Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Forum index | Previous Thread | Next thread
More on banning heading... 18:27 - Aug 2 with 1002 viewsKropotkin123

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/58060644

"[I think we are well past the point] where we say the evidence is sufficiently strong where we should consider a sport without unnecessary head impact".

As those of you have discussed this with me before know, I agree with this stance.

The article goes into more detail, identifying defenders as those with the worst health impact.

Submit your 1-24 league prediction here -https://www.twtd.co.uk/forum/514096/page:1 - for the opportunity to get a free Ipswich top.
Poll: Is a cup run more important than getting promoted
Blog: Round Four: Eagle

0
More on banning heading... on 18:47 - Aug 2 with 943 viewsstrikalite

They might as well change the rules of the game then, you think how many corners there are in a game, and how many of those result in a headed clearance, a lot, and the lower the standard of football, the more headers there will be..

If you can't practice what is part of the game then change it, simple..
0

More on banning heading... on 18:55 - Aug 2 with 923 viewsronnyd

More on banning heading... on 18:47 - Aug 2 by strikalite

They might as well change the rules of the game then, you think how many corners there are in a game, and how many of those result in a headed clearance, a lot, and the lower the standard of football, the more headers there will be..

If you can't practice what is part of the game then change it, simple..


Play it like 5 a side, nothing over shoulder height.
0
More on banning heading... on 19:06 - Aug 2 with 900 viewsvictorywilhappen

Sorry. Didn't see this thread. Did the Independent story.

Goalkeeper is looking a good position for the kids.
0

More on banning heading... on 19:08 - Aug 2 with 891 viewsstrikalite

More on banning heading... on 18:55 - Aug 2 by ronnyd

Play it like 5 a side, nothing over shoulder height.


It'll probably come to that, don't see a way round it...
0
More on banning heading... on 19:10 - Aug 2 with 886 viewsZXBlue

More on banning heading... on 19:08 - Aug 2 by strikalite

It'll probably come to that, don't see a way round it...


Meanwhile we allow boxing...

I would be interested to know the age of the data being used and how it alligns with changes to balls before reaching any firm view.
2
More on banning heading... on 19:11 - Aug 2 with 880 viewsWacko

There's a difference between banning something outright and making people aware of the dangers with warnings etc. It depends how libertarian you are if you think people should have a choice, like they do with alcohol / junk food and which some countries give regarding certain recreational drugs. I personally think the best, most viable outcome is that these continued messages change the culture of football, i.e. much a more of a passing game (Mick OUT!)

Poll: Who would you rather see lose their job?

0

More on banning heading... on 19:13 - Aug 2 with 874 viewsSomethingBlue

Think (and so do plenty of people in the game) that the answer will end up involving some sort of protective headgear – that plus the balls becoming ever lighter will hopefully make the risk much smaller. Personally I think banning heading outright would be highly extreme.

Blog: The Way Back From Here Will Be Long, But There is a Way

1

More on banning heading... on 19:19 - Aug 2 with 844 viewsbluelagos

More on banning heading... on 19:13 - Aug 2 by SomethingBlue

Think (and so do plenty of people in the game) that the answer will end up involving some sort of protective headgear – that plus the balls becoming ever lighter will hopefully make the risk much smaller. Personally I think banning heading outright would be highly extreme.


Seems to me that the clashing of heads is potentially every bit as dangerous as heading a ball. Headgear would provide protection for that scenario too.

Poll: This new lockdown poll - what you reckon?

0
Login to get fewer ads

More on banning heading... on 19:35 - Aug 2 with 792 viewsMarshalls_Mullet

More on banning heading... on 19:10 - Aug 2 by ZXBlue

Meanwhile we allow boxing...

I would be interested to know the age of the data being used and how it alligns with changes to balls before reaching any firm view.


This.

Poll: Would love to see one of our midfield contribute 10+ goals. Who is most likely.

1
More on banning heading... on 22:27 - Aug 2 with 656 viewsMerseyBlue

More on banning heading... on 19:11 - Aug 2 by Wacko

There's a difference between banning something outright and making people aware of the dangers with warnings etc. It depends how libertarian you are if you think people should have a choice, like they do with alcohol / junk food and which some countries give regarding certain recreational drugs. I personally think the best, most viable outcome is that these continued messages change the culture of football, i.e. much a more of a passing game (Mick OUT!)


You can't expect football clubs to lead the way on this without changes to the rules - if the majority of teams were to decide to keep the ball on the deck then other teams would seek to capitalise on the lack of aerial battles by doing the opposite. It would massively change the game but if the data holds out that these problems could be avoided by a ban on heading, then banning heading would be the responsible thing to do.

