Summer 2021 transfer window

[Tredman]

It's not the same thing but I see where you're coming from.

There needs to be better player protection for the players and sanctions for dangerous play. Oddly enough I think this is where VAR should be involved.

Yeah, its more about the general principle of ensuring actions and movements do not cause harm. If a player is hurt by another, regardless of intent / accidents etc, then you are sanctioned. Absolutely should be picked up by VAR during or after the game - that won't happen as we seem to have this bizarre principle that referees are unchallengeable

 

[Johnny75]

I think a ban on heading will be inevitable, but won't happen for a long time. The research into dementia suffered by footballers shows the risks.

This is just rubbish.

It highlights the problem of the media being fucking thick and unable to read a research paper correctly. We then get people blindly believing stuff and thinking banning stuff is the only way forward.

 

[AndyWolves]

This is just rubbish.

It highlights the problem of the media being fucking thick and unable to read a research paper correctly. We then get people blindly believing stuff and thinking banning stuff is the only way forward.

I don't think it is rubbish, it's just that you don't like it.

It's not that much of a stretch to equate repeated heading of a football will cause damage to the brain. So either a mitigation for that has to be found or another solution.

Removing heading as a way of protecting players health seems inevitable to me. From a duty of care perspective, if an employer or organisation knows they're putting their people at risk but don't do anything about it feels like they're leaving themselves wide open.

As I said, I don't think it'll happen for a very long time though.

 

[Johnny75]

You’re coming at this from a position of ignorance Andy.

Can I suggest you educate yourself with the work of Stirling Brains, Willie Stewart of Glasgow University, Ann McKee at Boston University. Virginia Tech and Duke University are also a good source of information.

You can then see how silly your suggestion of banning heading is.

 

[The Bear]

I think we should go back to using "floaters" like we did at school, where there's no weight to the ball and the movement is crazy. Would give more goals as the goalie wouldn't have a clue where the ball is going, and it wouldn't do any damage heading it.

 

[AndyWolves]

You’re coming at this from a position of ignorance Andy.

Can I suggest you educate yourself with the work of Stirling Brains, Willie Stewart of Glasgow University, Ann McKee at Boston University. Virginia Tech and Duke University are also a good source of information.

You can then see how silly your suggestion of banning heading is.

Have you got any links?

The stuff I've skim read suggests there are immediate impacts on the brain up to 24 hours after routine headers with the longer term impact unknown.

If Im wrong on this that's fine and more than happy to be corrected, however, everything I've read so far suggests that heading the ball has negative consequences for the brain.

 

[YoungWolf]

I think we should go back to using "floaters" like we did at school, where there's no weight to the ball and the movement is crazy. Would give more goals as the goalie wouldn't have a clue where the ball is going, and it wouldn't do any damage heading it.

We called them 'flyaways'

 

[darlowolf64]

Laughable. The days of “attack the ball” will be gone. Corners will become a waste of time. WJ goal against Fulham would be illegal, as would Saiss’ against Spurs. John Egan’s powerful header against us end of last season disallowed.

May as well ban headinf rather than bring that rule in.

WJ didn’t jump at the player, he nipped in front of him and headed home. Same with Saiss so no problem with either goal. It’s the running and jumping at speed into another player that’s the problem. Out of control and reckless

 

[Tony Towner]

I think we should go back to using "floaters" like we did at school, where there's no weight to the ball and the movement is crazy. Would give more goals as the goalie wouldn't have a clue where the ball is going, and it wouldn't do any damage heading it.

To be fair, we've signed a lot of floaters over the years. No matter how many times we tried to flush away Ferguson he kept popping back up

 

[PuntsWolf]

David Luiz attacks the ball with his head in the same way you would headbutt somebody so it clearly is more dangerous. Attacking in that way limits the danger to yourself to it's lowest form.

It is reckless as his eyes are shut (not blinking) and he can't see where he's going. He has also jumped into the same space that a player is. That is dangerous.

I don't think it's malicious but it is reckless and dangerous and to compare it to an overhead kick misunderstands the severity of head injury and the forces involved.

I think we are agreeing with each other here?
I know it’s reckless and dangerous, but there’s a lot of challenges like that that happen and 99.99% of them end in nothing.

