Dementia in Football.

[Corndog]

If it's an issue, headgear won't prevent it because it's your brain hitting the inside of your skull repetitively over time that will do the damage.

[Harv]

Got to also remember a lot of these old players were heading footballs that used to get extremely waterlogged and weigh a tonne. The footballs now are light as. The damage being done would be nowhere near as much.

[Zapater]

Got to also remember a lot of these old players were heading footballs that used to get extremely waterlogged and weigh a tonne. The footballs now are light as. The damage being done would be nowhere near as much.

Read an article claiming that the light and aerodynamic nature of modern balls mean that they travel a lot faster resulting in greater force despite being lighter. If that is however true, it's unlikely the weight disparity would make that much of a difference as the tempo more than counteracts that.

[Harv]

No idea on the science side of things but having played with old balls (early 90's) and the new ones, the new ones definitely feel easier to head. The old ones used to almost knock you out if you headed it wrong I don't think the new ones travel anywhere near as fast as the older balls either, they are too light and lose velocity quicker i reckon. Those old tango's or the Mitre's, man when you hit one of them sweetly the thing would rip the ****ing net off its moorings. These new ones suck IMO,

And if you took a volley to the face with an old wet ball then forget about it. Game over brain.

[Corndog]

But again it does not matter about the physics of the ball because it is the physics of any sort of knock to the head of the brain hitting the internal wall of the skull that can cause damage done over and over again.

They are even starting to see links to sports where there is no head contact but fast repetitive head movement I e skeleton.

[BG1973]

Says who?

Surely a heavier object will cause more recoil.

Or would a tennis ball have the same effect?

[Corndog]

Says who?

Surely a heavier object will cause more recoil.

Or would a tennis ball have the same effect?

So not to be misunderstood, the weight of the object may be a variable that effects the severity of the disease (I haven't seen reports or research specifically on this but am no expert in this field) but there is already early research to suggest that even repetitive head shaking without any knock from an external object can lead to higher incidences of trauma:

Source: https://www.bbc.com/sport/winter-sports/55129090

Peter McCarthy, a leading expert in brain injuries and sport from the University of South Wales, has called for a "concerted worldwide effort" to assess the impact completing skeleton runs can have on the head and brain.

"The major issue is that unless a person gets concussed, it's unlikely that any of the basic head or neck issues will be addressed and the person will be able to continue based on a self-certification that they are fine," he told BBC Sport.

"There are a number of different ways of damaging or compromising the brain. Shaking them regularly at a high or low frequency are going to cause some level of brain trauma, maybe damage over longer periods.

"If you get them repetitively, especially the vibrational ones and the sharp shocks, and they are not noticed or addressed, it is a cumulative injury. There are issues associated with the long-term effects of that, and in the later years, it becomes akin to things like dementia and maybe Parkinson's and so on.


The reasons for this are that the brain sits in fluid within the skull and that fluid is there to protect it. When someone takes a knock to the head there is the force of the blow but also the brain sliding around hitting the inside of the skull.

So it's possible that even a certain lower frequency of heading even with lighter balls is still doing significant damage over a longer period of time due to the cumulative effects of many small knocks

[Harv]

But again it does not matter about the physics of the ball because it is the physics of any sort of knock to the head of the brain hitting the internal wall of the skull that can cause damage done over and over again.

They are even starting to see links to sports where there is no head contact but fast repetitive head movement I e skeleton.

It does matter. Hitting your head against a rock or a balloon is going to have different degrees of damage. All head knocks may indeed do damage, but whats causing that damage definitely matters.

[Corndog]

It does matter. Hitting your head against a rock or a balloon is going to have different degrees of damage. All head knocks may indeed do damage, but whats causing that damage definitely matters.

So again, yes it is likely a variable as I said above but it does not matter to the extent that any proven link between heading footballs or any other object will likely eventually lead to heading being taken out of the game in my opinion.

[Harv]

No you said it doesn't matter about the physics of the ball. It most definitely does.

If they take heading out of the game they might as well just bin everything and start a new game. Or you just leave it in the players hands (or heads) to know the risks they're taking playing the game in a certain way? This palming off of liability these days is a massive cop out IMO. Players know full well the risk they take playing certain sports or putting their bodies on the line.

[Corndog]

No you said it doesn't matter about the physics of the ball. It most definitely does.

If they take heading out of the game they might as well just bin everything and start a new game. Or you just leave it in the players hands (or heads) to know the risks they're taking playing the game in a certain way? This palming off of liability these days is a massive cop out IMO. Players know full well the risk they take playing certain sports or putting their bodies on the line.

but you're not acknowledging the second clause of the sentence written after the because in what I said about the physics of getting any sort of head knock which sets the context for the first clause about the physics of the ball.

Of course if you take that part of the sentence on its own out of context then it's not true.

I don't agree it would be a worthless game without heading nor that the players know full well the risks. That's the point of some of the legal actions that have been taken.

I think it will depend on what the risk relationship is. If the risks are well communicated and the players sign away their concerns then that's fine in my opinion.

If the risks turn out to be much higher than 3x more likely to get dementia than the average, then there is a moral question to it, given that it is not a necessary industry nor in my opinion a necessary part of the sport i.e the sport of football could technically function without it.

[Harv]

but you're not acknowledging the second clause of the sentence written after the because in what I said about the physics of getting any sort of head knock which sets the context for the first clause about the physics of the ball.

Of course if you take that part of the sentence on its own out of context then it's not true.

I don't agree it would be a worthless game without heading nor that the players know full well the risks. That's the point of some of the legal actions that have been taken.

I think it will depend on what the risk relationship is. If the risks are well communicated and the players sign away their concerns then that's fine in my opinion.

If the risks turn out to be much higher than 3x more likely to get dementia than the average, then there is a moral question to it, given that it is not a necessary industry nor in my opinion a necessary part of the sport i.e the sport of football could technically function without it.

I don't even understand what you're trying to say anymore to be honest. That reads like gibberish man. Clause?? WTF

Im not discounting any of what you've said, any form of head knock is going to cause damage. Fine. But you're never going to convince me what youre getting hit in the head by doesn't matter. It absolutely does. Would you rather be punched in the head by a 5 yr old kid or Mike Tyson?

[Corndog]

I don't even understand what you're trying to say anymore to be honest. That reads like gibberish man. Clause?? WTF

Im not discounting any of what you've said, any form of head knock is going to cause damage. Fine. But you're never going to convince me what youre getting hit in the head by doesn't matter. It absolutely does. Would you rather be punched in the head by a 5 yr old kid or Mike Tyson?

a clause is a part of a sentence, usually after a comma or a conjunction. Yea of course I'd rather the 5 year old anyday

[Fivex]

But would you rather be punched in the head by 100 5-year old Mike Tysons or 1 normal size Mike Tyson?

[Charly]

Isnt this just an English study?

Fair enough... we outlaw heading. Wont the rest of the world carry on regardless unless there is a unified response. The money and players will go elsewhere if the product here is inferior.

Pretty sure the speed of the ball is determined by mass and force with which its hit , so if the ball is lighter and travels faster it pretty much means the same result... Thats not to say every cross is going to be hit at full whack, so the energy in a newer ball will be less if hit at the same speed.

I was never one to head the ball anyway, but I wonder how workable this can be. Make touching the ball with your head a foul like hand ball? Cant work out if this would give an advantage to long ball teams, or not.