hibs.net Messageboard

 

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 58 of 58
  1. #31
    Testimonial Due Cataplana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Somewhere near Albequerque.
    Posts
    1,901
    Quote Originally Posted by Hibby Bairn View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    You would think that the scientists and charities would be all over this. Much more of a link than heading a football I would suggest. Iíve had another look and the top 10 per head of population is:

    Finland
    USA
    Canada
    Iceland
    Sweden
    Switzerland
    Norway
    Denmark
    Netherlands
    Belgium

    Apart from Switzerland as an outlier the rest are all geographically clustered and have large coastal boundaries.
    Perhaps they have been, and have decided there is no significance.

    One thing that jumped out at me from one of the sources I looked at (https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-with-the-highest-rates-of-deaths-from-dementia.html) is that deaths from dementia are being compared. The differences may be due to what is recorded on the death certificate.

    Anyway, in respect of heading the ball, I think that if there is a proven increase in risk, it makes sense to pull back from kids heading the ball.


  2. Log in to remove the advert

  3. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Cataplana View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Perhaps they have been, and have decided there is no significance.

    One thing that jumped out at me from one of the sources I looked at (https://www.worldatlas.com/articles/countries-with-the-highest-rates-of-deaths-from-dementia.html) is that deaths from dementia are being compared. The differences may be due to what is recorded on the death certificate.

    Anyway, in respect of heading the ball, I think that if there is a proven increase in risk, it makes sense to pull back from kids heading the ball.
    Your point about what is being recorded is probably not far off. Iíd guess that it seems to be more prevalent in western countries because thatís where people will know more about it. In less advanced countries people wonít have the same knowledge of dementia

  4. #33
    @hibs.net private member Carheenlea's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Age
    49
    Posts
    7,100
    Where will the David Grays of tomorrow learn the beautiful art of bulleting home cup winning, Hun deflating injury time goals?

  5. #34
    The games gone down hill since they outlawed proper tackling and this VAR nonsense. Take away heading or kids being taught how to head the ball and the game will just continue to decline even further.

  6. #35
    @hibs.net private member danhibees1875's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Age
    28
    Posts
    9,933
    Quote Originally Posted by Carheenlea View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Where will the David Grays of tomorrow learn the beautiful art of bulleting home cup winning, Hun deflating injury time goals?
    In the under 13s.

    I think it seems to be a good move. There's a link that shows footballers are X times more likely to suffer from the disease than not and I would assume the damage is more likely to be done at younger ages (guesswork) while brains and bones develop and strengthen so may as well protect them when young.

    If it all fails, what's the worst that's happened? We've spent too much time focusing on passing the ball on the ground.

    I find the English FA response quite strange. They're saying there isn't enough evidence to ban it yet. That sounds to me like there isn't enough evidence to not ban it either. Surely the sensible solution at that point is to ban it until there's evidence to show it isn't an issue and then reintroduce it.
    Mon the Hibs.

  7. #36
    If they arent going to ban it its pretty silly to say no heading before 13..... 7/8 years of time where they could be coached in how to head the ball properly lost and probably end up with worse injuries due to that.

  8. #37
    @hibs.net private member
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    3,270
    Quote Originally Posted by underscore View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    If they arent going to ban it its pretty silly to say no heading before 13..... 7/8 years of time where they could be coached in how to head the ball properly lost and probably end up with worse injuries due to that.
    How much heading do 10 year olds need to do? Get the ball down and focus on passing, shooting and dribbling. Heading is certainly a skill but I don't see it being a priority for kids.

  9. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by neil7908 View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    How much heading do 10 year olds need to do? Get the ball down and focus on passing, shooting and dribbling. Heading is certainly a skill but I don't see it being a priority for kids.
    Its not a priority but us others have stated on the thread its amazing how few kids are actually coached in it at all.... same goes for throw ins etc. They are all fundamentals of football, and lack of heading skill is the reason why you see so many goals are let in from corners etc.

  10. #39
    Heading is a HUGE part of the game, especially defending and being able to attack the ball. I remember as a kid not being taught and how brutal it was heading the ball with the top of your head and not the forehead. Some proper coaching goes a long way.

  11. #40
    It was bound to happen, we stopped kicking the ball years ago and moved onto kicking the man.
    Seriously though, I think its a good move anything to properly protect kids is good.

  12. #41
    I assume tackling in rugby is also banned for under 12s? I have no idea tbh but it must be as even more chance of brain jolts via that.

  13. #42
    @hibs.net private member The Spaceman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Age
    27
    Posts
    888
    Quote Originally Posted by underscore View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I assume tackling in rugby is also banned for under 12s? I have no idea tbh but it must be as even more chance of brain jolts via that.
    Not if you tackle properly.

  14. #43
    Administrator Vault Boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Norwich
    Age
    24
    Posts
    3,606
    Quote Originally Posted by underscore View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I assume tackling in rugby is also banned for under 12s? I have no idea tbh but it must be as even more chance of brain jolts via that.
    There are quite a few changes to the rules for U13s rugby in order to make it safer. Tackles are allowed, but there are more restrictions to certain types of movement and challenges. They quite often don't scrum either.

