Heading banned in training day before and after matches

Think the evidenced is not yet conclusive on heading and brain damage? Current approach is to minimize risk and limit heading, not entirely against it tbh
 
GovanFront4 said:
Fucking woke nonsense back in my day we headered 50 balls a day and went home and dealt with our dementia with a stiff upper lip.
Click to expand...
My dad died last year after suffering from dementia associated to his junior playing days. He was known for his powerful headers. There is nothing woke in looking at the shell of a man that was your dad, and he doesn’t even know it. There is fúck all funny about it.
 
Always ahead of the game (pardon the pun) by letting the opposition do the heading at corners
 
TQ3 said:
My dad died last year after suffering from dementia associated to his junior playing days. He was known for his powerful headers. There is nothing woke in looking at the shell of a man that was your dad, and he doesn’t even know it. There is fúck all funny about it.
Click to expand...

There is nothing funny about it at all mate. Bless your old man, my absolute respect to him mate.

This is beyond politics.
 
TQ3 said:
My dad died last year after suffering from dementia associated to his junior playing days. He was known for his powerful headers. There is nothing woke in looking at the shell of a man that was your dad, and he doesn’t even know it. There is fúck all funny about it.
Click to expand...

Really awful about your dad, been lucky with with my older relatives so far in that respect, but seen the havoc it has wrought upon friend's families and the stress on my mum caring for a friend who was suffering but didn't have a family support network.

But, in fairness to the poster, I'm pretty sure he was making an irreverent/sarcastic joke.

It seems a weird call, in Scottish football of all places, where headering your way through a brick wall is pretty much esential and celebrated. But personally I think this is one to be too early on than too late.

The evidence from the NFL is pretty conclusive, and the scary thing is that it seems to be many repetitive smaller blows to the head that tend to have a devestating effect in the future, rather than a catastrophic clash/head injury. Taking out unnecessary repetition in training seems a relatively small price to pay to protect players' futures. Even from a selfish perspective, it's not out of the question that it may be something that can be done just now to pre-empt heading getting banned altogether from the game in the future when further evidence confirms what many people assume.
 
Was listening to Joe Rogan the other day, I can't remember who he had on but this got brought up (soccer) as well as boxing, football etc. Anyway studies coming out now that certain people are genetically susceptible to these problems and they can identify the gene now.

Just a bit if random pre morning coffee information.
 
Teddy Lasso said:
Was listening to Joe Rogan the other day, I can't remember who he had on but this got brought up (soccer) as well as boxing, football etc. Anyway studies coming out now that certain people are genetically susceptible to these problems and they can identify the gene now.

Just a bit if random pre morning coffee information.
Click to expand...

Was that where he had steve-o on? Said Tony Hawk done a test to see if he had the gene and turns the results were he never.
This was after steve-o discussing bashing cans of beer on his head on a nightly basis haha.
 
HighlandLoyal3036 said:
Was that where he had steve-o on? Said Tony Hawk done a test to see if he had the gene and turns the results were he never.
This was after steve-o discussing bashing cans of beer on his head on a nightly basis haha.
Click to expand...

That could be the one mate, I defo remember that conversation. I listen to so many that they all merge into one as he often discusses the subject with multiple people. So, you would like to think that within sport they would start testing athletes for this gene so precautions can be made early doors (just my thoughts).
 
Very difficult to argue against, even more so when you read some of the personal stories above.

What I find utterly perplexing is that rugby is allowed to continue with minimal changes, zero interference from Scottish politicians and token gestures like their concussion protocols which seem to be seen as something to work around rather than implement thoroughly.

I’ve seen interviews/news footage of one of the medics at the forefront of campaigning for banning headers in football. Can’t remember his name, but virtually every time I’ve seen him interviewed he’s sitting in his office with several pieces of rugby memorabilia behind him.

I’m convinced rugby clubs and authorities are going to get the a*se sued of them in future years by families affected by this.
 
I’m not against this. If dementia and other neurological disorders in mid to late life can be avoided then it’s a sensible decision. None of my family played football, none of them had dementia, other work related issues yes such as pnemonoconiosis.

The big question is how it will be enforced? Self policing or will the SFA send an inspector. The former may result in flouting the ban to gain an advantage, second will be expensive and open to brown envelopes being passed (probably by you-know-who)
 
BroomhouseBear said:
Very difficult to argue against, even more so when you read some of the personal stories above.