On boxing that others have mentioned, it's a different argument in my eyes. If you get into a ring to throw punches st one another, then the head is going to be a primary target. I enjoy boxing but I have often thought that fight sports that centre around making contact with the head sit in a strange space in civilised society. I'm not saying that it should be banned, but I'm surprised that there isn't more clamour for it.

Some will say that life is being sanitised too much and that sports people know the rules of the sport they enter into. Nonetheless, we have so much more understanding of the dangers of head trauma than we have done in the past, it's right that these things are questioned whether you're for or against.

"Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."
Poll: Who will be the winner?

0
More on banning heading... on 22:31 - Aug 2 with 649 viewsZXBlue

More on banning heading... on 22:27 - Aug 2 by MerseyBlue

You can't expect football clubs to lead the way on this without changes to the rules - if the majority of teams were to decide to keep the ball on the deck then other teams would seek to capitalise on the lack of aerial battles by doing the opposite. It would massively change the game but if the data holds out that these problems could be avoided by a ban on heading, then banning heading would be the responsible thing to do.

On boxing that others have mentioned, it's a different argument in my eyes. If you get into a ring to throw punches st one another, then the head is going to be a primary target. I enjoy boxing but I have often thought that fight sports that centre around making contact with the head sit in a strange space in civilised society. I'm not saying that it should be banned, but I'm surprised that there isn't more clamour for it.

Some will say that life is being sanitised too much and that sports people know the rules of the sport they enter into. Nonetheless, we have so much more understanding of the dangers of head trauma than we have done in the past, it's right that these things are questioned whether you're for or against.


Boxing isnt different. Its a sport where much more severe head blows are to be expected as part of the game. Both sports can expect blows to the head regularly. I share your discomfort about it in a civilised society.
1
More on banning heading... on 22:46 - Aug 2 with 624 viewsMerseyBlue

More on banning heading... on 22:31 - Aug 2 by ZXBlue

Boxing isnt different. Its a sport where much more severe head blows are to be expected as part of the game. Both sports can expect blows to the head regularly. I share your discomfort about it in a civilised society.


That's certainly true. I suppose what I mean to say is that the difference is that you make the conscious choice to head the ball, whilst you spend the majority of your time trying to avoid your opponents blows to your head.

Rugby has made a lot of efforts to try and minimise head contact but it still happens and the force is frightening at times. I regularly watch St Helens in the rugby league and whilst I love the game, I often wince at the impact.

As much as I love most sports, they're really not important enough to justify a risk of long term problems caused by head impact

"Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."
Poll: Who will be the winner?

0
More on banning heading... on 23:28 - Aug 2 with 585 viewsZXBlue

More on banning heading... on 22:46 - Aug 2 by MerseyBlue

That's certainly true. I suppose what I mean to say is that the difference is that you make the conscious choice to head the ball, whilst you spend the majority of your time trying to avoid your opponents blows to your head.

Rugby has made a lot of efforts to try and minimise head contact but it still happens and the force is frightening at times. I regularly watch St Helens in the rugby league and whilst I love the game, I often wince at the impact.

As much as I love most sports, they're really not important enough to justify a risk of long term problems caused by head impact


It rather depends what the risk is. 3.5 times more likely than the population? Increases it to 20%. I find that surprising. Are we really finding 20% of footballers (and 25-30 percent of defenders) get dementia? If so- I agree.

What we have is old data based on old heavy water absorbing balls though. So its difficult.
0
More on banning heading... on 23:32 - Aug 2 with 580 viewsClapham_Junction

More on banning heading... on 19:10 - Aug 2 by ZXBlue

Meanwhile we allow boxing...

I would be interested to know the age of the data being used and how it alligns with changes to balls before reaching any firm view.


In the BBC report it mentions that it goes up to the late 1990s.
0
More on banning heading... on 23:40 - Aug 2 with 568 viewsZXBlue

More on banning heading... on 23:32 - Aug 2 by Clapham_Junction

In the BBC report it mentions that it goes up to the late 1990s.


So people who stopped playing 20 years ago and are in their 50s? And 30% of them have dementia? Seems surprising.

Problem is with so many of these things, you have to go to source because bbc and other outlets simply dont know how to read science and stats, and even if they did, they would dumb it down to make a story.
0
More on banning heading... on 06:55 - Aug 3 with 454 viewsMerseyBlue

More on banning heading... on 23:28 - Aug 2 by ZXBlue

It rather depends what the risk is. 3.5 times more likely than the population? Increases it to 20%. I find that surprising. Are we really finding 20% of footballers (and 25-30 percent of defenders) get dementia? If so- I agree.

