Is it a matter of time before heading is banned?

[el_loco_bielsa]

Statistically wise dementia effects around 20 percent of people over the age of 80 years old, if you told me I would have a glittering sports career and get dementia at the age of 70.

I would definitely take that, life is about choices.

Taking heading out of the game completely would be stupid in my eyes.

Prevalence of 5-8% of the population in the west above the age of 60, and the total prevalence is expected to triple by 2050.

A tiny fraction of these ex-sportsmen CTEs will have had ‘glittering sports careers’ - most will be journeymen.

It‘s easy enough to say ‘I‘ll take the risk‘ in your youth because the consequences of being in a nursing home at the age of 70 needing 24/7 care of all of your washing/toileting/dressing/feeding needs aren’t apparent to you when you’re 21.

 

[The holy trinity 68]

Prevalence of 5-8% of the population in the west above the age of 60, and the total prevalence is expected to triple by 2050.

A tiny fraction of these ex-sportsmen CTEs will have had ‘glittering sports careers’ - most will be journeymen.

It‘s easy enough to say ‘I‘ll take the risk‘ in your youth because the consequences of being in a nursing home at the age of 70 needing 24/7 care of all of your washing/toileting/dressing/feeding needs aren’t apparent to you when you’re 21.

We should therefore also ban all vehicles, all food that has been pumped with chemicals or sprayed with pesticides and make everyone grow their own produce. Ban alcohol and smoking as well. Because people who are diagnosed with Cancer and the last 20 years has gone up to unprecedented levels.

It is all about choices, free will and freedom, people know the consequences but people should be allowed to decide for themselves.

 

[georgipep]

And yet another one.... playing football is legal. I did not advocate for changing any law.
As for the we whom are constantly preventing people being endangered? Who is this we? Is it the same we who are feckin up the only planet we can live on? Or another we who have unlimited supply of cotton wool to wrap everyone up in?

Most drugs were also legal until they weren't. Head injuries are a serious concern and will mostly likely lead to change in rules or banning whole sports. You may want to be the hardest man on earth, that's up to you. Also, the fact that humans are destroying the planet is the most nonsensical argument against protecting players from injury.

And to add on top of all that, I know that such a change will most likely make football a worse/different spectacle. Fully aware of it.

 

[dal]

Prevalence of 5-8% of the population in the west above the age of 60, and the total prevalence is expected to triple by 2050.

A tiny fraction of these ex-sportsmen CTEs will have had ‘glittering sports careers’ - most will be journeymen.

It‘s easy enough to say ‘I‘ll take the risk‘ in your youth because the consequences of being in a nursing home at the age of 70 needing 24/7 care of all of your washing/toileting/dressing/feeding needs aren’t apparent to you when you’re 21.

In my eyes there’s a risk with anything and it can be mitigated but you can’t take heading away from football in a game scenario, by all means try things to mitigate it but please don’t take away the essence of a game.

Im not sure it’s even fully proven.

Im sure everyone has someone they know with dementia. I mean I know a few and some days they can’t even remember who I am.

Yes it’s a horrible disease but taking away headers from football is 100 % not the answer.

Nanny state isn’t the answer.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

That‘s not accurate at all. The percentage of GDP expended on drug/alcohol care for addicts+the management of drug/alcohol induced chronic disease is a drop in the ocean compared to the huge chunk of GDP every western nation spends annually on caring for and supporting elderly patients with dementia, and treating their associated chronic disease.

If you need any proof of this, walk into your local hospital and do a quick headcount of how many elderly inpatients with dementia there are. They’ll be anywhere around 60-80% of the total, from my experience of having worked in that setting for decades.

So if you’re running with the ‘drain on society and your family’ argument then legalising all drugs and alcohol and turning the same resources towards fighting dementia would save you a hell of a lot more money and effort in the longterm as a society.

You don’t ruin your entire life with dementia, it comes late, and you’re at massive risk of it just from under sleep during life.

Not at all similar to selling class a drugs or alcohol to minors for fecks sake. You don’t become an alcoholic from not drinking, or a drugs addict from not taking drugs, you do get dementia even from sleeping shit. Look at Reagan and Thatcher who boasted about it ffs.

 

[Ludens the Red]

I’m amazed at how many people say ‘ban heading in training. How can you train for set pieces (a huge part of football) if you don’t head the ball.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

Is this Nanny state bollocks the reason people often turn to the right in mid-life? fecking hell. It certainly seems like it.

