The new research, which was led by Dr Willie Stewart, used databases of 7,676 pre and post-war Scottish league footballers who were aged 40 or over on Dec 31, 2016. Stewart’s team of investigators then studied their medical and death certification records and matched them against three people from the general population according to age, sex and demographic who had not played professional football.
Its a good job then that footballs now are much better quality. They compress more on impact and don’t change weight in bad weather.
This and as others have said or implied the research is potentially flawed as there has been marked changes in the footballs being used. As kids, I’m of that generation that played with leather footballs which, when wet, were like concrete. That’s the sort that Jeff Astle would have been playing with as a kid and for most of his career. The footballs today don’t even compare. A few seasons ago a wayward shot came hurtling towards me when I was standing in the Covered End. I instinctively caught it bracing myself for the impact and was shocked that the thing was as light as a feather. Today’s generation of players are not going to have the problems of yesterday’s. The research is also comparing generations that had different diets and attitudes to injury which may well have impacted of their body’s ability to cope with any head trauma.
I'm not really clear how the research is flawed in terms of the claims it is making. Further research will need to be done and it has flagged the danger of head trauma which sport in general has not taken seriously.
A more lightweight football may reduce the risk but it won't remove it entirely.
As football lovers we have to guard ourselves against looking at what we want in terms of the integrity of the game and developing our positions from there. If this is right, football has to change. Whether it is right or not will be a matter of fact. When we know that fact then we have to act accordingly. It is a matter for the world game to get to the bottom of this as quickly as possible.
The new research, which was led by Dr Willie Stewart, used databases of 7,676 pre and post-war Scottish league footballers who were aged 40 or over on Dec 31, 2016. Stewart’s team of investigators then studied their medical and death certification records and matched them against three people from the general population according to age, sex and demographic who had not played professional football.
Its a good job then that footballs now are much better quality. They compress more on impact and don’t change weight in bad weather.
This and as others have said or implied the research is potentially flawed as there has been marked changes in the footballs being used. As kids, I’m of that generation that played with leather footballs which, when wet, were like concrete. That’s the sort that Jeff Astle would have been playing with as a kid and for most of his career. The footballs today don’t even compare. A few seasons ago a wayward shot came hurtling towards me when I was standing in the Covered End. I instinctively caught it bracing myself for the impact and was shocked that the thing was as light as a feather. Today’s generation of players are not going to have the problems of yesterday’s. The research is also comparing generations that had different diets and attitudes to injury which may well have impacted of their body’s ability to cope with any head trauma.
I'm not really clear how the research is flawed in terms of the claims it is making. Further research will need to be done and it has flagged the danger of head trauma which sport in general has not taken seriously.
A more lightweight football may reduce the risk but it won't remove it entirely.
It’s flawed because it’s not comparing like for like. Any of us who headed an old leather football, particularly a wet one, and especially as kids, will tell you straight away it’s not a good idea - mind you, you quickly learnt how to head a ball properly, unlike a lot of players today from what I’ve seen who quite often let the ball bounce off their heads (which at the time I thought Sarr did on Saturday - apologies Naby if you didn’t)
There are questions that have to be considered. Here are some at the top of my head, others will have more: a) Are we comparing like for like (Changes to the game and footballs) b) Is there an added risk for Children who are still developing heading a football c) Is there a certain type of header that is more dangerous than others? d) Could there be other factors apart from headers?
And ultimately, you probably can't make any activity safe, but you can make it safer.
The extreme solution may be to outlaw heading. But what else can be done if the risks are too high. We do have to accept a degree of risk, It is part of life, but there is a point when the risk is too high. If you knew there was a high risk, would you be happy having your child heading a ball? But we need to know more and I'm sure there is some overlap with other sports which should make getting the answers easier.
The new research, which was led by Dr Willie Stewart, used databases of 7,676 pre and post-war Scottish league footballers who were aged 40 or over on Dec 31, 2016. Stewart’s team of investigators then studied their medical and death certification records and matched them against three people from the general population according to age, sex and demographic who had not played professional football.
