Heading the Ball

[the saint in winchester]

With the (proven) link between heading the ball, concussion and dementia, is it time for heading the ball to be outlawed?

Add in the sickening fracture for Jimenez yesterday.

Al Shearer getting irate that football hasn't put in place protocols for head injuries.

I, for one, would ban heading. It's called FOOTball. I would like allow the ball to travel over head height, but not allow heading from now on, on health and safety grounds.

This post is not related to Cavani scoring two with his head yesterday.

If you're going to disagree with me, you have to explain what safety protocols you will put in place.

[jawillwill]

Genuine question (I don't know enough about it), but is there really a genuine link with dementia? Or is it more players from bygone generations that used to head a much, much heavier ball than the lightweight versions used in todays game?

[Manuel]

I believe this was more of an issue historically when heavier balls were used.  Not sure about these days.  Easy solution, wear helmets.  

[Mystic Force]

There has been extensive investigation into this and many documented cases (famously Geoff Astle amongst them) In the past balls were heavier but the on going danger that is up in the air as the balls are different than in the past, but the power that modern professionals can achieve is greater than in the past through advances in conditioning. What causes the damage is the brain sloshing around in the head, caused by sudden energy transfer (Therefore helmets are not really useful). I think they have restricted heading in younger age groups, but it's definitely a problem that needs to be addressed.

[East Kent Saint]

Clash of heads means instant sub , over and above number of subs. Heading is a big part of the game (Canavani) so It would be a massive change to outlaw it . Headers by centre backs from long balls by opposition make me wince more than glancing attacking headers .

[Toussaint]

Let’s just all live out grey meaningless lives indoors and “stay safe”, see if we can make it to 100. 

[Saint Keef]

I will start by saying I am no expert in this. These are only my thoughts. Certain members of my family have ended up with dementia, Alzheimer's etc. To the best of my knowledge my Grandmother, Aunties and Uncles who are all long since gone, and who suffered these ailments, never headed a football in their life.

The fact is, a certain percentage of the population will suffer from these terrible diseases. To me, it therefore stands to reason that a certain number of those will be footballers. Using only Nobby Stiles as an example, no doubt they head footballs in training, but on the pitch I don't remember him being a prolific header of the ball, unlike say, Jack Charlton who reportedly also had dementia. We are told Sir Bobby also has dementia. So, I'm not dismissing the idea that heading the ball can have a detrimental effect, but equally from the little I know it's not the only reason. Is there a particularly high proportion of footballers who suffer these diseases compared to the rest of society (genuine question).

Whilst on this subject, best wishes for a full recovery to Raul Jiminez after yesterday's horrible head clash with David Luiz. Fractured skull apparently and already operated on.  

[Lord Duckhunter]

The way society is going it’s inevitable it’s going to be banned eventually. Whether that’s in my lifetime is the question. I reckon in 50 years the game will be different, the ball will still travel in the air, but players will be bringing it down with their chests.  

[Lighthouse]

3 hours ago, Toussaint said:

Let’s just all live out grey meaningless lives indoors and “stay safe”, see if we can make it to 100. 

How about 36?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marius_Žaliūkas

 

or 43?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fernando_Ricksen

 

or 40?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marián_Čišovský

 

Or even just yesterday, a 42 year old?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papa_Bouba_Diop

[skintsaint]

I think as long as boxing is still going they won't ban heading a lightweight football. Surely being repeatedly punched in the head is more of an issue.

[Lighthouse]

1 minute ago, skintsaint said:

I think as long as boxing is still going they won't ban heading a lightweight football. Surely being repeatedly punched in the head is more of an issue.

The difference being you can feasibly play football without heading the ball, it’s just different. In boxing the whole purpose is to smack your opponent into next Thursday. Whether it should be banned as a sport entirely is a different debate.

[skintsaint]

3 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

The difference being you can feasibly play football without heading the ball

You can't...it won't be the same game. It will be so wank with no heading if you think about it 😄

In fact, just reduce the game  to indoor 5 a side, thats no over head height.

[Toussaint]

8 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

How about 36?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marius_Žaliūkas

 

or 43?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fernando_Ricksen

 

or 40?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marián_Čišovský

 

Or even just yesterday, a 42 year old?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papa_Bouba_Diop

We all die, we have no say when it will be, it's  the only certainty in life, this seems to have been lost in the current era. 

[Ted Bates Statue]

People used to see asbestos as a necessary evil - worth it for the fire prevention, but not so good for the plebs who had to install it. Once it became clear that companies and individuals could get hauled over the coals in the legal system for not giving a shit about their employees, that all changed. Funny thing, that.