    I don't see any issue whatsoever with mitigating against risk to the long-term health of children, most of whom will never become professional footballers. The evidence linking headers to brain injury is pretty conclusive.

  15. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Vault Boy View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    There are quite a few changes to the rules for U13s rugby in order to make it safer. Tackles are allowed, but there are more restrictions to certain types of movement and challenges. They quite often don't scrum either.

    I don't see any issue whatsoever with mitigating against risk to the long-term health of children, most of whom will never become professional footballers. The evidence linking headers to brain injury is pretty conclusive.
    Boxing? Re the evidence Iíd like to see more detail on players from recent times.

  16. #45
    Administrator Vault Boy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Norwich
    Age
    24
    Posts
    3,606
    Quote Originally Posted by underscore View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Boxing? Re the evidence Iíd like to see more detail on players from recent times.
    Boxing is an incredibly dangerous sport when done competitively. I've got no interest in it and I'm not sure what the question is.

    There have been peer reviewed studies that show that heading a modern football causes short term mental impairment, including inhibiting memory performance immediately after a heading drill. The long term effects of this are pretty widely considered to be damaging by neurologists/concussion experts. There's not much debate to be had on this front.

  17. #46
    Testimonial Due Cataplana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Somewhere near Albequerque.
    Posts
    1,901
    Quote Originally Posted by Vault Boy View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Boxing is an incredibly dangerous sport when done competitively. I've got no interest in it and I'm not sure what the question is.

    There have been peer reviewed studies that show that heading a modern footbal causes short term mental impairment, including inhibiting memory performance immediately after a heading drill. The long term effects of this are pretty widely considered to be damaging by neurologists/concussion experts. There's not much debate to be had on this front.
    Maybe a bit of caution is advisable. Players that have been heading the newer, lightweight balls that came in the 90s will not be at an age where dementia will be showing itself yet.

    I recently saw an article that said aluminium was definitely a cause of dementia. When I looked into it more, another says there is no proof of that, at all

    However, where a reasonable doubt exists (most of the people with dementia were not professional footballers) then a bit of care with young brains can't go amiss.
    Last edited by Cataplana; Yesterday at 10:24 AM.

  18. #47
    Coaching Staff
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Antwerp
    Posts
    9,599
    Quote Originally Posted by underscore View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Its not a priority but us others have stated on the thread its amazing how few kids are actually coached in it at all.... same goes for throw ins etc. They are all fundamentals of football, and lack of heading skill is the reason why you see so many goals are let in from corners etc.
    Don't get throw ins until they're about 11 or 12 either.

  19. #48
    Coaching Staff jacomo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    exile
    Posts
    15,731
    Quote Originally Posted by DetroitHibs View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The games gone down hill since they outlawed proper tackling and this VAR nonsense. Take away heading or kids being taught how to head the ball and the game will just continue to decline even further.

    Science!

    I donít have time for those who point blank refuse to accept evidence being presented by experts in this field.

  20. #49
    Coaching Staff hibsbollah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Age
    49
    Posts
    23,107
    Quote Originally Posted by Cataplana View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Maybe a bit of caution is advisable. Players that have been heading the newer, lightweight balls that came in the 90s will not be at an age where dementia will be showing itself yet.

    I recently saw an article that said aluminium was definitely a cause of dementia. When I looked into it more, another says there is no proof of that, at all

    However, where a reasonable doubt exists (most of the people with dementia were not professional footballers) then a bit of care with young brains can't go amiss.
    From what I've read, the perception that new lightweight balls are 'safer' in relation to head injury is totally wrong. The old 1970s wet leather ball from my distant memory was indeed heavier, but what causes injury is the weight of impact,which can be even more severe when a lighter ball hits you at twice the speed than if a heavier ball hits you at a slower speed.

    There's no alternative, when it comes to child health you have to follow the science.

  21. #50
    @hibs.net private member lord bunberry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    edinburgh
    Posts
    14,718
    Kids at that age never head the ball anyway, corners are almost always taken short. People saying the art of heading the ball will be lost obviously donít watch much kids football. Itís not until under 13s that it even becomes competitive. Below that age itís all about developing skills and keeping the ball on the deck.

    United we stand here....

  22. #51
    @hibs.net private member Peevemor's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Saint-Malo, Brittany
    Age
    52
    Posts
    19,402
    Quote Originally Posted by hibsbollah View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    From what I've read, the perception that new lightweight balls are 'safer' in relation to head injury is totally wrong. The old 1970s wet leather ball from my distant memory was indeed heavier, but what causes injury is the weight of impact,which can be even more severe when a lighter ball hits you at twice the speed than if a heavier ball hits you at a slower speed.
    It'll even itself out (mass x velocity).

    However, with kids the problems won't come from corners or free kicks anyway - it's being under/on the receiving end of a keeper's clearance from hand where an old, wet leather ball will be far worse, given that it'll drop at the same speed as a lighter ball.

    There's no alternative, when it comes to child health you have to follow the science.

