Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

Saturday, December 21, 04:12:01pm

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4 ]

• How does that work phasing out heading? What happens at corners? Can't get my head around it ... (NT) -- eganonoa, Tuesday, December 10, 12:58:06pm (175-183-84-143.adsl.dynamic.seed.net.tw/175.183.84.143)
  • Bad news for the once-invincible Arsenal (NT) -- Fkev, Tuesday, December 10, 01:00:43pm (219.122.199.146.dyn.plus.net/146.199.122.219)
  • Will have to dribble and pass it instead. Or just get rid of corner kicks. Apart from Arsenal the mostly promise much and deliver little. (NT) -- Juana Aorta, Tuesday, December 10, 01:04:18pm (217-155-46-35.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk/217.155.46.35)

  ---

• It will be terrible for the game. The only way to enforce this will be to make football like 5 aside and not allow it to go over waist height. As a defender will header it if it comes up high at him. Meanwhile I take it boxing has no new laws to protect their heads. (NT) -- Hg, Tuesday, December 10, 01:14:43pm (NoHost/31.94.34.15)
  • Not yet. (NT) -- Juana Aorta, Tuesday, December 10, 01:17:30pm (217-155-46-35.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk/217.155.46.35)

  ---

• Unfortunately the whole reason for it was summed up in this sentence "He is among a group of claimants taking legal action against football governing bodies over brain injuries allegedly suffered during their careers." The 3.5 times more likely doesn't take into account many things such as footballers lifestyle, weight of ball has definitely decreased, style of game is vastly different to 25+ years ago etc (NT) -- Jim© The Devon IP, Tuesday, December 10, 01:23:22pm (62-64-192-58.virtual1.co.uk/62.64.192.58)
  • From memory the Glasgow uni report didn't accept the lifestyle and ball weight argument. (NT) -- f bloke, Tuesday, December 10, 02:13:58pm (host86-134-9-66.range86-134.btcentralplus.com/86.134.9.66)
    • The weight of the ball could be argued but it's clearly not true. Re lifestyle most footballers now live like fitness fanatics with ice baths, massages, personalised fitness programmes, it's ludicrous that lifestyle isn't taken into account. The two players in the report, apparently loved a pint. (NT) -- Jim © (The Devon IP), Tuesday, December 10, 07:16:03pm (host86-156-235-143.range86-156.btcentralplus.com/86.156.235.143)
      • What has ice baths, life style and the fondness for a beer have to do with the impact on the brain of repeated heading of the ball? it is not my data nor my methodology but am not inclined to dismiss it on a hunch - a quick google search has shown a new report (yesterday) saying that lifestyle is not a factor in football dementia - I guess it is this report that has brought the topic back into the news (NT) -- f bloke, Tuesday, December 10, 08:04:02pm (host86-134-9-66.range86-134.btcentralplus.com/86.134.9.66)
        • Well two main drivers of dementia are supposed to be poor diet and excessive alcohol consumption. I don't think that's a huge issue with today's pampered fitness lot. Simple point I was making. (NT) -- Jim © (The Devon IP), Wednesday, December 11, 12:44:15am (host86-156-235-143.range86-156.btcentralplus.com/86.156.235.143)
          • Ok that’s fine - footballers of yesteryear are not as fit or as well nourished as the players of today - but were a lot fitter and better nourished than the rest of the population at that time and yet 3-5 times more likely to develop serious brain degenerative conditions. There is no increased likelihood for goalkeepers- and since they rarely head the ball must be indicative of something (NT) -- f bloke, Wednesday, December 11, 07:23:03am (host86-134-9-66.range86-134.btcentralplus.com/86.134.9.66)
            • That's a good point you make about keepers- has that been looked into in the report? One last thing I'd say against it, is that the style of football has changed in a major way now compared to even 25 years ago. Playing it out from the back for example, no long keeper kicks punted downfield to land on a CB's bonce. Must have a positive efffect? (NT) -- Jim© The Devon IP, Wednesday, December 11, 10:25:16am (62-64-192-58.virtual1.co.uk/62.64.192.58)
              • Its a few years since I read the report but I do recall either the report or a newspaper article saying average player = 3 times. CBs 5x and GKs 0 x. Key factors are length of playing time and position played. Like rugby it is often the cumulative effect of impacts that causes the issue. So agree the less heading the better which is why they are cutting down on it in training and why I am suggesting heading only in the penalty box - I even think it may make the game better. (NT) -- f bloke, Wednesday, December 11, 10:38:24am (host86-134-9-66.range86-134.btcentralplus.com/86.134.9.66)

