Change to the number of headers allowed in training

[Ellis Rimmer]

23 minutes ago, shandypants said:

Head contact is banned in the NFL and has been for years. 
 

Concussion is caused by the brain slamming around in the skull and not by the impact itself. 

The brain is slamming because of the huge force caused by 2 gigantic men slamming into each other

 

If a ball hit a helmet, you wouldn't get the same level of force because the helmet is too rigid

[dumboldowl]

On 28/07/2021 at 11:48, markg said:

All players to wear llera style skull caps with trackers

 

Good idea.  With a bell on it that rings every time they head the ball, and a light that flashes when they are in breach of the permitted number of headers, and automatically transmits a signal FA HQ and immobilises the offender for three games.  On reflection I think some of our players had them fitted last season.

[shandypants]

9 hours ago, Ellis Rimmer said:

The brain is slamming because of the huge force caused by 2 gigantic men slamming into each other

 

If a ball hit a helmet, you wouldn't get the same level of force because the helmet is too rigid

Oh FFS! Why do people on social media have to argue their point, even when they’re just guessing?!!

 

Read this article (look at the “Can I have a concussion if I didn’t hit my head” section. It clearly states that concussion is caused by the brain crashing against the skull. Heading the ball while wearing a helmet will not remove the risk of concussion)>> https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.cognitivefxusa.com/blog/football-concussion-prevention-and-recovery%3fhs_amp=true

 

Edited August 24, 2021 by shandypants

[Ellis Rimmer]

18 minutes ago, shandypants said:

Oh FFS! Why do people on social media have to argue their point, even when they’re just guessing?!!

 

Read this article (look at the “Can I have a concussion if I didn’t hit my head” section. It clearly states that concussion is caused by the brain crashing against the skull. Heading the ball while wearing a helmet will not remove the risk of concussion)>> https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.cognitivefxusa.com/blog/football-concussion-prevention-and-recovery%3fhs_amp=true

 

How have you come to this conclusion based on that article as that isn't mentioned in there? 

 

Why would the brain crash against the skull if there is a large protective rigid helmet protecting the head? Could you get a concussion if a ball hit your car while you were in it?

[shandypants]

24 minutes ago, Ellis Rimmer said:

How have you come to this conclusion based on that article as that isn't mentioned in there? 

 

Why would the brain crash against the skull if there is a large protective rigid helmet protecting the head? Could you get a concussion if a ball hit your car while you were in it?

The brain floats within the skull. When heading a ball, when the head meets the ball, momentum can make the brain travel towards the skull and slam into it at speed thus potentially causing a concussion. This would still happen if the player wore a helmet. I’m just 

[Ellis Rimmer]

3 minutes ago, shandypants said:

The brain floats within the skull. When heading a ball, when the head meets the ball, momentum can make the brain travel towards the skull and slam into it at speed thus potentially causing a concussion. This would still happen if the player wore a helmet. I’m just 

you’re therefore saying it’s not the ball causing the damage it’s the forward momentum of flexing the neck that is causing the damage then?

 

[shandypants]

8 hours ago, Ellis Rimmer said:

you’re therefore saying it’s not the ball causing the damage it’s the forward momentum of flexing the neck that is causing the damage then?

 

In some cases, yes, but typically, at the event point when the head meets the ball. If the ball has enough momentum, that energy can jolt the head (or slow the head’s momentum significantly) but the brain still travels and hits the inside of the skull. Wearing a helmet won’t stop the brain from moving; it may take away some of the energy from the impact but, if the forces are strong enough, it won’t stop the brain from travelling inside the skull, hence, there is still potential for concussion to occur. In other cases, it could be the direct impact that causes concussion but this is more likely to be a clash of heads, head hitting the post, etc. 