  23. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by G B Young View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-51129653

    This has already been implemented in the USA since 2015 and presumably has very significant implications for the future of the game if it ultimately gets adopted worldwide. Remove heading from the game and there's a massive change in the way football is played. What happens at corners and set pieces? Not to mention the way defenders and strikers are coached.

    If long-term health issues are the key factor here, why limit the move only to under-12s?
    I have no idea, but as we get older and grow, are our heids stronger and more resistant etc?

  24. #53
    Testimonial Due Cataplana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Somewhere near Albequerque.
    Posts
    1,901
    Quote Originally Posted by hibsbollah View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    From what I've read, the perception that new lightweight balls are 'safer' in relation to head injury is totally wrong. The old 1970s wet leather ball from my distant memory was indeed heavier, but what causes injury is the weight of impact,which can be even more severe when a lighter ball hits you at twice the speed than if a heavier ball hits you at a slower speed.

    There's no alternative, when it comes to child health you have to follow the science.
    My point is there is no science to suggest the newer balls cause dementia, as the cohort in question has not reached the age where signs of dementia emerge.

    Likewise, the science surrounding footballers is slightly flawed in that, it would require a control, such as how many times people have headed the ball, which is pretty much impossible to measure .

    For example, you would expect a higher incidence in centre halfs, compared to wingers. As far as I am aware the science does not examine that.

    However, while there is a slight doubt, it makes sense for official coaches to discourage headering. What the kids do in their own time is another matter.

  25. #54
    Coaching Staff lyonhibs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Zurich
    Age
    34
    Posts
    12,619
    Quote Originally Posted by JimboHibs View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Thats not entirely correct is it ?

    On that theory you are potentially ignoring a huge part of the game.Do corner kicks & possibly free kicks become irrelevant.
    At u12 level, pretty much. But this is not some legal ban on any kids ever heading ŗ val, anywhere, ever again. There will still be kids down the park with their friends and parents having a kickaround as ever they did.

    Much ado about nothing. Lots of the best teams play free kicks and corners on the ground already (as much as short corners drive me mad!)

  26. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Onceinawhile View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Don't get throw ins until they're about 11 or 12 either.
    Ive had 7/8 year olds doing throw ins for years. I couldnt care less what the SFA or ESSDA say. Kick ins from the side re the worst thing in kids football. 15 years olds getting pulled up for not being able to do a throw in is embarrassing.

  27. #56
    Coaching Staff
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Antwerp
    Posts
    9,599
    Quote Originally Posted by lord bunberry View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Kids at that age never head the ball anyway, corners are almost always taken short. People saying the art of heading the ball will be lost obviously donít watch much kids football. Itís not until under 13s that it even becomes competitive. Below that age itís all about developing skills and keeping the ball on the deck.
    Maybe in theory, but the season of 7s I've just been through saw plenty headers and lots of corners getting put into the box.

    and it might be "non-competitive", but it's usually anything but.

  28. #57
    Coaching Staff hibsbollah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Edinburgh
    Age
    49
    Posts
    23,107
    Quote Originally Posted by Cataplana View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    My point is there is no science to suggest the newer balls cause dementia, as the cohort in question has not reached the age where signs of dementia emerge.

    Likewise, the science surrounding footballers is slightly flawed in that, it would require a control, such as how many times people have headed the ball, which is pretty much impossible to measure .

    For example, you would expect a higher incidence in centre halfs, compared to wingers. As far as I am aware the science does not examine that.

    However, while there is a slight doubt, it makes sense for official coaches to discourage headering. What the kids do in their own time is another matter.
    The scientists don't need to wait for the end of a cohort of players heading newer lighter balls, for them to know that repetitive heading of those balls will cause the same incidents of brain trauma that have been seen previously. It is inevitable when you apply the basic physics that you learn at school, with the emerging knowledge of what causes brain trauma. The heaviness of the ball isnt the decisive factor.

  29. #58
    Testimonial Due Cataplana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Somewhere near Albequerque.
    Posts
    1,901
    Quote Originally Posted by hibsbollah View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The scientists don't need to wait for the end of a cohort of players heading newer lighter balls, for them to know that repetitive heading of those balls will cause the same incidents of brain trauma that have been seen previously. It is inevitable when you apply the basic physics that you learn at school, with the emerging knowledge of what causes brain trauma. The heaviness of the ball isnt the decisive factor.
    I'd argue that the weight of the object would be a factor using a simple mass X velocity equation, to calculate the amount of energy being absorbed by the brain.

    However, I am not a scientist, and it's not really relevant to this discussion .

    Given the number of variables that come to play on brain function, it's not possible to say with any certainty what causes dementia. So, the science is far from exact, and brain function is much more complex than simple physics.

    I don't want to go further off track, but the science is little more than a stab in the dark, when it comes to working out how to prevent these terrible conditions. The majority of dementia sufferers are women, and it's a fair bet the never headed a ball in their life.

    However with young bodies, you can never be too safe. So, I'm cool with the ban.
    Last edited by Cataplana; Yesterday at 04:48 PM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
hibs.net ©2012 All Rights Reserved