Summer transfer window 2021

[sheepyvillian]

3 hours ago, TRO said:

bit profound that Sheepy, i think we have moved on from coats improvising as goal posts....but take your point.

  I wouldn't call that profound, but it's just a fact that the game is always looking to evolve , weather it's for the better is a matter of opinion. I, myself, think the dementia link has some very compelling evidence and when it's a matter of life or death,  regardless of one's nostalgic feelings, this has to be looked into thoroughly. It's far too concerning a subject for the likes of Gordon Taylor to try and bury there heads in the sand, for fear of what the consequences may be.

They had the same kind of averse reaction in American football when they presented the concussion link. In fact, Will Smith plays the doctor, who found the link, in a film. And it was quite remarkable how much resistance the doctor experienced in trying to expose that link. Football should take heed and needs to be careful in doesn't leave itself open to ridicule and contempt. 

[TRO]

14 minutes ago, sheepyvillian said:

  I wouldn't call that profound, but it's just a fact that the game is always looking to evolve , weather it's for the better is a matter of opinion. I, myself, think the dementia link has some very compelling evidence and when it's a matter of life or death,  regardless of one's nostalgic feelings, this has to be looked into thoroughly. It's far too concerning a subject for the likes of Gordon Taylor to try and bury there heads in the sand, for fear of what the consequences may be.

They had the same kind of averse reaction in American football when they presented the concussion link. In fact, Will Smith plays the doctor, who found the link, in a film. And it was quite remarkable how much resistance the doctor experienced in trying to expose that link. Football should take heed and needs to be careful in doesn't leave itself open to ridicule and contempt. 

One case is too many, but a balance has to drawn here....There are rakes of players had no ill effects from Heading the ball....and it might be worth noting the balls are far lighter than those heavy things of yesteryear, where they cam over water logged and like medicine balls.

I am not sure if the evidence is conclusive or not......I guess Cardiac Arrests happen too, the question is, how often?

There are many, many folk sadly that have suffered with dementia and Alzheimers, who have never been near a football.....What about boxing too, do they just body punch?

like I say, its too deep a topic and a very subjective one.

[TRO]

2 hours ago, barry'sboots said:

Seen some reports that he is perceived to not work hard enough off the ball.  I haven't watched Pereira or ESR enough to know if one is better than the other at this aspect of their game.

I have been impressed with ESR ever since his introduction to the first team....good player.

[JAMAICAN-VILLAN]

2 hours ago, thabucks said:

Good write up on Boubacar Kamara here 

https://www.scoutedftbl.com/best-young-football-players/boubacar-kamara/ I’d like this paragraph 

Sanson should be on the phone extolling the virtues of joining the Villa revolution .

We do have a habit/strategy of signing lads who know someone in the squad.

Great for morale, integration, and tapping up of course!

[sheepyvillian]

35 minutes ago, TRO said:

There are many, many folk sadly that have suffered with dementia and Alzheimers, who have never been near a football.....

What does that prove ? Millions have died from lung cancer without ever being near a cigarette, but I don't think you'll find anyone denying that there's a link between cigarettes and cancer. 

No one is saying heading a football will cause dementia, but it may well increase your chances of getting it. And if that is the case, then it needs to be addressed asap. 

[TRO]

5 minutes ago, sheepyvillian said:

What does that prove ? Millions have died from lung cancer without ever being near a cigarette, but I don't think you'll find anyone denying that there's a link between cigarettes and cancer. 

No one is saying heading a football will cause dementia, but it may well increase your chances of getting it. And if that is the case, then it needs to be addressed asap. 

I think the relationship there is hardly a comparable comparison and there is far more evidence with cigarettes and cancer, not to mention far more people involved who smoke than head a ball.

Have it your way sheepy, is all subjective to me.

Edited July 5, 2021 by TRO

[Kiwivillan]

27 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

We do have a habit/strategy of signing lads who know someone in the squad.

Great for morale, integration, and tapping up of course!

Really like the sound of him but in article says good for Manure, City, Real etc. These are type of signings we should be trying to make to progress

[OxfordVillan]

8 minutes ago, sheepyvillian said:

What does that prove ? Millions have died from lung cancer without ever being near a cigarette, but I don't think you'll find anyone denying that there's a link between cigarettes and cancer. 

No one is saying heading a football will cause dementia, but it may well increase your chances of getting it. And if that is the case, then it needs to be addressed asap. 

Passive smoking my friend. 

