I think reckless endangerment is the phrase I am looking for, not dirty play. My question is how, under the circumstances, could a head dilivered directly to the goalie's collarbone NOT have been reckless? And once the seriousness of the injury became apparent -- the goalie would not allow anyone to touch her -- why wasn't the seriousness of the foul upgraded accordingly? Do refs have discretion in such situations up until the time that play resumes? Do they, by the customs of soccer, have an obligation?
I hope my readers will understand that my concern is solely with the general principle of the situation and the physical safety of goalies. I am not questioning, let alone complaining about, the outcome of the game -- which, as coach Weekly informed the press, may turn out to be a good thing for Baylor. We have a well-balanced team both offensively and defensively and so far, at least, very few shots have been delivered to goal. (Of course that may change. )
Looking forward, then, let me rephrase my concern as a parent with admittedly limited soccer experience:
Do the league refs get together from time to time to discuss the proper way to handle this kind of contingency when and if it arises again? Or is it understood and accepted among them to be a matter of individual judgment?
Are there special rules that apply, or should apply, only to goalies, (as with punters in football for example) which take into account of the vulnerable situations to which goalies routinely expose themselves when their hands are outstretched and their attention is focused on the ball (not talking about diving saves for instance)?
That's all I am asking. As a matter of information, what are the rules of the game in this particular situation? Are there any?