I expect it will get phased out as Lord Duckhunter says, starting at youth and amateur levels as they do with other heretical developments like sin bins etc. It is weird to think about but most would agree the game is played best on the floor anyway. 

Relevant Martin Samuel article in the DM (archive link to circumvent advertising bombardment) https://archive.is/wip/JVcZZ

[ant]

13 hours ago, Toussaint said:

Let’s just all live out grey meaningless lives indoors and “stay safe”, see if we can make it to 100. 

This is some stunning whataboutery and false equivalence.

Never advance; never progress. If it's not traditional, it's not valid.

[sydney_saint]

14 hours ago, Saint Keef said:

I will start by saying I am no expert in this. These are only my thoughts. Certain members of my family have ended up with dementia, Alzheimer's etc. To the best of my knowledge my Grandmother, Aunties and Uncles who are all long since gone, and who suffered these ailments, never headed a football in their life.

The fact is, a certain percentage of the population will suffer from these terrible diseases. To me, it therefore stands to reason that a certain number of those will be footballers. Using only Nobby Stiles as an example, no doubt they head footballs in training, but on the pitch I don't remember him being a prolific header of the ball, unlike say, Jack Charlton who reportedly also had dementia. We are told Sir Bobby also has dementia. So, I'm not dismissing the idea that heading the ball can have a detrimental effect, but equally from the little I know it's not the only reason. Is there a particularly high proportion of footballers who suffer these diseases compared to the rest of society (genuine question).

Whilst on this subject, best wishes for a full recovery to Raul Jiminez after yesterday's horrible head clash with David Luiz. Fractured skull apparently and already operated on.  

I'm genuinely sorry that your family has been hit hard by this. According to the Alzheimer's Society, the main published research on this is by the University of Glasgow which suggests professional footballers have a 3.5 times higher rate of death due to neurodegenerative disease. Which is considerable. There also seems to be two other big studies in the pipeline. If both of those have similar conclusions, then there needs to be a serious discussion, even if the conclusions of that discussion are to continue on as usual.

I think it is also important as many footballers won't have known the risks when getting into the sport. In sports like motorsports and boxing, the risks are fucking obvious. And each of those participants knows the risks going in. I don't know how many footballers are genuinely willing to have an increased risk of neurodegenerative disease to play the game. Some sure would happily die on the pitch for the cause, but other won't.

One area I would like to see more research on amateurs. Again unlike motorsports or boxing, football is played by millions and millions of amateurs. I get amateurs will be heading the ball alot less, but they will also be heading the ball with terrible technique. I used to avoid heading at all costs cos I was never shown how to do it properly. It would be horrible to think that amateurs had a higher risk as well. 

[Lighthouse]

3 hours ago, Toussaint said:

We all die, we have no say when it will be, it's  the only certainty in life, this seems to have been lost in the current era. 

If you believe that then go and stick your head up the arse of your lawnmower.

[LeBizzier69]

Rugby has issues too, with MND coming to the fore - but that's not going to change and i suspect will only get worse as the current crop of players get older and we see the effects of modern day "car crash impact" rugby. Can anyone honestly see football without heading?

[skintsaint]

16 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

If you believe that then go and stick your head up the arse of your lawnmower.

no wonder there is so much nonsense on the forums when even the mods are throwing this response around to a fairly reasonable comment.

[the saint in winchester]

Oh I thought it was a reasonable comment to "we all die, we have no say in when it will be". We do have a measure of control and a responsibility to live as long and safely as we can.

[Mystic Force]

If you have Audible and would like to learn more about you can listen to...

The Beautiful Brian by Hanna Walker-Brown,

which goes into this in detail, covering the science and the personal stories of footballers. It is not just about death, it's about the quality of life of the people affected before they die, their mental decline and the effects on those around them. Once upon a time we were ignorant of the consequences, now we are not, at that point we should be duty bound to do something about it. Various forms of tackling were outlawed because of the damage that can be done, it does not seem unreasonable to amend the rules in other ways for less easily visible harm to the participants.

[Lighthouse]

4 hours ago, skintsaint said:

no wonder there is so much nonsense on the forums when even the mods are throwing this response around to a fairly reasonable comment.

If an argument falls apart in the face of an admittedly flippant remark like mine, then it wasn’t a very good argument. We have a massive say in when we die and it’s in no way reasonable to claim otherwise. Diet, exercise, smoking, alcohol, drug use and risk taking are all massive factors.

