Heading and dementia | Page 2 | Vital Football

Heading and dementia

Pope John XXIII said:
I agree to a very large extent that a pro should accept some degree of risk and future consequence from their sport. A pro sports person who puts enormous strain on their joints all the time is likely to suffer arthritis, etc as a result. A boxer is all about punching the head; you have a good idea what the future consequences of that might be.

But I do think there is nothing wrong with making reasonable adjustments where they dont impact on the game itself.

Banning some of these injections they do could he a start; part of the reason pros end up with major problems is being pressurised to play while injured by giving them pain killing injections. That's not a great practice surely?

And if that also means players wearing some sort of basic headgear like Petr Cech used to then sure, why not?
Click to expand...

Think you made the key point about not impacting on the game itself. Headgear, neck gear- im all for it but if we ban the heading of the ball then we are losing footy as we know it.
 
Pope John XXIII said:
Formula 1 thankfully had a different outlook
Click to expand...

The very same rules apply; if a driver thinks it is unsafe to drive he is well within his rights to refuse to drive.

At the end of the day it is down to the individual to decide if the risk outweighs the rewards.

As far as F1 is concerned, it is both a good example and a bad example; unlike football, millions and millions do not take part in a Sport which is the epitome of elitism; you have two dozen multi millionaires driving round in billion dollar cars.

There is a pathway into the sport for the less well of through Karting; but you still need to have a fair amount of money to take part, that is if you can gain entry to a club - to put things into perspective there are more Football Clubs in the Nottinghamshire Football leagues than there are Karting Clubs world wide.

However, there is a very good side to the sport; they have taken ownership of the risks involved and enforced rules and regulations which make the sport about as safe as it could possibly be.

They did not need a collection of "experts" with no knowledge of the sport, sticking their noses in, demanding change; they engaged with drivers and engineers and technicians and sorted out their own problems.

The so called measures mentioned in the Guardian report are hare brained; they want to regulate the amount of heading in training but not in games; who the fuck is going to monitor that?

Do you think the players will take any notice?

As for players wearing protective head guards; that might not be the most idiotic suggestion I have heard but it is definitely in the top one.

Presumably the magical headguards will have to be sturdy enough to cushion some of the impact; what happens when two players go for a header and one gets the ball and the other hits his opposing number full in the face with his headguard?

Petr Cech played with a protective head guard but, as a keeper, he did not have to head the ball, which is just as well when you have a depressed fracture of the skull.

I really do not know what it is that compels people who do not, and never have, played the sport to think they can save the millions and millions who do, from themselves.

People play the game happily knowing there is a huge chance they will get injured at some point; and that is at all levels of the game.

Some people suffer serious breaks or dislocations or tears and then go through hell in an attempt to play again; not playing again is the last thing on their minds.

I know plenty of people who cannot understand that attitude and think it is madness; the only thing those people have in common is they have never kicked a ball in their lives.

This whole dementia issue received a great amount of prominence from the plight of Eastwood native, Jeff Astle.

Jeff became aware of his condition in the mid 90's; a West Brom supporting work mate at the time took me to see Astle give a talk; it could not have been long after he found out.

After the talk there was a question and answer session; as he had touched on dementia, someone in the crowd was brave enough to ask him if he had any regrets and would he have done anything different.

He said "yes, I should have stuck that one away against Brazil in 1970"

His answer might shock some people but I doubt it did to any of those present.
 
mao tse tung said:
The very same rules apply; if a driver thinks it is unsafe to drive he is well within his rights to refuse to drive.

At the end of the day it is down to the individual to decide if the risk outweighs the rewards.

As far as F1 is concerned, it is both a good example and a bad example; unlike football, millions and millions do not take part in a Sport which is the epitome of elitism; you have two dozen multi millionaires driving round in billion dollar cars.

There is a pathway into the sport for the less well of through Karting; but you still need to have a fair amount of money to take part, that is if you can gain entry to a club - to put things into perspective there are more Football Clubs in the Nottinghamshire Football leagues than there are Karting Clubs world wide.

However, there is a very good side to the sport; they have taken ownership of the risks involved and enforced rules and regulations which make the sport about as safe as it could possibly be.

They did not need a collection of "experts" with no knowledge of the sport, sticking their noses in, demanding change; they engaged with drivers and engineers and technicians and sorted out their own problems.

The so called measures mentioned in the Guardian report are hare brained; they want to regulate the amount of heading in training but not in games; who the fuck is going to monitor that?

Do you think the players will take any notice?

As for players wearing protective head guards; that might not be the most idiotic suggestion I have heard but it is definitely in the top one.

Presumably the magical headguards will have to be sturdy enough to cushion some of the impact; what happens when two players go for a header and one gets the ball and the other hits his opposing number full in the face with his headguard?