[Geedee]

27 minutes ago, shandypants said:

In some cases, yes, but typically, at the event point when the head meets the ball. If the ball has enough momentum, that energy can jolt the head (or slow the head’s momentum significantly) but the brain still travels and hits the inside of the skull. Wearing a helmet won’t stop the brain from moving; it may take away some of the energy from the impact but, if the forces are strong enough, it won’t stop the brain from travelling inside the skull, hence, there is still potential for concussion to occur. In other cases, it could be the direct impact that causes concussion but this is more likely to be a clash of heads, head hitting the post, etc. 

On that basis what do you think is the solution? Other than actually banning heading totally?

[Ellis Rimmer]

31 minutes ago, shandypants said:

In some cases, yes, but typically, at the event point when the head meets the ball. If the ball has enough momentum, that energy can jolt the head (or slow the head’s momentum significantly) but the brain still travels and hits the inside of the skull. Wearing a helmet won’t stop the brain from moving; it may take away some of the energy from the impact but, if the forces are strong enough, it won’t stop the brain from travelling inside the skull, hence, there is still potential for concussion to occur. In other cases, it could be the direct impact that causes concussion but this is more likely to be a clash of heads, head hitting the post, etc. 

I understand what you’re saying but the helmet is too rigid for that to happen on a regular basis, also the angle in which they head the ball would be reduced if they were wearing helmets therefore they wouldn’t actually have to flex the neck as much either and create that momentum to head the ball. I think the risk would be greatly mitigated. Obviously they aren’t going to consider playing in American football helmet anyway.

[shandypants]

1 hour ago, Geedee said:

On that basis what do you think is the solution? Other than actually banning heading totally?

I think banning heading totally is the solution for concussion from heading the ball (you would be correct if you accused me of “semantics”) - concussion will always occur in any contact sport. 
 

I will reiterate though that I’m not advocating that we ban heading (it’s a part of the game), I’m just stating that wearing a helmet won’t fully remove the risk of concussion from heading the ball. 

I don’t know what the answer is to this particular conundrum other than totally banning heading (and I wouldn’t want that to happen). 

[shandypants]

1 hour ago, Ellis Rimmer said:

I understand what you’re saying but the helmet is too rigid for that to happen on a regular basis, also the angle in which they head the ball would be reduced if they were wearing helmets therefore they wouldn’t actually have to flex the neck as much either and create that momentum to head the ball. I think the risk would be greatly mitigated. Obviously they aren’t going to consider playing in American football helmet anyway.

I disagree and I would suggest to agree to disagree on this one. 

[scram]

4 hours ago, Ellis Rimmer said:

I understand what you’re saying but the helmet is too rigid for that to happen on a regular basis, also the angle in which they head the ball would be reduced if they were wearing helmets therefore they wouldn’t actually have to flex the neck as much either and create that momentum to head the ball. I think the risk would be greatly mitigated. Obviously they aren’t going to consider playing in American football helmet anyway.

 

 

How have you come to that conclusion?

 

[Ellis Rimmer]

13 minutes ago, scram said:

 

 

How have you come to that conclusion?

 

Which conclusion 

[scram]

This

 

8 hours ago, scram said:

also the angle in which they head the ball would be reduced if they were wearing helmets therefore they wouldn’t actually have to flex the neck as much either and create that momentum to head the ball

 

[Emerson Thome]

On 19/08/2021 at 17:29, Ellis Rimmer said:

 

I think that although more likely to happen to a football, you have to consider that ex-footballers are often fitter people and often more affluent people. Therefore they live longer. The older you are the more likely dementia is. 

 

 

I'm not sure this is true for the footballers in their 70s and 80s now. They are not by and large that wealthy (most of the '66 team had to sell their medals and they were the very best of their day - what about the hundreds of others lower down the leagues?). And while they were fit in their 20s and 30s, many had health issues later in life.