Next up, no more skiing, mountain climbing, actually no sport altogether. No booze, no driving, and forget about things like scuba diving.

feck it, just play bubble football instead.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

That‘s not accurate at all. The percentage of GDP expended on drug/alcohol care for addicts+the management of drug/alcohol induced chronic disease is a drop in the ocean compared to the huge chunk of GDP every western nation spends annually on caring for and supporting elderly patients with dementia, and treating their associated chronic disease.

How much does 1 alcoholic cost in GDP over a lifetime, if he or she lasts a lifetime? Compared to one dementia patient?

Cause I’m sure we’d have a shit load more alcoholics around if we scrapped the minimum age, which you think is similar to allowing heading in football.

 

[Red_toad]

Most drugs were also legal until they weren't. Head injuries are a serious concern and will mostly likely lead to change in rules or banning whole sports. You may want to be the hardest man on earth, that's up to you. Also, the fact that humans are destroying the planet is the most nonsensical argument against protecting players from injury.

And to add on top of all that, I know that such a change will most likely make football a worse/different spectacle. Fully aware of it.

Yet again, I did not advocate a change of law for illegal things to become legal. Quit with that line of thought you have going on there. No idea where you’re going with the drugs thing, as they’re illegal now, playing competitive sports isn’t.
If people wish to partake in a sport they’re legally allowed to do, then who is to say they’re not allowed to, it can be made safer and it probably is far better than 40 odd years ago when Nobby and co played.
Oh and I was asking who this we are, you obviously missed that. It wasn’t an argument it was a question. But as you’re on the old high horse on this thread and want everyone banned from taking any risk, good luck with your quest.

 

[georgipep]

Yet again, I did not advocate a change of law for illegal things to become legal. Quit with that line of thought you have going on there. No idea where you’re going with the drugs thing, as they’re illegal now, playing competitive sports isn’t.
If people wish to partake in a sport they’re legally allowed to do, then who is to say they’re not allowed to, it can be made safer and it probably is far better than 40 odd years ago when Nobby and co played.
Oh and I was asking who this we are, you obviously missed that. It wasn’t an argument it was a question. But as you’re on the old high horse on this thread and want everyone banned from taking any risk, good luck with your quest.

I think you're not getting my point. Playing football is legal. By the laws of the game hitting you in the genitals or playing with your hands, is illegal, right? So, as drugs were once legal and now illegal, heading can become illegal in the future too.

And if you don't get why I'm using drugs as a comparable example, it's because the decision to make them illegal is to protect people from potential harm from drug use. Similarly, banning heading of the ball would be done to protect players from the potential harm.

Not sure what high horse you are reading or seeing, but here is one for you:

(as you can see, my ladder fell and I'm stuck up here)

 

[Red_toad]

I think you're not getting my point. Playing football is legal. By the laws of the game hitting you in the genitals or playing with your hands, is illegal, right? So, as drugs were once legal and now illegal, heading can become illegal in the future too.

And if you don't get why I'm using drugs as a comparable example, it's because the decision to make them illegal is to protect people from potential harm from drug use. Similarly, banning heading of the ball would be done to protect players from the potential harm.

Not sure what high horse you are reading or seeing, but here is one for you:

(as you can see, my ladder fell and I'm stuck up here)

like I said enjoy your quest of getting everyone to agree with you to living in a sterile environment where any fun activities they may wish to choose to partake in are banned, just in case there’s an element of risk involved.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

I don't see why there should be any ban. I don't believe the research supports it. Plus the balls these days are much lighter than previous incarnations and do get lighter every decade. Incomparison to what was used in the 60s and 70s.

 

[Melbourne Red]

Read page 5 and 6 Chief.

 

[georgipep]

like I said enjoy your quest of getting everyone to agree with you to living in a sterile environment where any fun activities they may wish to choose to partake in are banned, just in case there’s an element of risk involved.

I don't remember ever saying I support or would like to see the ban. But because you can't seem to argue very well, you're attacking the person not the argument.

 

[Yakuza_devils]

https://www.espn.com.sg/soccer/manc...-ferguson-my-duty-to-raise-dementia-awareness

 

[André Dominguez]

https://web.wpi.edu/Pubs/E-project/Available/E-project-042412-175936/unrestricted/MQP_BJS_RE11.pdf

 

[renandstimpyfan83]

This last page has really reinforced my hatred of libertarians.