Petr Cech played with a protective head guard but, as a keeper, he did not have to head the ball, which is just as well when you have a depressed fracture of the skull.

I really do not know what it is that compels people who do not, and never have, played the sport to think they can save the millions and millions who do, from themselves.

People play the game happily knowing there is a huge chance they will get injured at some point; and that is at all levels of the game.

Some people suffer serious breaks or dislocations or tears and then go through hell in an attempt to play again; not playing again is the last thing on their minds.

I know plenty of people who cannot understand that attitude and think it is madness; the only thing those people have in common is they have never kicked a ball in their lives.

This whole dementia issue received a great amount of prominence from the plight of Eastwood native, Jeff Astle.

Jeff became aware of his condition in the mid 90's; a West Brom supporting work mate at the time took me to see Astle give a talk; it could not have been long after he found out.

After the talk there was a question and answer session; as he had touched on dementia, someone in the crowd was brave enough to ask him if he had any regrets and would he have done anything different.

He said "yes, I should have stuck that one away against Brazil in 1970"

His answer might shock some people but I doubt it did to any of those present.
Click to expand...
There are plenty of pros calling for changes Mao.

Alan Shearer for one.

Your attempt to explain the difference with F1 as economic and based on privilege is a valient one. Your attempt to claim that no one who has not played the game can discuss safety in football, having just done exactly that for motor racing having presumably never raced an F1 car is equally valient.

F1 drivers used to die every season. They campaigned for changes; Jackie Stewart being one of the real pioneers. Yes, racing was their choice and they accepted the risks (Stewart retired fairly early because he no longer accepted those risks); that didn't stop them trying to incrementally make it safer. Their success was seen last year when Romain Grosjean's car was ripped in half and exploded and he literally walked away.

I agree that the idea of banning heading is a nonsense. But eventually players are going to want something to be done and I think you are reaching a bit when you say they all understand the risks. We are only just starting to understand them.
 
Pope John XXIII said:
There are plenty of pros calling for changes Mao.

Alan Shearer for one.

Your attempt to explain the difference with F1 as economic and based on privilege is a valient one. Your attempt to claim that no one who has not played the game can discuss safety in football, having just done exactly that for motor racing having presumably never raced an F1 car is equally valient.

F1 drivers used to die every season. They campaigned for changes; Jackie Stewart being one of the real pioneers. Yes, racing was their choice and they accepted the risks (Stewart retired fairly early because he no longer accepted those risks); that didn't stop them trying to incrementally make it safer. Their success was seen last year when Romain Grosjean's car was ripped in half and exploded and he literally walked away.

I agree that the idea of banning heading is a nonsense. But eventually players are going to want something to be done and I think you are reaching a bit when you say they all understand the risks. We are only just starting to understand them.
Click to expand...

I did no such thing; I was not telling F1 how or when to put their house in order; I was acknowledging the fact that they had done so and made of good job of it, as you go on to confirm with good examples.

That is not the same as attempting to second guess what motivates people to defy personnel risk.
 
Pope John XXIII said:
Go back to Mao's post and tell me how his point applies any differently
Click to expand...

Because the risk assessment is completely different for f1 frequency is low but impact is high- crash at 180 miles an hour and u will probably die. In football the frequency of injury is almost certainly higher but the impact is lower.

Imo it is about making the risks transparent and letting people make their own choices. If you are worried about getting dementia from playing football then stop playing football.
 
radfordinlondon said:
Because the risk assessment is completely different for f1 frequency is low but impact is high- crash at 180 miles an hour and u will probably die. In football the frequency of injury is almost certainly higher but the impact is lower.

Imo it is about making the risks transparent and letting people make their own choices. If you are worried about getting dementia from playing football then stop playing football.
Click to expand...
In one particular way it is worse.

The devastating potential impact comes much later in life; so distant that few, if any, teenagers are every going to pay it much heed. How can we honestly say it's a fully informed choice when most teens will not have seen the effects of dementia and they know it is something far, far in the distance; and the money and immediate rewards are so great?

The way the game is encourages the young to sell out their future selves for fame, money and the chance to have a job they enjoy. How can they possibly see themselves in 40 years wasting away and make an informed choice whether it's worth it?

F1 on the other hand is far more informed; any F1 driver of the 1960's-70's would have seen a fellow competitor get killed and the effect is immediate; they raced knowing they might die that day
 
Pope John XXIII said:
In one particular way it is worse.

The devastating potential impact comes much later in life; so distant that few, if any, teenagers are every going to pay it much heed. How can we honestly say it's a fully informed choice when most teens will not have seen the effects of dementia and they know it is something far, far in the distance; and the money and immediate rewards are so great?

The way the game is encourages the young to sell out their future selves for fame, money and the chance to have a job they enjoy. How can they possibly see themselves in 40 years wasting away and make an informed choice whether it's worth it?