Its a good job then that footballs now are much better quality. They compress more on impact and don’t change weight in bad weather.
This and as others have said or implied the research is potentially flawed as there has been marked changes in the footballs being used. As kids, I’m of that generation that played with leather footballs which, when wet, were like concrete. That’s the sort that Jeff Astle would have been playing with as a kid and for most of his career. The footballs today don’t even compare. A few seasons ago a wayward shot came hurtling towards me when I was standing in the Covered End. I instinctively caught it bracing myself for the impact and was shocked that the thing was as light as a feather. Today’s generation of players are not going to have the problems of yesterday’s. The research is also comparing generations that had different diets and attitudes to injury which may well have impacted of their body’s ability to cope with any head trauma.
The research is not "flawed". It is what it is - a historical study!
I think it’s the clash of heads that are more damaging than the repeated heading of the modern day football. Certain players, because of the position they play, are of course far more prone to have this happen than others.
I know it's a bit flippant to say it but not smoking and living a healthy life also greatly increases your chances of (eventually) dying from dementia.
We need a proper statistical study without meaningless eye-catching headlines so we can discover the true dangers / benefits of modern football!
I'll get my coat now and go back to listening to "More or Less" on radio 4. (Very good).
The new research, which was led by Dr Willie Stewart, used databases of 7,676 pre and post-war Scottish league footballers who were aged 40 or over on Dec 31, 2016. Stewart’s team of investigators then studied their medical and death certification records and matched them against three people from the general population according to age, sex and demographic who had not played professional football.
Its a good job then that footballs now are much better quality. They compress more on impact and don’t change weight in bad weather.
This and as others have said or implied the research is potentially flawed as there has been marked changes in the footballs being used. As kids, I’m of that generation that played with leather footballs which, when wet, were like concrete. That’s the sort that Jeff Astle would have been playing with as a kid and for most of his career. The footballs today don’t even compare. A few seasons ago a wayward shot came hurtling towards me when I was standing in the Covered End. I instinctively caught it bracing myself for the impact and was shocked that the thing was as light as a feather. Today’s generation of players are not going to have the problems of yesterday’s. The research is also comparing generations that had different diets and attitudes to injury which may well have impacted of their body’s ability to cope with any head trauma.
I'm not really clear how the research is flawed in terms of the claims it is making. Further research will need to be done and it has flagged the danger of head trauma which sport in general has not taken seriously.
A more lightweight football may reduce the risk but it won't remove it entirely.
It’s flawed because it’s not comparing like for like. Any of us who headed an old leather football, particularly a wet one, and especially as kids, will tell you straight away it’s not a good idea - mind you, you quickly learnt how to head a ball properly, unlike a lot of players today from what I’ve seen who quite often let the ball bounce off their heads (which at the time I thought Sarr did on Saturday - apologies Naby if you didn’t)
It's not flawed as it's not claiming to compare like for like - nothing in the study says so. It's a historical study covering a certain period which includes changes in the game.
To compare like for like further studies would have to be done and the terms of reference clearly defined. This is not a simple process.
The worst thing football can do is ignore the problem.
New generation footballs are certainly better than previous incarnations but I would still suggest that repeated impacts on the skull particularly I would say for centre half’s where often they head a ball dropping a long way will still have the possibility of causing jarring of the brain.
100%.
Of course the old fashioned and original footballs would cause more damage because of the weight of them, but it could also be argued that there is actually more headers in the modern game now even with teams playing better football.
Essentially, weight doesn’t matter because it’s the repeated trauma to the skull and the brain that causes the damage.
Did anyone see the Alan Shearer Documentary a while back and how the brain moves and gets compressed when heading a football?
This is a serious matter and one that is only going to grow with more tests and knowledge. It isn’t going to go away. Even when you have to consider the various other factors that must be taken into account as well, technology being on of them, psychological well-being being another, the repeated trauma of any weight on the skull is going to take its toll.