 

[Stack]

I don't see why there should be any ban. I don't believe the research supports it. Plus the balls these days are much lighter than previous incarnations and do get lighter every decade. In comparison to what was used in the 60s and 70s.

Sadly you are just horribly wrong about both the research and the ball weight. The weight of the balls used today is exactly the same as it was in the 70s, go look it up if you dont believe me. I still have an old Tango from the early 80s, its the same weight as the balls I use today. The weight of the ball thing keeps being brought up and it really is something people are getting very wrong. Brand new balls were used at every pro match in the 60s and its the same thing today. With respect to training, pro teams also got rid of balls as soon as they got out of shape. Train as you expect to play was a thing back then as it is today. I started playing in the 60s and coaching in the 90s. I coached on average 3 teams a season from 96 onwards, mostly kids teams and for every single team i coached I was given a new set of balls at the beginning of the season. The ball issue really is being twisted badly out of shape (excuse the pun)
Writing this has just triggered a memory from an U17 team I coached in 1999 at a week long tournament. One of my players took a head knock during a game and one of the parents of the opposition team spoke to me after the game. She was a doctor and was concerned that the player didnt take part in the rest of the tournament because of concern for delayed concussion etc. I bring this up because thats 22 years ago and of concern then. It may appear to be a brand new issue because its making the news in recent years but brain injury is something thats been known about for decades.

If you dont think the research points towards a problem then I suspect you havent really read much on the issue. Its been something thats been a concern for a long time now in a multitude of sports. Even when I was a teen in the 70s I had a coach who would warn us against heading the ball too much at training because of what he called delayed concussion. Brain trauma and brain injuries happen outside of sports frequently and there is a huge amount of information and knowledge about that. In the 80s I was an engineer for Phillips and worked on some of their MRI scanners. MRI scanning has been around since the 70s.

Im not advocating a ban btw, what I am doing is refuting the idea that the research doesnt indicate a real problem and I am refuting the ball issue. The research with respect to repeated impact on the human skull and brain is absolutely out there. You dont need football only research to understand the dangers and issue.

There are however things that can be done to help reduce the problem such as limiting when people begin heading the ball and also something I learned which is how to coach heading the ball correctly with a direct view to reduce the concussive issue. Often kids teams are coached by parents who are trying their best to help but have no knowledge of the game.
Heading is just one skill and it wont hurt the game professionally if players are learning the skill as they become adults. Also more rigorous testing of players after training or games where suspected problem knocks occur can be introduced. Clear protocols for dealing with incidents at all levels of the game can be introduced. Its no coincidence that we see in other sports doctors now checking players after head knocks, Rugby being a clear example of it now becoming part of the game.

Please people stop repeating the nonsense that the research isnt there. It is.

 

[SadlerMUFC]

Silly rule. At my sons school they banned headers yet the coach still has them crossing the ball on corner kicks

 

[HTG]

Silly rule. At my sons school they banned headers yet the coach still has them crossing the ball on corner kicks

It’s the coach who’s silly, not the rule.

 

[SadlerMUFC]

It’s the coach who’s silly, not the rule.

It's silly. There is risk in sport. Bubble wrapping players won't eliminate injuries. What's next? No slide tackling?

 

[HTG]

It's silly. There is risk in sport. Bubble wrapping players won't eliminate injuries. What's next? No slide tackling?

If you think a rule preventing kids from getting lasting brain damage is silly and comparable to the stuff you’re posting there, I don’t think there’s enough common ground for further discussion. So I’ll just say that: if I had kids, I’d be really happy about rules protecting their health and safety and I‘d be very mad about a coach, who wilfully disobeyed rules to protect children’s health.

 

[Stack]

It's silly. There is risk in sport. Bubble wrapping players won't eliminate injuries. What's next? No slide tackling?

Debate over, you win. The argument you have put forward is foolproof

 

[SadlerMUFC]

If you think a rule preventing kids from getting lasting brain damage is silly and comparable to the stuff you’re posting there, I don’t think there’s enough common ground for further discussion. So I’ll just say that: if I had kids, I’d be really happy about rules protecting their health and safety and I‘d be very mad about a coach, who wilfully disobeyed rules to protect children’s health.

