If you are going post shit like Richard Littlejohn and Boris Johnson would shit out I’ll stand by what I said.
4 Likes
Surprised at you Matty.
You usually disagree without the bombastic shit that others are capable of…
Anyway, as a traditionalist who loves the game as it is, one study isn’t gold standard in the need to change the laws of football. More research is required. I played football, at centre half for over thirty years. Heading balls all my football days, part of the game.
In all reasonability, we are long past the point where more study is necessary to take action. More study might tidy up some of the detail, but another study isn’t going to conclude it’s all fine after all.
Maybe.
Or it might suggest that the damage suffered by those born post the 1980’s is less than expected.
id imagine thats whats happening…(edit, more research)
but in the meantime, lets restrict heading in the kids version of the game becuase we’re pretty sure its detremental to their health, and also banning it will help produce better talented footballers… win win…
i dont even think its actually banned in Aus, but in juniors the keepers have to play the ball out, not launch it, and most coaches ive ever come accross value football on the deck…
pretty much went years without seeing it affect the game play.
3 Likes
I understand the need for risk avoidance, whilst still questioning the level of evidence reqired for banning heading the ball in football. More research is certainly required, specifically for players currently playing. If evidence exists that they are exposed to potential damage, then measures have to be taken.
That said…
In ten years time football will be played without heading, without tackling, potentially in four quarters to facilitate more advertising.
The game most of us grew up with will be a distant memory.
The skills of tackling, aerial duels, headed goals will be defunct.
@Mascot nodded towards the offside rule change earlier, using that as a comparitor for comment when it was introduced. The thing is, the introduction of offside improved football. I’m not sure no heading improves the game.
But risk aversion and litigation can’t be ignored I guess
I think every generation feels the games has changed. That’s the nature of sport.
Just to play devil’s advocate, if the rules were changed to say heading is only allowed in both boxes, would we really miss it that much?
2 Likes
I would miss it from the game, yes.
Though…
Maybe tradition isn’t important in the whole scheme of things?
What might happen as well…
A large pharma company and a sportswear company like Nike will develop a headband which cushions impact. FIFA will test the device and state that this revolutionary technology will be mandatory from Season 30/31.
Someone will make billions from the initiative.
Just look at what happens when youth aren’t taught how to head a ball properly, Ekitike’s miss 
1 Like
Article behind paywall. Use https://archive.today/
Ban came in when I was playing as we had a youngsters squad so trajectory is more down to what we currently see from the league leaders and others.
I wouldn’t expect a drop away for another 5-10 years. It’s probably risen because all the tactics in the last 10-15 years have been on the deck stuff
I think during the LFC vs West Ham pre-match press conference today, some one asked Slot about Ekitike’s headers, and Slot responded something about training…This is the guideline set by FA in 2021 (if you scroll up all the way to the early posts, it may be there).
4.3. Limiting Heading in Training
Based on the findings of preliminary studies a recommended maximum number of 10 higher force headers per training week has been calculated. This recommendation applies to headers categorised as resulting in the highest forces, namely:a) Headers following a long pass (those in excess of 35m), for example, returning a goal kick.
b) Headers from crosses, corners and free kicks.
The recommended limit has been calculated using the maximum mean number of headers occurring for any position group across competitions as set out in table one. The recommendation follows the principle of preparing players adequately for match-play. This is an initial recommendation designed to protect player welfare and will be reviewed regularly.
Preliminary data recorded mean linear acceleration as 16.8 g, compared to daily activities such as running and jumping that produce linear acceleration of around 10 g. As such the focus of this guidance is on higher force headers. However, it is important that coaching staff and players consider whether lower force
headers are required in training to suitably prepare a player for match play. Moderation of such headers is recommended.As further research is undertaken this guidance will be reviewed and updated to reflect increased understanding.
Might as well cut out crossing drills and practising corners in case someone heads the ball 10 times 
1 Like
Getting smack in the head at least 10-20 times a week (10 a week in practice, plus 2 match days per week), then multiple it by weeks and years. Imagine that you are being smacked with such force the same way that many times a week, months and years, it cannot be good. So why are you so against it?
I was not very good at playing football, and when I tried to head the ball (or more likely getting hit by the ball), my head hurt for ages, and that was the part of the game I absolutely loathed.
4 Likes
It is part of the game and I have never hurt my head when I have made good contact with the ball.
If you learn the correct technique there is no pain, well for me there isn’t.
I have had for more head trauma from tackles and fouls and landing badly than heading the ball, so might as well ban tackling as well.
Heres the thing, its not like getting smacked on the head twenty times a week as @CanuckoLFC suggests above. That would mean the person heading the ball is doing so passively. If you are heading, using the correct technique, you ard anticipating the impact. Its actually less impact than banging your head after a tackle.
I understand the need for caution re head injury potential, but we are risk aversive beyond sanity at times.
1 Like
Genuine question, but how? The damage here is done by the transfer of kinetic energy into the brain, so even if you brace your head the energy is still getting transferred, unless you’re somehow absorbing the energy through the rest of your body. But by that logic (correct my understanding of physics if wrong), the resulting header itself would be shite since you’re just dissipating all the energy?
Sorry
What I meant, and I’m not a physics expert, was…
If you are heading a ball, you are braced, prepared. If you are in a fall you are not braced, therefore more susceptible to injury? Logically?
I suspect that’s more damage to your neck and muscles rather than the brain. From what I understand about impact-related brain injuries they’re all to do with the energy dissipated.
1 Like