I'm shocked, shocked I tell you, that a newspaper gave a misleading synopsis of something from a scientific report.
We had gu12 player take a shot to the face this past weekend. She went down. Didn't pass out. Didn't cry. Stayed on the field for about 10 more minutes playing. Subbed her off and she told me she was dizzy. She looked a little "zombie-ish." No more playing for her that day. Went to the doctor later that afternoon. Concussion. She went back to the doctor on Monday. No school for the week. Her eyes were still a bit off. She gets an MRI today. She's feeling better, but I don't expect her back on the field for a while. Had nothing to do with heading the ball or rough play for either team. Doctor said she was the 3rd soccer concussion of the day.
I suspect this is one the reasons us soccer wants to limit players to 30 games a year. Less soccer (especially worn out players) The less injuries will happen.
I did run into one issue with the different rule. After doing six games in two days of U10 and younger, I centered a U12 game on day three. The first intentional header and I brought the whistle to my mouth. Thankfully I remembered this was U12 and lowered the whistle. Home coach said "almost..." I looked at him and smiled. Yep, almost.
I spent my Saturday working six games at a competitive soccer tournament, alternating between the U11 and U12 age groups. I usually referee older teams, so this was my first opportunity to enforce the heading ban at U11. I made sure to remind the U11 coaches and players before each game, and at least one team from out of state expressed surprise at the prohibition which makes me wonder about the breadth of its implementation. A couple of observations that probably have already been made in this thread, but I have forgotten: 1. I hope that the heading ban significantly reduces the possibility of concussions (or TBI), because it really changes how the game is played. This was more obvious because I was switching between games with players essentially the same size, but with or without heading. 2. While I saw several players perform decent chest traps, in more than a few instances heading the ball was replaced by high boots. I didn't have any players get kicked in the head, but it made me wonder if we aren't trading one type of injury for another. 3. I only had to call illegal heading two times in total for the three U11 games, so the message is getting across. The players and parents seemed to recognize the difference between deliberate and accidental ball-head contact, which was nice.
Bear in mind, the heading thing is only a USSF recommendation (except for the very few games under their direct control), so it's up to each State whether/when/how to implement.
While there is a definite lawsuit threat behind the ban, it also dovetails nicely with the new small-sided games changes, which promote and encourage playing the ball on the ground. Given this, I have to ask why the ball was in the air enough for high boots to be a worry? Was it balls being misplayed or was the ball played in the air deliberately? My kids are full-sided this year so I haven't had a chance to see games played this way yet.
These games were 9v9 with no build-out line and no restrictions on keeper delivery. The ball was in the air from keeper punts, throw-ins, kicks on a bouncing ball, kicks on rolling balls, etc. Some these guys were good enough to kick stationary balls above head height as well. The ball was in the air a lot.
I think you're missing what I am getting at. The intent to to force you to learn how to develop the technical ability to work the ball on the ground. Without the ability to to play a ball by head, the ability to kick a ball above head height is significantly nullified unless you're attempting a shot on goal. If the ball was in the air a lot, then I'd suggest in this case the problem is not the directive, but those way teams have adjusted.
I think this is also an argument on why the build out line is a companion to the no-heading. AYSO has adopted the heading ban, but not the build out line. So GKs punting to get the ball away from the goal still makes a lot of sense -- which results in high bouncing balls -- both because punts tend to be high in general and because younger punters typically have more up than distance. (On Saturday, I reffed my first U10 game since the ban came in, and had two headers in the BU10 game. On the first, my AR flagged and I found myself perplexed as I could not see an possible OS infraction . . . )
But unless my understanding of this directive is faulty, the ban on heading by players U11 and younger was based on safety (or liability) concerns - not skill development. Certainly coaches can and should adjust their tactics to work better with the heading restriction. I was mainly sharing my recent experience with similarly aged kids with and without heading. The difference was striking.
A small sampling of three - My two sons and I - My older son received a concussion attempting to head a ball when another player's head contacted his. My younger son received a concussion when struck by a free kick while he was standing in the wall. I received one (and an undetermined period of unconsciousness) when I slipped and fell backward while playing on an old artificial surface - essentially just carpet over asphalt - the back of my head whiplashing down onto the carpet. Only the first one would have been prevented by a ban on heading. Not only that, when I was younger I tried to avoid heading the ball because of the discomfort I felt. However, after I was taught proper technique I felt no more pain. Nothing in these new heading restrictions does anything about teaching proper technique. At best, the only benefit will be a delay of a few years of whatever injuries are going to occur.
While I have some misgivings about the ban and agree with the first sentence, I don't think that the second is necessarily accurate. Physical and mental development will give the players stronger necks, better ability to learn proper technique, and (apparently) less general susceptibility to the brain slosh that causes concussions. (Of course, on the flip side, it is also true that 10 year olds rarely attempt contested headers so that there is less risk to them of head-to-head contact and the ball will be slightly heavier and likely moving faster when they are older, and they will have lost the initial training on heading when they were younger.) (I do hope there will be focus on teaching coaches how to teach 11 year olds to head the ball I do think they are more teachable and less likely to do the u-little version of heading by just letting the ball hit their head, but unless coaches actually teach, they can't learn.)
I did the following yesterday....u14, 15, u12 twice and then a u9.... When the GK punted it away in the u9 game I did nothing until the coach reminded me... The build out line works though.
Indeed the liability was a driver, but if you re-read what I wrote it also dovetails nicely with the new small-sided games initiative. A problem I see is too many parent coaches who do not understand the game and coach a basketball full court press at every goal kick. I'd argue for a build out line to u17 to be honest. I ask our u13s to just put the ball out for a throw-in if the short ball isn't on.
How do you think it would work in a when the ability to reliable "boot" the ball upfield is not there and a goal kick is a better scoring opportunity for the opponent than a corner?
It's better because a throw in rarely leads to a scoring chance for the other team and it takes significant pressure off the poor kid kicking the ball. I really don't want to waste the 1 hour and 15 minutes we get a week to practice on set plays and booting the ball. I have also not once practiced heading the ball.
No, it really isn't and if you go through a training sessions for youth players, actually if you look at 99% of what's in the NSCAA materials, the emphasis is on possession, passing to space and feet, and movement. And those are professional practice plans on which to build. If you're playing the ball on the ground and building technical proficiency, then you really don't need to head the ball. Plus you ignored the important part, there's limited time to train. Do you spend that limited time coaching a marginal skill or do you spend that time working on things that help you become a better soccer player on the core skills required. It's convenient that liability aspect comes as we rethink how we learn and teach the game.