[aintforever]

5 hours ago, sydney_saint said:

professional footballers have a 3.5 times higher rate of death due to neurodegenerative disease. Which is considerable. 

3.5 times more than who?

I don't doubt that there is a link but doesn't the fact that footballers are professional athletes mean they are more likely to be fitter and live longer than the average person so are bound to have a higher percentage of deaths from a neurodegenerative disease?

If outfield players are 3.5 times more likely than goalkeepers then that would show the true effect of heading.

[Lighthouse]

1 minute ago, aintforever said:

3.5 times more than who?

I don't doubt that there is a link but doesn't the fact that footballers are professional athletes mean they are more likely to be fitter and live longer than the average person so are bound to have a higher percentage of deaths from a neurodegenerative disease?

If outfield players are 3.5 times more likely than goalkeepers then that would show the true effect of heading.

They are up until the age of around 35 or whenever they retire, after that some of them properly let themselves go. When you’re younger, you tend to be at much lower risk from a lot of health problems anyway. I doubt a 45 year old, obese ex footballer is much better off than a 45 year old, obese lorry driver. There’s also a rather sad impact on mental health when players are forced to give up the thrill of the game. The likes of Speed, Shipperly, Maradona, Gazza, Merson and others have gone on to live post-retirement lives which were far from healthy.

[aintforever]

26 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

They are up until the age of around 35 or whenever they retire, after that some of them properly let themselves go. When you’re younger, you tend to be at much lower risk from a lot of health problems anyway. I doubt a 45 year old, obese ex footballer is much better off than a 45 year old, obese lorry driver. There’s also a rather sad impact on mental health when players are forced to give up the thrill of the game. The likes of Speed, Shipperly, Maradona, Gazza, Merson and others have gone on to live post-retirement lives which were far from healthy.

Maybe, but I find it hard to believe that being a professional athlete doesn't have a positive effect on life expectancy.

Surely the best way to gauge the effects of heading would be to compare outfield players to goalkeepers, both are professional footballers with similar lifestyles the only difference would be one lot don't do headers. It may be that the lifestyle you mentioned (being very fit then letting yourself go and hitting the bottle) is a big influence on wether you die from it.

Edited 1 December, 2020 by aintforever

[Turkish]

1 hour ago, Mystic Force said:

If you have Audible and would like to learn more about you can listen to...

The Beautiful Brian by Hanna Walker-Brown,

which goes into this in detail, covering the science and the personal stories of footballers. It is not just about death, it's about the quality of life of the people affected before they die, their mental decline and the effects on those around them. Once upon a time we were ignorant of the consequences, now we are not, at that point we should be duty bound to do something about it. Various forms of tackling were outlawed because of the damage that can be done, it does not seem unreasonable to amend the rules in other ways for less easily visible harm to the participants.

Is it the sequel to the life of Brian?

[sydney_saint]

1 hour ago, aintforever said:

3.5 times more than who?

I don't doubt that there is a link but doesn't the fact that footballers are professional athletes mean they are more likely to be fitter and live longer than the average person so are bound to have a higher percentage of deaths from a neurodegenerative disease?

If outfield players are 3.5 times more likely than goalkeepers then that would show the true effect of heading.

I don't quite understand your point? They are 3.5 times more likely to die than the average person due to neurodegenerative disease. The bit around been fitter and having less heart issues etc is true, but also irrelevant as they aren't mutually exclusive. We are talking about the link between heading and illnesses related to that part of the sport that happen later in life. Studies are showing that there is a link. But yeah sure, fitness is good and will often lead to a healthier fitter life. Which can still be done if heading were to be either limited or eliminated. Personally I'm fairly neutral on it, I would hate to see heading disappear or be reduced. But if scientific studies are showing that there is a strong health impact then that need to be taken into consideration

Edited 1 December, 2020 by sydney_saint

[Manuel]

I wonder which Saint has headed more than any other in recent years.  Radhi Jaidi must be up there with his defensive clearances.  Lambert perhaps.  

[aintforever]

13 minutes ago, sydney_saint said:

I don't quite understand your point? They are 3.5 times more likely to die than the average person due to neurodegenerative disease. The bit around been fitter and having less heart issues etc is true, but also irrelevant as they aren't mutually exclusive. We are talking about the link between heading and illnesses related to that part of the sport that happen later in life. Studies are showing that there is a link. But yeah sure, fitness is good and will often lead to a healthier fitter life. Which can still be done if heading were to be either limited or eliminated. Personally I'm fairly neutral on it, I would hate to see heading disappear or be reduced. But if scientific studies are showing that there is a strong health impact then that need to be taken into consideration

My point is that if you live longer you are probably more likely to get dementia anyway wether you have headed balls all your life or not. If you are obese and smoke 40 fags a day you will probably have a heart attack and pop your clogs in your 50s.