  ---

• Helmets. Solved (NT) -- CB, Tuesday, December 10, 01:25:28pm (213-18-164-61.customer.gigaclear.net/213.18.164.61)

  ---

• Surely you know the risks when you take up the game? Otherwise do something else? (NT) -- Waterboy, Tuesday, December 10, 01:28:01pm (lanc-08-b2-v4wan-168332-cust3678.vm14.cable.virginm.net/80.5.238.95)
  • There's a duty of care on the part of the employer beyond that the employee knew the risks and that's that. I'm not sure what that duty is in this particular case, but there has to be something. Phasing out at young ages makes sense. They can't consent. But for adults: I suspect Jim gets at some of it with the lighter football. Stronger monitoring and medical support, during and after careers. Those sorts of things make sense. Doubt they'll ever have to ban heading (NT) -- eganonoa, Tuesday, December 10, 01:32:56pm (175-183-84-143.adsl.dynamic.seed.net.tw/175.183.84.143)

  ---

• It is worth searching the Glasgow university research on this - the research is somewhat damning. They need more data but all the indications are that the weight of the ball makes no difference since the balls are now more aerodynamic and travel at far greater velocity than the old balls. If anything, the suspicion is that the new balls may cause more damage. What would be worth trialling is banning all headers outside of the penalty boxes. (NT) -- f bloke, Tuesday, December 10, 01:46:31pm (host86-134-9-66.range86-134.btcentralplus.com/86.134.9.66)
  • That's very interesting. Do you have a link? CB jokes about helmets, but I do wonder why no soft protective headgear? As we know, Raul has that band to protect his fractured skull, and had something bigger before. (NT) -- eganonoa, Tuesday, December 10, 01:54:39pm (175-183-84-143.adsl.dynamic.seed.net.tw/175.183.84.143)
  • It will change when players can no longer get insurance to cover neuro degenerative disorders in later life, or when players start to sue the clubs or football authorities. I think this is a change that will come sooner than we might think. I think it might actually improve the game as a spectacle if they ban it. (NT) -- Juana Aorta, Tuesday, December 10, 02:01:53pm (217-155-46-35.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk/217.155.46.35)
  • I read a lengthy newspaper Article in the Guardian about 5/6 years and then looked a bit deeper into the Glasgow report - would need to do Google searches to find the report but am sure they can be found. Again from memory don't think helmets will help in the same way headguards don't help in Boxing (other than for cuts and bruising) and helmets don't work in American football - and it has been suggested that in some ways they can make things worse. (NT) -- f bloke, Tuesday, December 10, 02:24:21pm (host86-134-9-66.range86-134.btcentralplus.com/86.134.9.66)
    • Reading that report is quite concerning. I am sure there are parts that can be challenged but I don't think we can ignore all the findings just cos we don't like the potential impact on the game. Also, not sure it is a simple matter of personal choice - there is the impact on parents, spouses, children and society at large in dealing with eg CTE (NT) -- f bloke, Tuesday, December 10, 02:30:20pm (host86-134-9-66.range86-134.btcentralplus.com/86.134.9.66)
  • I need to read up on this, because although they might be correct in saying in saying that the new balls could worse, as force = mass x acceleration..it doesn’t negate the fact that players don’t get knocked out by the ball like they used too. Are they saying it’s more to do with repetition, as I find it very hard to believe that new balls hit harder. A lobbed ball will rely more on gravity for its downward force, which would be affected more by weight , than aerodynamics (NT) -- Hg, Tuesday, December 10, 02:57:30pm (NoHost/31.94.34.15)
    • i seem to recall that they did a test soaking old style balls and modern balls in water and the difference in weight wasn't as much as they had predicted - and that the velocity gap was greater than the weight gap - the modern balls still can hurt when you head them as I found out when I helped out in my sons football training about 10 years ago. (NT) -- f bloke, Tuesday, December 10, 03:07:26pm (host86-134-9-66.range86-134.btcentralplus.com/86.134.9.66)
      • There’s so many variables for this. Did they use a machine to test this, or did they do it using humans. And if it were humans did they use old and new boots, as older boots, although heavier and slower, would give the ball more force upon impact, than the new light weight boots. (NT) -- Hg, Tuesday, December 10, 03:16:01pm (NoHost/31.94.34.15)
        • I can't answer your questions re methodology and it may be that some of the findings can be challenged - but as said above, don't think the findings can be dismissed out of hand . In terms of boots - again I dunno but when I was growing up it was mainly the likes of Bobby C and Peter Lorimer who would regularly score from o/s the box - it seems to me that goals from distance much more commonplace now. - but that could be dodgy memory anecdotal evidence on my part. (NT) -- f bloke, Tuesday, December 10, 03:23:54pm (host86-134-9-66.range86-134.btcentralplus.com/86.134.9.66)
          • I’m disputing that heading a ball can make you more susceptible to dementia. Just find it really hard that the new balls can t you with as much force. Those old balls in the wet were like medics balls. (NT) -- Hg, Tuesday, December 10, 03:52:39pm (NoHost/31.94.34.14)
            • Sorry phone playing up. I’m not disputing, that should read. (NT) -- Hg, Tuesday, December 10, 03:55:08pm (NoHost/31.94.34.14)
    • Well just lernt something new. The old balls weigh exactly that same as a new does, when DRY. I’m sure as most of us who are a certain age will know, the differ massive when wet. (NT) -- Hg, Tuesday, December 10, 03:09:30pm (NoHost/31.94.34.14)
      • I’ve heard nothing about boxing being banned. (NT) -- K, Tuesday, December 10, 03:15:36pm (NoHost/37.72.155.225)
      • No - the tests involved soaking for some time - both the old and modern balls. Also the modern balls still can hurt when headed - it is just a question of whether the difference (if any) is sufficient to say what was once a problem is no longer a problem. The study is suggesting that it is still a problem. (NT) -- f bloke, Tuesday, December 10, 03:28:43pm (host86-134-9-66.range86-134.btcentralplus.com/86.134.9.66)