How do you know his eyes are shut? A photo wil never tell you. If you’ve seen a video showing him charging in with his eyes closed then fair enough.

When I was comparing it to the overhead kick was just an example and me being flippant showing that reckless and dangerous things happen quite often and we don’t send players off for it.

WJ didn’t jump at the player, he nipped in front of him and headed home. Same with Saiss so no problem with either goal. It’s the running and jumping at speed into another player that’s the problem. Out of control and reckless

This is true. But in either instance if the defending player was aware of the run and made a run to attack the ball then they are clashing heads.

 

[Johnny75]

Have you got any links?

The stuff I've skim read suggests there are immediate impacts on the brain up to 24 hours after routine headers with the longer term impact unknown.

If Im wrong on this that's fine and more than happy to be corrected, however, everything I've read so far suggests that heading the ball has negative consequences for the brain.

Go onto their websites there’s plenty of links to the work they’ve done. It would be nigh on impossible to link all of their work.

Another guy you might want to research is Ross Tucker, he’s more on the rugby side and rules but is a sports scientist that has helped shape rules based on research.

1) Just for information you cannot eliminate any brain injury from any sport that has a chance of human contact (and even in some that are non-contact).

2) Heading a football now is immeasurably different from heading a football 50 years ago.

3) Taking all risks of injury out of football would render the sport impossible to play.

 

[MARKakaJIM]

We called them 'flyaways'

View attachment 3638

This was the boy when we were at primary school, essentially a flyaway but felt like the plastic was about an inch thick, swear it would've remained exactly the same shape without any air in it.

Lot of window replacements caused at our school by a rogue toe poke on one of those flying well wide of the mark.

 

[Sniffer]

Even looking at that ball makes me feel the pain of trying to head it.

 

[Deutsch Wolf]

Do not ever head one of these bastards.

 

[b3h]

This was the boy when we were at primary school, essentially a flyaway but felt like the plastic was about an inch thick, swear it would've remained exactly the same shape without any air in it.

Lot of window replacements caused at our school by a rogue toe poke on one of those flying well wide of the mark.

Man, I can vividly hear the noise this thing made! Anyone else? Like a doink crossed with a slap

 

[AndyWolves]

Go onto their websites there’s plenty of links to the work they’ve done. It would be nigh on impossible to link all of their work.

Another guy you might want to research is Ross Tucker, he’s more on the rugby side and rules but is a sports scientist that has helped shape rules based on research.

1) Just for information you cannot eliminate any brain injury from any sport that has a chance of human contact (and even in some that are non-contact).

2) Heading a football now is immeasurably different from heading a football 50 years ago.

3) Taking all risks of injury out of football would render the sport impossible to play.

1) Eliminating heading takes away the biggest cause of brain related injuries, both through repeating heading of the ball and incidents like Luiz & Jimenez

2) footballs are the same weight now that they were in the 60s. Agree they don't soak up water now like they used to. However, current research shows cognitive impairment using current balls in typical heading scenarios.

3) It's not about taking all risks of injury out, it's about protecting players from risk of Alzheimer's / dementia in later life. No other activity in football has these links.

Forgive me, but I don't see it as "rubbish" that heading will be banned given what we already know. I, personally, see it as an inevitable conclusion of the ongoing research.

 

[Johnny75]

You're forgiven.

Read the research.

 

[AndyWolves]

You're forgiven.

Read the research.

You keep saying that, anything specific?

 

[jlo]

I think we should go back to using "floaters" like we did at school, where there's no weight to the ball and the movement is crazy. Would give more goals as the goalie wouldn't have a clue where the ball is going, and it wouldn't do any damage heading it.

We should bring in players wearing halo devices like F1. They didn't like it at first either but it caught on.

 

[Jinky]

This was the boy when we were at primary school, essentially a flyaway but felt like the plastic was about an inch thick, swear it would've remained exactly the same shape without any air in it.

Lot of window replacements caused at our school by a rogue toe poke on one of those flying well wide of the mark.

I took one of these square in the face from about 1 yard away at primary school and I had the imprint of the ball on my face for a week.