Not really. But it will give you a concussion. No matter what. But in a litigative society, this is called 'compromise.' http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/10/s...ill-limit-headers-for-youth-players.html?_r=0 As with everything elementary school based. It is all or nothing. There is no place for common sense. A. Most concussions (without statistics, I'd say almost none, but I digress) don't come from heading a soccer ball. Being hit in the head with a shot is not heading the ball. B. We are losing a prime age to teach the proper technique in a controlled environment. C. We lose creativity from a player who may run onto a bouncing ball who cannot instinctively nod it with his head (I assume a ref will now be instructed to call it as a 'dangerous play'). D. Kids basically are being further instructed to be deathly afraid of a ball at eye level. Its sad.
The problem is that there is no information available, so people are making judgments based on no information whatsoever. Heading without contact with another player definitely does not cause concussions. (U-littles are not striking with adult power.) But concussion is defined by doctors to be a set of specific symptoms. Just because heading doesn't cause concussions, however, doesn't mean that heading doesn't cause injuries of some other kind. This is the part where there is no available information at all--just speculation. If we started researching the subject today, it might be 100 years before we had reliable information. The biggest problem is not identifying a traumatic brain injury, but in identifying causation for the injury. The causation problem is complicated because some injuries are the cumulative result of a lifetime of trauma and some of the symptoms could be caused by disease or other medical condition. I am not saying that coaches should not take precautions. I took precautions 20 years ago with U-Littles because it made sense to me. I taught heading technique with low impact exercises and few repetitions. (Lower inflation means lower weight ball means lower impact energy.) I didn't criticize players for deciding not to head the ball during play. I didn't use any restrictions in games to require heading. As a player I used technique to reduce the danger of head to head contact. First I never "jumped in" to head the ball over a player. I jump up with my head centered over my body and I keep my shoulder turned toward my marker to create space. The shoulder won't prevent a marker from jumping into you, but it will make it less likely and reduce the amount of force of any impact. Smarter players are not going to jump into you. It also makes foul recognition easier for the referee. So how you teach heading is important for safety. The bottom line is that I resent anybody telling me how to train a subject when their restrictions are based on pure speculation. (As an example of the lunacy, the heading ban means you have to stop players from controlling or juggling the ball with their heads.) The compromise settlement was not made because it is in the best interests of children, but rather simply to save litigation costs in an area where both sides know that there is no information available. Even with no information available, attorneys can always find expert witnesses willing to give whatever expert opinion the attorney wants. So lack of information doesn't mean there wouldn't be an expensive trial.
I was hoping they would add a "dangerous header" to the refs arsenal, they could call it on all headed corners, goal kicks, shots, crosses etc. But leave alone the throw in header, bouncing ball headers etc. The out right ban is ridiculous. I seriously worry about young kids today getting to high school years from now and suddenly they start trying to head balls hit by 18 year olds with no training on proper technique, conditioning, neck/head snap etc. The overwhelming number of concussions I have personally witnessed were not caused by a ball, elbows-heads-knees-the ground were the culprits.
Outright ban at u10 and below and some limits on heading during practice u11-13. So I don't get the concern.
I'm not understanding the outrage about this, other than it being taken as a convenient opportunities to bash all lawyers. As a coach dealing with kids in this age range, I have stayed away from heading. We have plenty of other stuff to work on. I'm much happier to see them dribbling and playing the ball on the ground. And, we should continue to see a movement in that direction with the upcoming changes to emphasize playing out of the back. The most likely situation where heading arises is from punts, so removing or reducing those situations should make this even less of an issue as a practical matter. Nothing yet as to how it is implemented, right? If it is really banned, that does sound like it would be called as a new example of a dangerous play. I'd agree that there is a lack of definitive evidence, but remain of the impression that this argument cuts both ways. As a coach who would prefer to focus my practice time elsewhere and would rather err on the side of caution in any event, this removes the angst of needing to coach it since a few of them may try to do it in games even though we haven't ever practiced it.
I'm at U11 and have had my current crop since U9 and haven't spent maybe twenty minutes on heading with them. Not sure why, but it's such a miniscule part of their game. Sure, now just finished the first season of U11 and we missed a few chances to head the ball into the goal (but we also scored at least 2 this season). I don't recall many high balls going over heads or missed clearances—it was dealt with some other way. I'm kinda like, "Great, what else is new?" Why I might get out of coaching is because it's becoming increasingly litigious. In 10-15 years I don't want some kid and family who I haven't coached in 10 years coming back and naming me as a defendant in some ridiculous lawsuit over this.
I wasn't bashing lawyers. Just giving my opinion of what happened. Settlement is not the lawyer's decision anyway.