What we have is old data based on old heavy water absorbing balls though. So its difficult.


I suppose there has to be a rate of increase which we deem negligible and one that we deem too much - I think you're right that we need someone to go over the raw data and explain it and the context better than the articles and news segments do.

Depending on when that data specifically goes up to some of those players could now be in their mid 60s. If there is evidence of an increased rate of early onset dementia for people in their 40s or 50s then that would be particularly noteworthy.

I'm unsure how much difference the type of ball will make to this. I can see the logic why people expect the older, heavier ball to have more of an impact but it may not be that simple. I think it was the British Medical Association who said that whilst boxing gloves prevent more cuts to the head, they may increase the risk of brain injuries because the cushioning of the glove allows the puncher to punch harder and faster. I wonder if you could make a similar argument with crossing the ball and the frequency and casual use of headers in the modern game.
[Post edited 3 Aug 6:57]

"Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience."
Poll: Who will be the winner?

0
More on banning heading... on 09:07 - Aug 3 with 373 viewsmonty_radio

More on banning heading... on 19:10 - Aug 2 by ZXBlue

Meanwhile we allow boxing...

I would be interested to know the age of the data being used and how it alligns with changes to balls before reaching any firm view.


Though the Telegraph today carries a report on work by a Professor who claims to have data going way back that proves that the change to synthetic balls have made no difference. Personally, though I think that changes are inevitable, I think that the data for the early part of the 20th Century would be hard to get at across the board and that conclusions from that period would likely find whatever the researcher wanted to find.

The personal choice argument, while it seems a strong one to those who are libertarian, is a sailed ship in today's coercive mindset. 10 thousand Frenchmen might still be wrong, but not 10 thousand Brits.

Blog: Too Many Suspects? – A Swede Ramble

0
More on banning heading... on 09:24 - Aug 3 with 345 viewsIpswichKnight

More on banning heading... on 19:19 - Aug 2 by bluelagos

Seems to me that the clashing of heads is potentially every bit as dangerous as heading a ball. Headgear would provide protection for that scenario too.


For anything outside the penalty area you could bring in a hockey style rule where the person first to where the ball is landing can not be interfered with and you can not tackle them for 5M would allow the receiver to bring the ball down without heading.
0
More on banning heading... on 10:38 - Aug 3 with 301 viewsClapham_Junction

More on banning heading... on 23:40 - Aug 2 by ZXBlue

So people who stopped playing 20 years ago and are in their 50s? And 30% of them have dementia? Seems surprising.

Problem is with so many of these things, you have to go to source because bbc and other outlets simply dont know how to read science and stats, and even if they did, they would dumb it down to make a story.


If you go to the source it says exactly the same thing:
https://www.gla.ac.uk/news/headline_803997_en.html

"However, despite changes in football technology and head injury management over the decades, there is no evidence neurodegenerative disease risk changed for the population of footballers included in this study, whose careers spanned from around 1930 to the late 1990s."

Or the actual paper:
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaneurology/fullarticle/2782750?resultClick=1

"Regarding playing era, risk remained similar for all players born between 1910 and 1969."
0
More on banning heading... on 10:47 - Aug 3 with 282 viewsZXBlue

More on banning heading... on 10:38 - Aug 3 by Clapham_Junction

If you go to the source it says exactly the same thing:
https://www.gla.ac.uk/news/headline_803997_en.html

"However, despite changes in football technology and head injury management over the decades, there is no evidence neurodegenerative disease risk changed for the population of footballers included in this study, whose careers spanned from around 1930 to the late 1990s."

Or the actual paper:
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaneurology/fullarticle/2782750?resultClick=1

"Regarding playing era, risk remained similar for all players born between 1910 and 1969."


2 decade sub groups by year of birth. So the late 90s players are lumped in with those playing in late 70s presumably.

Not sure when the ball changes came, but they are certainly lighter now than in the 90s, and lighter int eh 90s than in the 70s I would imagine.

Also

"Our data demonstrate that risk of neurodegenerative disease among former professional soccer players remained similar across players born in an era when solely leather balls would be used to players born in an era when there was a transition from leather to synthetic balls.30 The current data set does not permit analysis of outcomes in players participating in an era when the soccer ball was solely synthetic. Further, there have been advances in sports medicine in recent decades, particularly around the assessment and management of symptomatic head injuries.11 As such, whether risk remains high in soccer players born after 1969 remains unknown."
[Post edited 3 Aug 10:49]
0

Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
About Us Contact Us Terms & Conditions Privacy Cookies Advertising
© TWTD 1995-2021