 

Taking the England '66 team as a sample:

 

Gordon Banks - Died aged 81 (kidney cancer); no known dementia

George Cohen - Still alive (81); 

Ray Wilson - Died age 83 (dementia); having suffered with dementia for 14 years

Bobby Moore - Died age 59 (bowel cancer)

Jack Charlton - Died age 85 (cancer); dementia for c. 8 years

Nobby Stiles - Died age 78 (dementia), having suffered with dementia for around 15 years

Martin Peters - Died age 76 (dementia); dementia first publicly reported 4 years earlier, but it was late stage by then, so likely had it for 10 years or so.

Alan Ball - Died age 62 (heart attack)

Roger Hunt - Still alive (83); no known dementia

Bobby Charlton - Still alive (83); diagnosed with dementia last year

Geoff Hurst - Still alive (79); no known dementia

 

The life expectancy for men in the UK is 79, so the remaining 4 players would have to live very long lives for the team to significantly beat the average.

 

Only 7.1% of people in the UK over the age of 65 have dementia. Moore and Ball never reached 65. Wilson and Stiles contracted dementia relatively young. Banks was a goalie, so while he may have been knocked out by defenders elbows a few times he rarely had to head the ball. So 5/8 outfield players who lived to 65 to contract dementia is quite concerning.

 

Of course you can't tell from such a small sample size. I only use this to illustrate. But scientists have looked at footballers from that generation as a whole and dementia rates are 3.5 times higher than you would expect.

[Ellis Rimmer]

2 hours ago, Emerson Thome said:

 

I'm not sure this is true for the footballers in their 70s and 80s now. They are not by and large that wealthy (most of the '66 team had to sell their medals and they were the very best of their day - what about the hundreds of others lower down the leagues?). And while they were fit in their 20s and 30s, many had health issues later in life.

 

Taking the England '66 team as a sample:

 

Gordon Banks - Died aged 81 (kidney cancer); no known dementia

George Cohen - Still alive (81); 

Ray Wilson - Died age 83 (dementia); having suffered with dementia for 14 years

Bobby Moore - Died age 59 (bowel cancer)

Jack Charlton - Died age 85 (cancer); dementia for c. 8 years

Nobby Stiles - Died age 78 (dementia), having suffered with dementia for around 15 years

Martin Peters - Died age 76 (dementia); dementia first publicly reported 4 years earlier, but it was late stage by then, so likely had it for 10 years or so.

Alan Ball - Died age 62 (heart attack)

Roger Hunt - Still alive (83); no known dementia

Bobby Charlton - Still alive (83); diagnosed with dementia last year

Geoff Hurst - Still alive (79); no known dementia

 

The life expectancy for men in the UK is 79, so the remaining 4 players would have to live very long lives for the team to significantly beat the average.

 

Only 7.1% of people in the UK over the age of 65 have dementia. Moore and Ball never reached 65. Wilson and Stiles contracted dementia relatively young. Banks was a goalie, so while he may have been knocked out by defenders elbows a few times he rarely had to head the ball. So 5/8 outfield players who lived to 65 to contract dementia is quite concerning.

 

Of course you can't tell from such a small sample size. I only use this to illustrate. But scientists have looked at footballers from that generation as a whole and dementia rates are 3.5 times higher than you would expect.

Yes dementia is higher but many other health conditions are lower. 
 

It’s not a great sample to use anyway, many of the team made their living doing after dinner speaking which doesn’t sound conductive to a healthy lifestyle.

[Daniele Giovanni]

That's it banning kids from heading a ball is being banned, no more tackling in school rugby, let's give people a choice instead of wrapping them in cotton wool, what's next? Stopping people from wearing loud shirts near hospitals, in case they wake the sleeping pills, cmon grow a pair for god sake

Edited July 18, 2022 by Daniele Giovanni

[Salli]

Mental.

 

What did the unedited version say?

[Tewkesbury]

Look up CTE.

 

Once it's been fully researched, heading will probably be banned in the professional leagues too.

 

Let's let (or make in some parent's cases) kids risk brain damage over a game.

[StudentOwl]

Going soft = reducing dementia?

Gotcha