F1 on the other hand is far more informed; any F1 driver of the 1960's-70's would have seen a fellow competitor get killed and the effect is immediate; they raced knowing they might die that day
Click to expand...
I remember reading an article once that talked about Roberto Carlos. He used to lock his knee as he struck the ball at free kicks which is how he got so much swerve but doctors had told him that he wouldn’t be able to walk unaided by the time he was 50 because of the damage it was doing.

Out of curiosity (and stupidity perhaps) I tried it. After three goes my knee was in agony so I can only presume that it was the same for Carlos and he did this knowing full well that there were consequences.
 
If players have to wear helmets it might actually help us as it’d smooth the edges of people’s 50p heads like Dexter Crapshot or Yatez & we might actually get some headers on target.
 
Basha73 said:
I remember reading an article once that talked about Roberto Carlos. He used to lock his knee as he struck the ball at free kicks which is how he got so much swerve but doctors had told him that he wouldn’t be able to walk unaided by the time he was 50 because of the damage it was doing.

Out of curiosity (and stupidity perhaps) I tried it. After three goes my knee was in agony so I can only presume that it was the same for Carlos and he did this knowing full well that there were consequences.
Click to expand...
.... Consequences by the time he is 50.

What do people find it easier to take heed of? Something that has consequences immediately or something that has consequences years in the future?

We all know the possible consequences in the future every time we have a fried breakfast, smoke a cigarette, have that extra beer or have full sugar coke.

By the time we actually experience the full force of the consequences and wish with all our hearts we had done things differently when younger, it's too late. Because young you can't experience the pain of your older self to make you take a different choice.

Football is the same; F1 isn't.
 
Pope John XXIII said:
.... Consequences by the time he is 50.

What do people find it easier to take heed of? Something that has consequences immediately or something that has consequences years in the future?

We all know the possible consequences in the future every time we have a fried breakfast, smoke a cigarette, have that extra beer or have full sugar coke.

By the time we actually experience the full force of the consequences and wish with all our hearts we had done things differently when younger, it's too late. Because young you can't experience the pain of your older self to make you take a different choice.

Football is the same; F1 isn't.
Click to expand...

Thought that was my point :fish:
 
Pope John XXIII said:
.... Consequences by the time he is 50.

What do people find it easier to take heed of? Something that has consequences immediately or something that has consequences years in the future?

We all know the possible consequences in the future every time we have a fried breakfast, smoke a cigarette, have that extra beer or have full sugar coke.

By the time we actually experience the full force of the consequences and wish with all our hearts we had done things differently when younger, it's too late. Because young you can't experience the pain of your older self to make you take a different choice.

Football is the same; F1 isn't.
Click to expand...

But people who do experience the pain of the older self carry on playing.

One of the biggest growth areas in football outside of the women's games is senior football; people aged over 35 who want to carry on playing.

Senior leagues are getting larger and larger due to their popularity; and the people who play are fully aware of what is happening to their bodies.

The thrill of still being able to play in your 40's and 50's is incredible; the real pain comes when you do have to stop playing, the loss is like experiencing a death in the family but without the grief.

Its not the young kids just starting to play who may or may not run the risk of dementia in later life that I feel sorry for; its the people who have never played the game, they will never fully understand what they have missed.
 
mao tse tung said:
But people who do experience the pain of the older self carry on playing.

One of the biggest growth areas in football outside of the women's games is senior football; people aged over 35 who want to carry on playing.

Senior leagues are getting larger and larger due to their popularity; and the people who play are fully aware of what is happening to their bodies.

The thrill of still being able to play in your 40's and 50's is incredible; the real pain comes when you do have to stop playing, the loss is like experiencing a death in the family but without the grief.

Its not the young kids just starting to play who may or may not run the risk of dementia in later life that I feel sorry for; its the people who have never played the game, they will never fully understand what they have missed.
Click to expand...
Are they playing with dementia in their 60s and 70's?
 
Do footballers suffer disproportionately with dementia? Then do centre backs disproportionately get it more than wingers & goal keepers? My guess is the answer to both is no.
 
Pope John XXIII said:
Are they playing with dementia in their 60s and 70's?
Click to expand...

I know a 70 year old who still turns out regularly; very fit old lad, thinks nothing of completing the Saturday morning park run (3 mile) in under 20 minutes.

I know plenty of lads in their 60's still playing.

I get the distinct impression that none of them give any consideration whatsoever to the prospect of dementia.
 
Woanz said:
Makes sense as they would do the most headers as per what I was saying, what’s the percentages though, compared with other professions?
Click to expand...

Recent studies suggest that as many as 0.8% of people who play the game will suffer from some sort of brain damage; in comparison 17% of Boxers and 4.8% of Rugby Players suffer the same.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.