The outrage is because this isn't a problem. And IMO, it instills a culture of fearing the ball. I coach U-11's and 12's. We will do heading, as part of a warm up. It is more a training to use the head to control a ball. Once a month, each player would do 10 - 20 touches. This is to not be fearful of nodding down a ball or making a short pass to a teammate or open space. Off a half field punt or goal kick is a whole other matter. As a 40+ player (defender), to this day, I still hate those balls and try to avoid them as much as I can. I prefer, and tell my players, to find other methods to win those balls. Again, nodding a bounced ball down from eye level. Is that heading? Would that be deemed dangerous play? Dumb.
Whether there is a problem is the debate, and there is no evidence that supports the definitive statement that there isn't a problem. And, what evidence is there that this will instill a culture of fear. That isn't my take away, and certainly doesn't need to be the case. At these younger ages, the game can easily be played with the ball on the ground. Yes, it's not the "adult" game, but neither is 7v7 the same as the 11v11 game or so on. I'll repeat this later, but completely separate from the concussion issue, this change could just as easily have implemented as a best practices approach to training, in my opinion. It's not clear to me whether your U11s are part of the 10 and under group or the 11-13 group. Is it actual age, or age at the beginning or the season or the end of the season? setting that technicality aside, and whether you are or aren't starting one year earlier than these new guidelines would permit, the type of warmup you're describing sounds like it would fall within the limited practice training that will be allowed. Also, let's keep in mind that there are many coaches who may not be as enlightened as you. I can recall occasions where I've seen u8 recreational coaches have an entire practice devoted to heading. But, other coaches may not take that approach, especially if it means losing balls against a team that will go after them. Fact is, if we are the same height and I will use my head, your "other" methods to those balls are at a serious disadvantage, since they are all lower than my head. Why place players in that situation? Why place the coaches in that situation? I've seen nothing yet about how they are enforcing this "ban" during games, so I don't know. I'm not saying that there might not have been other ways to approach it, but, frankly, a simple rule that you can't use your head in just the same way that you can't use hands/arms would seem easiest rather than trying to dissect the velocity at which a ball is traveling or whether another player/opponent is near enough to also challenge the ball. I don't see a simple rule rather than a complicated and potentially ambiguous one as "dumb." I admittedly don't know enough to make these kinds of medical determinations, so I've long been of the mindset to err on the side of caution rather than to learn in however many years down the road that they've made new findings on this issue that show that a gamble I've taken with someone else's kid turned out to be wrong. Only a few weeks ago, I had a coach express disdain at my approach to this very issue and tell me that he had headed the ball when he was a kid and thus evidence it was safe. But I don't see any reason to take any risk. More importantly, however, this is as much a developmental issue for me as it is a safety one. At these ages, I'd rather take the minutes that another coach might spend on heading and spend those minutes with the ball at their feet, whether it be dribbling or passing or whatever else. Every minute we don't train on heading is a minute we train on something else. I've yet to meet the 10 year old who has so mastered everything that he doesn't need more work on those non-heading areas, which in return leads me back to not understanding the outrage. I don't believe the kids are missing out on anything by not heading the ball at these ages, and don't believe the youth game has to mimic the adult game in all respects. Stepping beyond the safety component of this, this is really no more than another variation of the debate over smaller fields and moving from 11v11 to short-sided games. All the uproar subsided and everything was fine. This is an issue in transition, but will then become the norm. And, at least as of now, there isn't any evidence that kids won't be able to learn to properly head the ball at 11, 12, 13, or older. And, I suspect there will probably be some who will get it much more quickly having waited until a later age. There are some kids who are ready to head, physically and otherwise, at a younger age, and others who may not be ready. I'm not seeing the harm in telling everyone to wait, removing the pressure from those who don't want to put there team at a disadvantage, and having everyone focus with even greater emphasis on developing their ability to play the ball on the ground.
Ok if you wait too long before allowing heading they will be brain washed into thinking heading is bad. Start that late they will not be good at it when they get older. Because they will still be thinking that they should be hesitant about doing it. Start young teach them how to head the right way with progression exercises. Every header is not power heading. High bounce head down to bring it down to your foot or a receivers foot. Heading everything high does not bring the ball under control. Head down into space for someone else to run on to. If you play in Germany most coaches want you to use your head on every ball that you can score with. Like diving headers on low balls. Redirectional heading is not power heading either. So learn how to do it right your less likely to get hurt heading the ball. You have to learn how to protect the space your are going to head in. You can get hurt if you let opponents into that space. Start to late you won't know how to protect your space from someone who really knows how to head the ball. When will the player learn how to stand still in the air. You learn that when heading the ball. When will they learn that after 13? I told this story before a high school girls coach if his parents were afraid to let their daughter head the ball. Instead of explaining to them how her daughter can head without getting hurt. Instead he Would just tell them ok she does not have to head the ball. Then when he caught a break and started to coach soccer at a women's college. He looked for players who could head the ball. That coach was a joke. I don't want to see youth players head every ball. There are many parts of the body that can be used to shoot and control the body. At times you want to get the ball with the chest and not with your head. Ever notice their are only certain players that are good with their head. Others can never seem to get their head on a high ball? Why, because they don't want to no matter what they say they don't want to. It's always over their head or they just miss. Is hat the kind of player we want to produce? but when you have to head the ball you should know how to head the ball.