In hockey they decided to get rid of body checking because "it causes concussions". So kids played well into their teens without body checking. But then all of a sudden there was body checking. But because they got rid of this basic skill that used to be learned from a young age (not only how to hit, but how to take a hit), all of a sudden teens were getting injured at a higher rate. The solution isn't to get rid of heading. It's to make sure they are doing it properly.

 

[renandstimpyfan83]

Getting rid of heading in training and youth football makes sense as a way of phasing it out while avoiding as much outrage from the old school. At some point, players will be so inept at heading that it will no longer be considered a worthwhile tactic to play an aerial ball and it will cease to be part of the game.

It's silly. There is risk in sport. Bubble wrapping players won't eliminate injuries. What's next? No slide tackling?

Slide tackles are practically banned now. Unless a player perfectly wins the ball without taking any of the man a foul is going to be given and even then if the tackler is considered to have been "out of control" he can be penalised.

 

[Stack]

Just to press home a point. This is a direct quote from the first paragraph of a research article on Head Injuries in Sport first published in 1996. Its from the British Journal of Sports Medicine and is the second link available if people search for " Scholarly articles for head injury in Sport".

"Every effort must be made to protect the athlete's head as injury can lead to dementia, epilepsy, paralysis, and death." Thats from 1996

This issue isnt something thats brand new.

Also just adding a link to a different article thats worth a read. Its titled " A Neurosurgeons guide to head injury in Sport. " https://www.aans.org/Patients/Neurosurgical-Conditions-and-Treatments/Sports-related-Head-Injury

 

[renandstimpyfan83]

It’s the coach who’s silly, not the rule.

Even in professional football, crossing from corners is such a low probability scoring opportunity that it rarely makes sense to bother unless it's late in the game and you're desperate or you're a Tony Pulis side that is essentially built for those situations.

I'd be interested to see if the frequency of short corners has increased without fans in the grounds.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

Sadly you are just horribly wrong about both the research and the ball weight. The weight of the balls used today is exactly the same as it was in the 70s, go look it up if you dont believe me. I still have an old Tango from the early 80s, its the same weight as the balls I use today. The weight of the ball thing keeps being brought up and it really is something people are getting very wrong. Brand new balls were used at every pro match in the 60s and its the same thing today. With respect to training, pro teams also got rid of balls as soon as they got out of shape. Train as you expect to play was a thing back then as it is today. I started playing in the 60s and coaching in the 90s. I coached on average 3 teams a season from 96 onwards, mostly kids teams and for every single team i coached I was given a new set of balls at the beginning of the season. The ball issue really is being twisted badly out of shape (excuse the pun)
Writing this has just triggered a memory from an U17 team I coached in 1999 at a week long tournament. One of my players took a head knock during a game and one of the parents of the opposition team spoke to me after the game. She was a doctor and was concerned that the player didnt take part in the rest of the tournament because of concern for delayed concussion etc. I bring this up because thats 22 years ago and of concern then. It may appear to be a brand new issue because its making the news in recent years but brain injury is something thats been known about for decades.

If you dont think the research points towards a problem then I suspect you havent really read much on the issue. Its been something thats been a concern for a long time now in a multitude of sports. Even when I was a teen in the 70s I had a coach who would warn us against heading the ball too much at training because of what he called delayed concussion. Brain trauma and brain injuries happen outside of sports frequently and there is a huge amount of information and knowledge about that. In the 80s I was an engineer for Phillips and worked on some of their MRI scanners. MRI scanning has been around since the 70s.

Im not advocating a ban btw, what I am doing is refuting the idea that the research doesnt indicate a real problem and I am refuting the ball issue. The research with respect to repeated impact on the human skull and brain is absolutely out there. You dont need football only research to understand the dangers and issue.

There are however things that can be done to help reduce the problem such as limiting when people begin heading the ball and also something I learned which is how to coach heading the ball correctly with a direct view to reduce the concussive issue. Often kids teams are coached by parents who are trying their best to help but have no knowledge of the game.
Heading is just one skill and it wont hurt the game professionally if players are learning the skill as they become adults. Also more rigorous testing of players after training or games where suspected problem knocks occur can be introduced. Clear protocols for dealing with incidents at all levels of the game can be introduced. Its no coincidence that we see in other sports doctors noow checking players after head knocks, Rugby being a clear example of it now becoming part of the game.

