
Click to expand...

which is strange, as the laws just say that players must wear footwear, and that any equipment players wear must be safe.

There is nothing about the type of footwear, studs or anything like that.

for shin pads it says that they must provide “reasonable” protection but doesn’t give any guidance as to what would constitute “reasonable” protection and we just go through the motions checking they haven’t got a copy of the daily Mail stuffed down their socks.
 
In my opinion the law should be changed to the shinpad having to cover the shin. Take a look at Jack Grealish etc. Looks so dangerous to me !
Regarding footwear, a few seasons ago I asked a youth player (U10-UI1) to consider changing his flat trainers for boots etc, as the pitch was very muddy. I was concerned he could slide all over the place and be a danger to himself and others. The kid (and his coach) welcomed the advice and one of the others lent him their spare boots for the same
 
Last edited:
one said:
I wouldn't call small shinpads being so dangerous. There is a difference between not being safe enough and being so dangerous 🙂, perhaps that was the wrong word.
Click to expand...
Yep, probably used the wrong wording. They just offer very little protection, which is the whole aim of the item
 
zarathustra said:
which is strange, as the laws just say that players must wear footwear, and that any equipment players wear must be safe.

There is nothing about the type of footwear, studs or anything like that.

for shin pads it says that they must provide “reasonable” protection but doesn’t give any guidance as to what would constitute “reasonable” protection and we just go through the motions checking they haven’t got a copy of the daily Mail stuffed down their socks.
Click to expand...
Be careful what you wish for! When I started refereeing the good book (and the exam) included minimum sizes for studs when tapered, composition of studs and bars, the issue of a missing stud, etc., etc., running to 3 pages in the book🙄
 
ChasObserverRefDeveloper said:
Be careful what you wish for! When I started refereeing the good book (and the exam) included minimum sizes for studs when tapered, composition of studs and bars, the issue of a missing stud, etc., etc., running to 3 pages in the book🙄
Click to expand...

In fairness, those rules were written at a time when studs and bars were literally nailed into the shoes. The Decisions of the International Board also mandated that shoes be inspected for conformity in international matches and that competitions could impose similar requirements.

When I started, where I was there was an obsession about toe cleats (which was not listed in Law IV). I think it came from American Football cleats that would often have a large cleat right at the toe to get traction at the line of scrimmage--which would be dangerous--but got expaned to any single cleat at the toe. Back then I did look at cleats, most specifically at screw ins to make sure there was no metal showing through from where it wore down (and the league I reffed in banned metal studs). Now, I hardly glance at them. With the combination of the evolution of boots and teh dry fields here in Southern California , I have yet to see a player with screw in studs.
 
My advice would be don't get involved. I agree that Grealish is taking a big risk for wearing such small pads, but it is his choice, and if he feels they give him sufficient protection that is good enough for me.

I saw a referee a couple of years ago fall out with a team before a ball was even kicked because he had his own ideas of what a shin pad should be like. One player was told his were too small, and another was told that his pads weren't the right material (they were the type that are soft but harden on contact, I think a bit like some mobile phone cases). Why put yourself in that position, risking your match control before a ball has even been kicked? I had it once as a player when the referee told me I couldn't wear my moulded studs because it was too wet and I'd struggle to keep my feet, I never wore screw in studs and found it incredulous that a referee could try and decide what type of studs I was allowed to wear. This was a young referee and seemingly a senior colleague had told him not to allow moulded studs on wet pitches, after a chat I'd persuaded him that his colleague was completely wrong.

Trouble finds us a referees as it is, we really don't need to go looking for it.
 
RustyRef said:
This was a young referee and seemingly a senior colleague had told him not to allow moulded studs on wet pitches, after a chat I'd persuaded him that his colleague was completely wrong.
Click to expand...
Sounds to me like something he misunderstood from a more senior ref. (I teach a lot of intro ref classes. It is sometimes amazing what people who have taken the class have "never heard before" or thought they heard at the class.)
 
RustyRef said:
My advice would be don't get involved. I agree that Grealish is taking a big risk for wearing such small pads, but it is his choice, and if he feels they give him sufficient protection that is good enough for me.
Click to expand...
I'm actually surprised that with players like Grealish, their clubs don't require them to wear shin guards that provide a reasonable amount of protection.

Considering the amount of money they've spent on such players, it doesn't make sense to me that they would let them put themselves at risk like that, week in and week out.
 
Peter Grove said:
I'm actually surprised that with players like Grealish, their clubs don't require them to wear shin guards that provide a reasonable amount of protection.

Considering the amount of money they've spent on such players, it doesn't make sense to me that they would let them put themselves at risk like that, week in and week out.
Click to expand...
I agree...and I bet the companies that insure players like Grealish aren't too pleased, either
 
ChasObserverRefDeveloper said:
Be careful what you wish for! When I started refereeing the good book (and the exam) included minimum sizes for studs when tapered, composition of studs and bars, the issue of a missing stud, etc., etc., running to 3 pages in the book🙄
Click to expand...

I remember it used to have reference to the fact you couldn't have spiked/sharp studs, but I don't remember whether it was in the Laws itself or shovelled back in the glossary at the back.
 
RustyRef said:
This was a young referee and seemingly a senior colleague had told him not to allow moulded studs on wet pitches, after a chat I'd persuaded him that his colleague was completely wrong.
Click to expand...

Weird, I know the (manufacturing) guidance is to use moulded studs on hard ground and the usual 'screw ins' for wet/soft ground, but I've never had referees try and make it an actual rule!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top