That Shearer documentary was pretty scary stuff. Every time you head the ball, effectively the brain is shaken
And the big danger is from training as you could spend an hour practising heading whether as a striker or defender. Impact after impact with no time to recover
The FA should fund additional research as it has a duty of care to the players. Just ignoring the problem won't make it go away.
In the case of Jeff Astle, a renowned header of the ball, the repeated minor traumas were shown to be a cause of death and he developed dementia at a young age.
It remains to be proven how much modern footballs remove the risk and the FA needs to fund adequate research.
The new research, which was led by Dr Willie Stewart, used databases of 7,676 pre and post-war Scottish league footballers who were aged 40 or over on Dec 31, 2016. Stewart’s team of investigators then studied their medical and death certification records and matched them against three people from the general population according to age, sex and demographic who had not played professional football.
Its a good job then that footballs now are much better quality. They compress more on impact and don’t change weight in bad weather.
This and as others have said or implied the research is potentially flawed as there has been marked changes in the footballs being used. As kids, I’m of that generation that played with leather footballs which, when wet, were like concrete. That’s the sort that Jeff Astle would have been playing with as a kid and for most of his career. The footballs today don’t even compare. A few seasons ago a wayward shot came hurtling towards me when I was standing in the Covered End. I instinctively caught it bracing myself for the impact and was shocked that the thing was as light as a feather. Today’s generation of players are not going to have the problems of yesterday’s. The research is also comparing generations that had different diets and attitudes to injury which may well have impacted of their body’s ability to cope with any head trauma.
I'm not really clear how the research is flawed in terms of the claims it is making. Further research will need to be done and it has flagged the danger of head trauma which sport in general has not taken seriously.
A more lightweight football may reduce the risk but it won't remove it entirely.
It’s flawed because it’s not comparing like for like. Any of us who headed an old leather football, particularly a wet one, and especially as kids, will tell you straight away it’s not a good idea - mind you, you quickly learnt how to head a ball properly, unlike a lot of players today from what I’ve seen who quite often let the ball bounce off their heads (which at the time I thought Sarr did on Saturday - apologies Naby if you didn’t)
It's not flawed as it's not claiming to compare like for like - nothing in the study says so. It's a historical study covering a certain period which includes changes in the game.
To compare like for like further studies would have to be done and the terms of reference clearly defined. This is not a simple process.
The worst thing football can do is ignore the problem.
It would be unfair of me to generalise and claim all players were at it but years ago footballers tended to do a bit of training in the morning and then go to the pub. In the last, I’ve seen Charlton players in the pub that made me feel instantly sober in comparison. My late father used to support Chelsea in his younger days and he would say they’d be in the pub across the road almost to kick off and there would be players in there as well who’d have to finish their drinks and dash into the ground to get changed for the game. Comparing years ago with today is flawed, more and more of the older generation, whether footballers or not, will be more prone to various illnesses because we are all living longer and not dying from things that would have one time killed us off in the meantime.
The extreme solution may be to outlaw heading. But what else can be done if the risks are too high. We do have to accept a degree of risk, It is part of life, but there is a point when the risk is too high. If you knew there was a high risk, would you be happy having your child heading a ball? But we need to know more and I'm sure there is some overlap with other sports which should make getting the answers easier.
As long as boxing and various martial arts are allowed, heading a football is never going to banned. Maybe at youth level, but not the professional level.
Got to love football fans trying to pick holes and indulge in whataboutery in an academically legitimate, statistically sound study carried out by professors.
So, what is the long term solution (assuming that there is a problem).........the ruination of the game as we know it?
Crash helmets
You got a lol for that Rob, but whether or not you meant it in jest, it is a possible solution.
Skull cap type contraptions perhaps, designed to absorb the impact and spread it across a wider area than the point of contact might work. It may look stupid but the alternative of banning heading in association football would change the game beyond all recognition.
