The ol' headgear debate

[Statesman]

Although I didn't care for the makers of the product, I do support the concept of padded, limited headgear for soccer players. All ethics aside there's a news story stating New York now mandates their usage. A step in the right direction?

http://sports.yahoo.com/sow/news?slug=ap-mandatoryheadguards&prov=ap&type=lgns

[Caesar]

I don't see any reason for headgear that's safe to not be permitted, but it seems like scaremongering to make a big deal about it.

[Claymore]

A step in the wrong direction, to be sure. New York probably put it in place out of fear of lawsuits.

[hoboken16]

A step in the wrong direction, to be sure. New York probably put it in place out of fear of lawsuits.

I agree that lawsuits probably have some factor with this. I don't see a problem with the younger kids wearing the head gear if studies show it can cause less injuries. Remember 20 years ago all hockey players did not wear helmets

I have coached 6-7 year olds and I have seen some kids take some shots off the head that hurt watching

[MassachusettsRef]

Merits of headgear aside, I can say that one match I would not want to referee is a Regional game involving the U13 or U14 NYW State Cup Champion. On the one hand, you'll have a team that is required to wear headgear and has been wearing it the whole year (in a state where everyone wears it) against teams that, for the most part, have never seen the product. We all know the level of taunting and teasing that can arise at this age level--particularly at this highly skilled level--and I think it could potentially make for some ugly situations that are difficult to handle once NYW teams leave their state.

[Rudy R9]

I agree

[alien]

This stikes me as similar to ten or so years ago when some leagues were tryingt to mandate keepers having to wear full hockey helmet style headgear (soft shell, not hard) as protection.

I suspect this decision goes back to the medical journal articles that indicated a raised level of brain injury in soccer players from heading. The methodology in the studies were dubious, but the "reported" results stirred a lot of debate.

I'm all for anyone who wants to wear the new style, soccer specific head gear. Just don't force it on them.

[refmike]

The article referenced above is not accurate. It says:

"The design [of the headgear] allows players to head the ball, but guards against blows to the sides of the head."

This padding IS designed to protect against head-to-head injurys during challenges for high balls but also affects how a ball is headed.

Anyone who uses the exposed top of head for heading is inviting injury because the top of the head is the last bone to close and is softer than the rest. The correct way to head the ball is at the hairline at the top of the forehead. That area is now covered with padding so the headballs will be softer and will not travel as far. Good for forwards who are trying to drop the ball into the goal and bad for defenders who need to clear the ball.

[blech]

when i played, shinguards were not mandatory.

[Footer Phooter]

when i played, shinguards were not mandatory.

You're old.
;)

[HoldenMan]

just out of interest, would anybody here not allow a player to wear rugby style headgear?

considering it's intended purpose, Assuming it's in reasonable condition I don't think we need to argue the point about whether or not it's going to endanger anybody, so let's not get into that!

[whitehound]

when i played, shinguards were not mandatory.
or shoes for that matter........and shinguards still shouldnt be. Sure is nice for the company to make a little money though. I bet they make the headgear too.

[whitehound]

just out of interest, would anybody here not allow a player to wear rugby style headgear?

considering it's intended purpose, Assuming it's in reasonable condition I don't think we need to argue the point about whether or not it's going to endanger anybody, so let's not get into that!
Dont you guys play aussie rules with ZERO padding? I wish they still showed that sport on ESPN......we called it smear the queer when I was a kid.

[HoldenMan]

Dont you guys play aussie rules with ZERO padding? I wish they still showed that sport on ESPN......we called it smear the queer when I was a kid.


lol, i like it.

Yeah, the reason i'm asking is that a few months ago i saw a kid playing soccer with rugby league style headgear - generated some interesting discussion on another board

[Bill Archer]

I think it's more than likely that these people fell prey to a good sales pitch. It's easy to make a case for "doing everything we can to keep the children safe" particularly if nobody shows up with statistical evidence which presents an opposing position.


Merits of headgear aside, I can say that one match I would not want to referee is a Regional game involving the U13 or U14 NYW State Cup Champion. On the one hand, you'll have a team that is required to wear headgear and has been wearing it the whole year (in a state where everyone wears it) against teams that, for the most part, have never seen the product. We all know the level of taunting and teasing that can arise at this age level--particularly at this highly skilled level--and I think it could potentially make for some ugly situations that are difficult to handle once NYW teams leave their state.

I'd propose an analagous case:

Every July, our club plays in a tournament in Niagara Falls. Have for years. It's not necessarily great competition but more like a little mini-vacation/end-of-the-season tradition. It's always a good time.

Seeing as how the tournament is sanctioned by New York West, I would assume that means our sub-U15 teams would be required to wear headgear. Which will, of course, mean we (and all the other out of state teams) won't be going.

You could, I suppose, exempt individual tournaments, but then you're allowing the teams that ARE from NY West to play without head protection in a NY West tournament. That isn't going to sit very well either.

It appears they didn't really think through all the ramifications here, which is probably why they've put it on hold.

[Claymore]

when i played, shinguards were not mandatory.

They weren't mandatory when I played either, but I played D3 college ball and you were risking serious injury without them.

[bungadiri]

They weren't mandatory when I played either, but I played D3 college ball and you were risking serious injury without them.
They weren't required until the '80s, right? Is it correct that the reason behind making shinguards required was concern over spread of HIV via blood? (This is how it was explained to me in one of my coaching classes.)

[Claymore]

Some time in the mid-80's, yes. I was in college from 83-87, and I remember at some point during that time they became mandatory.

[neilgrossman]

Dont you guys play aussie rules with ZERO padding? I wish they still showed that sport on ESPN......we called it smear the queer when I was a kid.

Smear the Queer, a.k.a. Maul Ball is usually every man for himself, not a team game like Aussie football.

[the101er]

I watched a bit of the ladie's NCAA final 4 yesterday and practically the whole Santa Clara team was wearing headgear.

This is bad, very bad. If you want to refute me, I will just layout a simple list:

1. Intimidation
2. False sense of safety
3. Encourage players who should stop playing, to keep playing
4. Confusion where it is mandatory and not
5. Added cost
6. Why only in the USA?
7. What was wrong with soccer for the previoous 150 years?
8. What happens when it doesn't work?
9. Changed tactics: "Sub in the corner kick special team."
10. Call your lawyer.

Well, that's my top ten. Oh and one final one: define "soft".