I only make that point because may Nan died from dementia aged 96 - she lived a super-healthy lifestyle and ending up suffering big time in her later years. It's a horrible disease.

[sydney_saint]

7 minutes ago, aintforever said:

My point is that if you live longer you are probably more likely to get dementia anyway wether you have headed balls all your life or not. If you are obese and smoke 40 fags a day you will probably have a heart attack and pop your clogs in your 50s.

I only make that point because may Nan died from dementia aged 96 - she lived a super-healthy lifestyle and ending up suffering big time in her later years. It's a horrible disease.

These are all things that are considered in a scientific study and why they have control groups. Studies don't get published in journals without a strong methodology, clear controls and mechanisms to identify trends.  For example, in the Glasgow study it says this:

"We conducted a retrospective cohort study to compare mortality from neurodegenerative disease among 7676 former professional soccer players (identified from databases of Scottish players) with that among 23,028 controls from the general population who were matched to the players on the basis of sex, age, and degree of social deprivation."

Honestly, I'm gonna with what the science says rather than anecdotes. More needs to be done with more studies, but the initial results show there is a link.  

Edited 1 December, 2020 by sydney_saint

[aintforever]

5 minutes ago, sydney_saint said:

These are all things that are considered in a scientific study and why they have control groups. Studies don't get published in journals without a strong methodology, clear controls and mechanisms to identify trends.  For example, in the Glasgow study it says this:

"We conducted a retrospective cohort study to compare mortality from neurodegenerative disease among 7676 former professional soccer players (identified from databases of Scottish players) with that among 23,028 controls from the general population who were matched to the players on the basis of sex, age, and degree of social deprivation."

Honestly, I'm gonna with what the science says rather than anecdotes. More needs to be done with more studies, but the initial results show there is a link.  

I don't doubt there is a link, just wondered about the 3.5 times figure.

[Lighthouse]

30 minutes ago, aintforever said:

My point is that if you live longer you are probably more likely to get dementia anyway wether you have headed balls all your life or not. If you are obese and smoke 40 fags a day you will probably have a heart attack and pop your clogs in your 50s.

I only make that point because may Nan died from dementia aged 96 - she lived a super-healthy lifestyle and ending up suffering big time in her later years. It's a horrible disease.

But players are dying in their 30s and 40s and not just in football but rugby and especially in NFL.

[Granite_City_Saint]

https://www.nhs.uk/news/neurology/dementia-fears-for-former-footballers/ A discussion on the study and what it means can be found here. While it was true that professional footballers had a 3.5 times risk of neurodegenerative disease, only a small proportion were affected. There was no difference observed between goalkeepers and outfield players. Ex-footballers were 5 times as likely to be prescribed medication for Alzheimer’s as non-footballers, but goalkeepers had a lower incidence than outfield players.

[Charlie Wayman]

53 minutes ago, Manuel said:

I wonder which Saint has headed more than any other in recent years.  Radhi Jaidi must be up there with his defensive clearances.  Lambert perhaps.  

Probably Ron Davies

[stknowle]

3 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

If an argument falls apart in the face of an admittedly flippant remark like mine, then it wasn’t a very good argument. We have a massive say in when we die and it’s in no way reasonable to claim otherwise. Diet, exercise, smoking, alcohol, drug use and risk taking are all massive factors.

Play the percentages. I'd add mowing the lawn to that list. (winky smiler emoji)

Edited 1 December, 2020 by stknowle

[cambsaint]

Ron Davies later behaviour was rather strange.

I often wondered if this was early onset dementia.

It was certainly a problem with old heavy sodden balls.

Whether it will e seen to be a problem to current generation won't be known for nearly 30 years.

Certainly it should be banned immediately from the junior game, and then would probably slowly be phased out of the adult game

It seems rather strange to me that you can't tackle anyone properly now for risk of injury (non life-threatening)yet little notice is taken of the most essential and amazing part of the body-the brain.

No cricketer would risk playing without a helmet these days

I won't be around to see the day but I hope it is gradually phased out.

[hypochondriac]

Is there a proven link between heading a modern football and dementia?