What I find utterly perplexing is that rugby is allowed to continue with minimal changes, zero interference from Scottish politicians and token gestures like their concussion protocols which seem to be seen as something to work around rather than implement thoroughly.

I’ve seen interviews/news footage of one of the medics at the forefront of campaigning for banning headers in football. Can’t remember his name, but virtually every time I’ve seen him interviewed he’s sitting in his office with several pieces of rugby memorabilia behind him.

I’m convinced rugby clubs and authorities are going to get the a*se sued of them in future years by families affected by this.
Click to expand...
It’s already happening, there are a number of cases being brought by former players.

www.bbc.co.uk

Players suing governing bodies over brain damage

Lawyers for more than 185 players are suing rugby union's governing bodies for negligence, claiming that playing the sport caused brain damage.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
 
TQ3 said:
My dad died last year after suffering from dementia associated to his junior playing days. He was known for his powerful headers. There is nothing woke in looking at the shell of a man that was your dad, and he doesn’t even know it. There is fúck all funny about it.
Click to expand...
Hes not laughing at dementia mate. Hes making a sarcastic joke towards people who might argue against this being a good thing.
 
Cucumbear said:
I’m not against this. If dementia and other neurological disorders in mid to late life can be avoided then it’s a sensible decision. None of my family played football, none of them had dementia, other work related issues yes such as pnemonoconiosis.

The big question is how it will be enforced? Self policing or will the SFA send an inspector. The former may result in flouting the ban to gain an advantage, second will be expensive and open to brown envelopes being passed (probably by you-know-who)
Click to expand...
It wont be avoided, its about managing risk factors. My Nana had dementia and she wasnt down the park in the 50s heading bricks in her supermarket pinny.

Theres evidence that repeated head injuries is one of the risks for cognitive brain function and even more so when theres no recovery time allowed between them.
 
I don't know if this is a relevant point but most of the ex professionals, suffering from dementia,played with the old style leather ball that was laced up.



That ball also gathered extra weight on muddy grounds.
 
richmond23 said:
Surely modern technology with lightweight footballs counter the need to ban this
Click to expand...
According to research footballs being lighter now means they are being hit harder and faster which means there is no less risk.

Modern footballers could be at greater risk from head injury, says academic | Football | The Guardian

The Field study was commissioned by the FA and the PFA and the findings suggest modern players not at any less risk than their predecessors
amp.theguardian.com amp.theguardian.com
 
To be fair, this aspect of the game is one we are going to have to accept will change. Maybe heading gone entirely. Any neurologist will tell you, although not an exact science, one thing you can do to prevent developing neurodegenerative disease is to avoid direct contact with your head. Be that baseball bat strikes or a football.
 
It is actually a myth that the modern day ball is lighter. Law 2 of the FIFA rules equate to the size and weight of a football - the ball has to be between 410g - 450g.

This law has been in effect since 1937. The ball being heavier is related to the leather soaking up rain and moisture from the pitch. They could often double in weight.

FIFA continued with a leather ball - albeit it from the late 1960s the leather balls had a waterproof covering to prevent them gathering water - right up until the 1986 World Cup.

The ball of choice then was the Adidas Azteca.

Wonder if there's been any change in players developing dementia in the years after they stopped the balls getting waterlogged?
 
Does this not disadvantage sides playing in Europe? And, later in the season, say if there has been a fixture back log, sides with busy schedules? I feel like the latter could be particularly targeted by canny opposition coaches down the leagues.

Hypothetical -

Hearts are playing in Europa Conference midweek and then away to Motherwell on the Sunday. Motherwell played the previous Saturday, Hearts previous Sunday. Considering the travel, Hearts likely haven't practiced a set piece in 9 days. Motherwell could have practiced them everyday M-F. Surely in a sport of marginal gains that offers them an advantage?

If one side is playing midweek the rule should be enforced on their next opposition, too
 
How will this work in reality though given that Rangers/Celtic typically play midweek+weekend throughout the season?
 
Strange that it only includes 2 days a week - on days that there wouldn’t be massive amounts of training going on. It’s also ‘guidance.’ Seems a bit half arsed tbh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top