The extreme solution may be to outlaw heading. But what else can be done if the risks are too high. We do have to accept a degree of risk, It is part of life, but there is a point when the risk is too high. If you knew there was a high risk, would you be happy having your child heading a ball? But we need to know more and I'm sure there is some overlap with other sports which should make getting the answers easier.
As long as boxing and various martial arts are allowed, heading a football is never going to banned. Maybe at youth level, but not the professional level.
You are right, but I think parents may not want their children playing if there is shown to be a significant risk. This is why it is important it is dealt with seriously and well.
The extreme solution may be to outlaw heading. But what else can be done if the risks are too high. We do have to accept a degree of risk, It is part of life, but there is a point when the risk is too high. If you knew there was a high risk, would you be happy having your child heading a ball? But we need to know more and I'm sure there is some overlap with other sports which should make getting the answers easier.
As long as boxing and various martial arts are allowed, heading a football is never going to banned. Maybe at youth level, but not the professional level.
You are right, but I think parents may not want their children playing if there is shown to be a significant risk. This is why it is important it is dealt with seriously and well.
Yes, that is possible. My son played youth football and I have coached in it (last season was our last). But if I thought I was subjecting him to a significant risk I would have pulled him out and packed it in.
The extreme solution may be to outlaw heading. But what else can be done if the risks are too high. We do have to accept a degree of risk, It is part of life, but there is a point when the risk is too high. If you knew there was a high risk, would you be happy having your child heading a ball? But we need to know more and I'm sure there is some overlap with other sports which should make getting the answers easier.
As long as boxing and various martial arts are allowed, heading a football is never going to banned. Maybe at youth level, but not the professional level.
You are right, but I think parents may not want their children playing if there is shown to be a significant risk. This is why it is important it is dealt with seriously and well.
Just look at the drop in children playing American Football!
The new research, which was led by Dr Willie Stewart, used databases of 7,676 pre and post-war Scottish league footballers who were aged 40 or over on Dec 31, 2016. Stewart’s team of investigators then studied their medical and death certification records and matched them against three people from the general population according to age, sex and demographic who had not played professional football.
Its a good job then that footballs now are much better quality. They compress more on impact and don’t change weight in bad weather.
This and as others have said or implied the research is potentially flawed as there has been marked changes in the footballs being used. As kids, I’m of that generation that played with leather footballs which, when wet, were like concrete. That’s the sort that Jeff Astle would have been playing with as a kid and for most of his career. The footballs today don’t even compare. A few seasons ago a wayward shot came hurtling towards me when I was standing in the Covered End. I instinctively caught it bracing myself for the impact and was shocked that the thing was as light as a feather. Today’s generation of players are not going to have the problems of yesterday’s. The research is also comparing generations that had different diets and attitudes to injury which may well have impacted of their body’s ability to cope with any head trauma.
I'm not really clear how the research is flawed in terms of the claims it is making. Further research will need to be done and it has flagged the danger of head trauma which sport in general has not taken seriously.
A more lightweight football may reduce the risk but it won't remove it entirely.
It’s flawed because it’s not comparing like for like. Any of us who headed an old leather football, particularly a wet one, and especially as kids, will tell you straight away it’s not a good idea - mind you, you quickly learnt how to head a ball properly, unlike a lot of players today from what I’ve seen who quite often let the ball bounce off their heads (which at the time I thought Sarr did on Saturday - apologies Naby if you didn’t)
It's not flawed as it's not claiming to compare like for like - nothing in the study says so. It's a historical study covering a certain period which includes changes in the game.
To compare like for like further studies would have to be done and the terms of reference clearly defined. This is not a simple process.
The worst thing football can do is ignore the problem.