Please people stop repeating the nonsense that the research isnt there. It is.

answer one simple question. Does the research support a ban on heading. Yes or no?


Because research supporting a ban on heading. And reasearch not existing are not the same things.

 

[Stack]

answer one simple question. Does the research support a ban on heading. Yes or not?

That is a really simplistic question which diverts from the reality. The research has not come to a conclusion of banning heading, the research merely gives authorities information to make decisions on. The purpose of research is to inform.
I can play the simplistic question approach to. One simple question, have you done significant reading upon the subject of brain trauma injuries in sports. Yes or No?

 

[Gehrman]

I hated trying to defend Bicycle kicks with a header only to succeed and get smacked in the face.. Still I don't think heading should be banned. It's a risk that comes with the sport and some sports come with a risk. Perhaps players can play with some sort of protective headband if they want to.

 

[morbidsaint]

Fair enough restrict heading or whatever in training, but to suggest removing it from he game altogether is ludicrous.

This is a career choice, like any other it comes with it's own potential consequences. The players should be educated to be knowledgeable enough about the long term effects of the game the from a young age.

The balls now move faster but are about 3 times lighter than they used to be. So the impact is roughly the same from what I've read. But there is less heading in the game now than there used to be, so you cannot really compare this current generation of players to previous until they have come to an age where the data shows that there is more or less effect than what there used to be.

How many former players can't walk properly because of injuries? Roy Keane has had hip operations. Batistuta once wanted a doctor to cut off his legs because of the pain in his ankles. Dean Ashton has had to use a walking stick because his ankles are fused due to injuries. Do they also want to restrict running and tackling?

In a few years I can see that football will be so heavily sanitized, regulated and reformed it will be about as enjoyable to watch as Formula One. Top level football is already getting boring enough to watch as it is.

Accept that this is a contact sport and if want to play at the highest level you should be aware of and be ready to accept the consequenses of it.

100%. Like the F1 example.. an absolute zzzzzzzz-fest.

 

[Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber]

That is a really simplistic question which diverts from the reality.

Its isn't simplistic at all. You insisted I was completely wrong to state I didn't believe the research supported an eventual total ban of heading in the sport, as the question that started the thread asked. I can comfortably admit you were
right that I was wrong about the weight of the ball over time. But I'm within my rights to openly challenge your second assertion

For that assertion immediately made me suspect you did not fully under stand all of what you replied to. Your response to my question has pretty much confirmed the suspicion .....

The research has not come to a conclusion of banning heading, the research merely gives authorities information to make decisions on. The purpose of research is to inform.

I hope you do realize the question that started this thread asked ': "Is it a matter of time before heading is banned?". Basically people in here are sharing opinions on it and seeking to know if the information in the research answers that question definitively either affirming a future ban or not . If that's too simplistic nor realistic enough for you. I'm not sure why you are bothering with the thread in the first place

I can play the simplistic question approach to. ......

That's the problem right there. You seem to think we are playing some kind of game. You seriously need to chill. We are in here to all exchange opinions, information, educate and learn from each other on the matter. Not to have a dick measuring contest over the net.....

 

[Ole's screen]

There was never a sport worth playing and watching that did not carry some risk of bodily harm.

I think in the quest to make the game safer for athletes (a necessary and laudable goal), one must not forget the above statement. One of the reasons sports is such a big industry has something to do with the fact that the human body is put on the line for the pursuit of athletic greatness.

 

[Lord SInister]

Given how crap we are when it comes to defending crosses, I hope it is.

 

[simplyared]

Can't see it happening! It would take away an aspect of the game that would affect the entertainment value too much. Do as they did in cricket when they introduced headguards for batsmen. Don't take heading out of the game but introduce some form of protection which could work. That was just off the top of my head btw

 

[Barthez]

A lot of the former footballers whom have been diagnosed with dementia were heading footballs like lead weights. Footballs have come on leaps and bounds since then, even since the balls I was heading in the 80s. A lot more research is required on the modern football

 

[dev1l]

Can't see it happening! It would take away an aspect of the game that would affect the entertainment value too much. Do as they did in cricket when they introduced headguards for batsmen. Don't take heading out of the game but introduce some form of protection which could work. That was just off the top of my head btw

Re Headguards . I think that s where we ll end up with.

Though I can't imagine a headguard on our Harry s head .