Ever play 5v5 touch football? 3v3 basketball? 7v7 baseball (ball hit to right field is a foul)? All variations on the main game. Heck, in many parts of America for a long time, tackle football was played 7v7 due to small schools/rosters. Calling it a 'Best Practice' and I have no problem with it falling under 'recommendations.' Don't come out and ban it and say it was not part of a settlement from litigation when on the same day the litigation disappears.
We needed to do more to protect players with actual or suspected concussions. It shouldn't have taken a lawsuit to institute rule changes for dealing with injuries and clearing players for re-entry. Regarding heading, I agree that there may be no development downside to banning heading in SSGs at U10 and below, even though there is no information showing any benefit from the ban. Arguing that it is okay to ban heading because very few U10 players properly head the ball during a match is illogical. Very few U10 players properly dribble, strike and collect with both feet during a match either. Since most players don't use both feet in matches does that mean it is okay to ban playing with both feet? My biggest concern is this type of useless, political rulemaking never satisfies a zealot, rather it encourages them to push for more stringent, unnecessary rules. It is bad politics. What next, helmets? Banning punts for under U10 is really a non-issue because either the format does not have keepers or else the fields are too small for punts to be practical. Throws are the better choice. Will they ban long throws too? Long passes and throws are not an evil. No successful adult system is based exclusively on short passes. Even Barca tiki taki gave priority to long passes. Short passes were used to set up the long pass. I have a real problem with restricting youth to playing balls on the ground, which seems to be the point of every new initiative by USSF. The objective is player development, not training a youth team to play in a preferred adult tactical style. If players are not allowed to do anything other than play balls on the ground, they will never develop any other skills or tactics. I suppose the plan is to have players develop the missing skills during their teenage years when they should be learning team tactics. There is no long term success to be found in skipping fundamentals to teach team tactics earlier. As for playing out of the back, in a small sided game there is no back to play out of, which is the development advantage of small sided games. Unfortunately some coaches faced with a 5v5 game will immediately quarter the field and assign players individual zones to play in. Don't get me started on clubs that think U-Littles should play in an adult possession style. The key to developing championship teams is not in the tactics. It is in doing the small things (fundamentals) well. Successful possession style play is built on excellent fundamental skills.
Most youth sports defer the learning of certain fundamental aspects of their full, adult version of their respective sports…for many, in football its tackling and subsequently getting tackled…in baseball its pitching…in basketball its dunking…in hockey its body checking…not all of these things are straight up bans per say, but the postponement of these acts/skills to a later date still remains…and yet, all of those sports still manage to produce fearless, well-rounded, athletes… Barring any real evidence either way, I am going to lean toward this not being that much of a big deal development-wise long term….
If I was watching 8 yr olds play. Then one of them brought down a high bouncing ball to his feet so he can dribble the ball. Then some machine official called him for heading the ball and not call play on. I would leave the field and not watch that game any more.
You don't have to take my word that heading alone does not cause concussions. Here is an interview with an expert on concussions injuries in sports with Grant Wahl of SI. http://www.si.com/planet-futbol/201...eaders-concussions-player-safety-robert-cantu His concern is lowering the risk of head/head and head/elbow contract during play, which is the cause of concussions and possibly other injuries in youth sports.
Doctors like this will actually put kids in a cast when they don't need one to make sure they are not tempted to start playing too soon after a leg injury. He should have said kids need to be taught to protect their space to play in.
Nick, he means well. A point in his corner, is the lack of sufficient numbers of good coaches. You probably realize better than I do how many poor youth coaches there are. What upset me was the number of fathers I saw who weren't even athletes that were coaching their son's youth soccer teams. They didn't bring anything to the table, not even general athletic skills.
That article was posted elsewhere on Big Soccer. Yes he has his heart in the right place, but he cannot be more wrong. I contend that at the target ages for the heading ban/limitations, it is hard enough to find the players 'going up' for a header, let alone the number of 'contested' headers to lead to head to hard body part injury. You really don't see this until the teens.
just got this from indiana soccer... i can't believe this is what they came up with. no restrictions once players reach u14 seems short sighted.