  ---

• Look at rugby union, far more advanced in this with regards who is liable and legal claims. RFU brought in loads of mitigation eg non contact younger ages, restrictions on how much they can train and yellow/red cards for head contact even if not deliberate. Get the old school moaning about changes at first but people come round, can’t see heading ever being outlawed, but some similar mitigations will come to football. (NT) -- Henry1879, Tuesday, December 10, 03:19:27pm (croy-26-b2-v4wan-167127-cust1611.vm24.cable.virginm.net/82.38.22.76)
  • That’s totally different though, it didn’t change the fabric of the rugby game. The equivilant to rugby would be to ban kicking of the ball. Plus there can’t be any mitigations for heading in football, you either allow or you don’t. It’s either to dangerous to head or ball, or it’s not. There can’t be an in between. (NT) -- Hg, Tuesday, December 10, 03:31:36pm (NoHost/31.94.34.14)
    • You can definitely mitigate if the problem is something caused by repetition. If the problem is too many impacts over the course of a career, reducing the likely number is a mitigation. Starting with youth makes sense. Reducing or eliminating heading in practices. That sort of thing. (NT) -- eganonoa, Tuesday, December 10, 03:51:43pm (unn-149-22-94-97.datapacket.com/149.22.94.97)
    • As below, mitigations things like restrictions based on age, how often heading is allowed in training (hasn’t something like this been introduced?). Nothing as drastic as union needs implementing, as impacts are far smaller in terms of concussions caused, but the frequency outside senior live matches can be greatly reduced, id imagine frequency x severity = damage, so reduce frequency. (NT) -- Henry1879, Tuesday, December 10, 04:41:02pm (croy-26-b2-v4wan-167127-cust1611.vm24.cable.virginm.net/82.38.22.76)
    • What they’ve done in union is not stop tackling, but stop (as far as they see possible) head contact, it isn’t the tackling that causes brain issues, it’s head contact and often concussions aren’t from tackling to the but clashes of head and accidents. Lots of work on technique too, body positions, duty of care brought in, all stuff football could take on if it wanted. (NT) -- Henry1879, Tuesday, December 10, 04:56:57pm (82-132-233-191.dab.02.net/82.132.233.191)
  • As said above - I would like to see trialled heading banned outside the penalty boxes with eg a booking and a free kick for any offence. Would considerably? reduce the number of impacts - and maybe, just maybe, might improve the game. (NT) -- f bloke, Tuesday, December 10, 03:33:22pm (host86-134-9-66.range86-134.btcentralplus.com/86.134.9.66)
    • And the answer to that will be, does it magically become safer to head a ball if you are inside some white painted lines. And the answer will be no, of course not. So like I say, you can only allow it, or disallow it. (NT) -- Hg, Tuesday, December 10, 03:37:47pm (NoHost/31.94.34.14)
      • I think there is a good chance that it will be outlawed in time but, in reality, doing it overnight will be difficult to achieve. There is a correlation between CTE and the length of a career and the position played. Eg CBS are 5 times (not 3.5) more likely to suffer since they head the ball much more. Restricting the areas where heading the ball is permitted will reduce the number of impacts and is therefore some attempt at mitigation (NT) -- f bloke, Tuesday, December 10, 03:51:25pm (host86-134-9-66.range86-134.btcentralplus.com/86.134.9.66)