It would be unfair of me to generalise and claim all players were at it but years ago footballers tended to do a bit of training in the morning and then go to the pub. In the last, I’ve seen Charlton players in the pub that made me feel instantly sober in comparison. My late father used to support Chelsea in his younger days and he would say they’d be in the pub across the road almost to kick off and there would be players in there as well who’d have to finish their drinks and dash into the ground to get changed for the game. Comparing years ago with today is flawed, more and more of the older generation, whether footballers or not, will be more prone to various illnesses because we are all living longer and not dying from things that would have one time killed us off in the meantime.
You should have a word with all those scientists and researchers and tell them their research is a waste of time. You seem to have a better understanding of it than they do. Not really sure what the link is between having a few beers and head trauma but I'm sure you can explain.
Presumably you could roll out the same argument about boxing as well?
So, what is the long term solution (assuming that there is a problem).........the ruination of the game as we know it?
Crash helmets
You got a lol for that Rob, but whether or not you meant it in jest, it is a possible solution.
Skull cap type contraptions perhaps, designed to absorb the impact and spread it across a wider area than the point of contact might work. It may look stupid but the alternative of banning heading in association football would change the game beyond all recognition.
Those used in youth and a mature boxing could possibly work. Bring it is as optional first maybe?
I think the point was that lifestyle may contribute too.
I think those producing scientific research are not governed by anecdotes about how much footballers used to drink.
Maybe they should be. Somebody who has a good diet and a moderate to no alcohol intake regime is probably going to have a lot less health problems in later life than somebody whose diet and alcohol intake wouldn’t be recommended today.
Years ago, there were just 11 players and 1 substitute and it seemed most weeks it was the same 11 or 12 named. Games were sometimes played on successive days. Teams like Liverpool were playing the best part of 70 games a season. By all accounts, injuries were commonly being dealt with by an injection. That surely has to come back and cause problems in later life.
It’s almost certain that at some point in the future there will be litigation brought against a club by a former player or their family subsequent to an untimely death or onset of dementia. An employer has a legal obligation to undertake a duty of care.
Employers have a duty of care to their employees, which means that they should take all steps which are reasonably possible to ensure their health, safety and wellbeing.
Like much health and safety law it’s grey and wooley but at some point it will no doubt be tested.
Comments
I'm not really clear how the research is flawed in terms of the claims it is making. Further research will need to be done and it has flagged the danger of head trauma which sport in general has not taken seriously.
A more lightweight football may reduce the risk but it won't remove it entirely.
a) Are we comparing like for like (Changes to the game and footballs)
b) Is there an added risk for Children who are still developing heading a football
c) Is there a certain type of header that is more dangerous than others?
d) Could there be other factors apart from headers?
And ultimately, you probably can't make any activity safe, but you can make it safer.
Certain players, because of the position they play, are of course far more prone to have this happen than others.
We need a proper statistical study without meaningless eye-catching headlines so we can discover the true dangers / benefits of modern football!
I'll get my coat now and go back to listening to "More or Less" on radio 4. (Very good).
To compare like for like further studies would have to be done and the terms of reference clearly defined. This is not a simple process.
The worst thing football can do is ignore the problem.
And the big danger is from training as you could spend an hour practising heading whether as a striker or defender. Impact after impact with no time to recover
In the case of Jeff Astle, a renowned header of the ball, the repeated minor traumas were shown to be a cause of death and he developed dementia at a young age.
It remains to be proven how much modern footballs remove the risk and the FA needs to fund adequate research.
You got a lol for that Rob, but whether or not you meant it in jest, it is a possible solution.
Skull cap type contraptions perhaps, designed to absorb the impact and spread it across a wider area than the point of contact might work. It may look stupid but the alternative of banning heading in association football would change the game beyond all recognition.
Presumably you could roll out the same argument about boxing as well?
Years ago, there were just 11 players and 1 substitute and it seemed most weeks it was the same 11 or 12 named. Games were sometimes played on successive days. Teams like Liverpool were playing the best part of 70 games a season. By all accounts, injuries were commonly being dealt with by an injection. That surely has to come back and cause problems in later life.