[sheepyvillian]

23 minutes ago, TRO said:

I think the relationship there is hardly a comparable comparison and there is far more evidence with cigarettes and cancer, not to mention far more people involved who smoke than head a ball.

Have it your way sheepy, is all subjective to me.

Nothing subjective about medical opinion.  That would be a violation of the hippocratic oath.

[dont_do_it_doug.]

30 minutes ago, TRO said:

I think the relationship there is hardly a comparable comparison and there is far more evidence with cigarettes and cancer, not to mention far more people involved who smoke than head a ball.

Have it your way sheepy, is all subjective to me.

It isn't though. The link between repeatedly heading objects and neurological disorders is based in science. What we do with that is a different question, how much 'risk' is it worth taking, as long as the athletes are complicit?

We are already hearing stories of defenders adapting their game to utilise cushioned headers to feet wherever possible rather than walloping the ball away with their bonce as they used to, I don't think it's long before protective headgear for centre halves becomes the norm. Frankly, I'm all for it. 

Edited July 5, 2021 by dont_do_it_doug.

[sheepyvillian]

21 minutes ago, OxfordVillan said:

Passive smoking my friend. 

That contributes to it too, I agree. How long did the cigarette companies deny any link even in the face of overwhelming, medical evidence?  I just hope those in authority at the high tiers of football don't make the same mistake. You only have to look at the amount of centre- half's who have suffered or are suffering from dementia to realise that there is a strong chance of there being a link.

 

 

[rubberman]

OT but heading will be out of the game in the not too far future or at least head protection like scrum caps in rugby. The dementia links are becoming too clear. 

Anyway, looking forward to the euros being over and transfer action to pick up again. 

[Kiwivillan]

8 minutes ago, rubberman said:

or at least head protection like scrum caps in rugby.

I don't see a problem. Not everyone in rugby wears them so only certain positions in football could. I was playing loose forward at school and got concussed for 2nd time and wore headgear every game after. You have 2 fullbacks and a centre in NRL rugby league that famously wear headgear. If I was still playing rugby or league I'd wear headgear regardless of position

Edited July 5, 2021 by Kiwivillan

[DaveAV1]

1 hour ago, TRO said:

I think the relationship there is hardly a comparable comparison and there is far more evidence with cigarettes and cancer, not to mention far more people involved who smoke than head a ball.

Have it your way sheepy, is all subjective to me.

I’m not in the Ban heading camp at all, but you can’t say that there’s no evidence or that it’s subjective. Quite the opposite in fact. 

I agree with you that today’s footballs are much lighter and I’m sure there can be other technical ways forwards to mitigate the risk. I don’t think it’s possible to ban heading, without changing the game fundamentally but we can’t bury our heads in the sand either. The risk of dementia can definitely be linked to heading footballs. What we need is clear data and more research so that at least people have that evidence and decide if they want to take the risk. If for no other reason than the lawyers will run riot and could potentially bankrupt football if we don’t.

I believe that heading is being or has been already banned for younger age groups. Is there medical evidence that the risks are higher the younger you are? This could be the way ahead to lower the risks if this is the case. In legal terms it may be that those under 16 have the decision made by their parents whether they play or not and so the probability would be then, that banning heading for under 16 is the default setting. Let’s face it no kid is going to say they don’t want to play because of something that might happen in the future. Kids at that age have no concept of being as ancient as 35 let alone 65. Parents on the other hand would be naturally more protective. The decision would need to be taken out of emotional hands. 

As I say there still needs to be more research. The answer is unlikely to be that there is a risk free option that doesn’t fundamentally change the game. We don’t live in a risk free world. But this can’t be ignored and it won’t and shouldn’t go away. My Mom’s final years were ruined by severe dementia and she never headed a football in her life. If there is a way of lowering the risk of dementia and still playing the greatest game on earth then we must do everything we can to find the solution. 

[QldVilla]

1 minute ago, DaveAV1 said:

I’m not in the Ban heading camp at all, but you can’t say that there’s no evidence or that it’s subjective. Quite the opposite in fact. 

I agree with you that today’s footballs are much lighter and I’m sure there can be other technical ways forwards to mitigate the risk. I don’t think it’s possible to ban heading, without changing the game fundamentally but we can’t bury our heads in the sand either. The risk of dementia can definitely be linked to heading footballs. What we need is clear data and more research so that at least people have that evidence and decide if they want to take the risk. If for no other reason than the lawyers will run riot and could potentially bankrupt football if we don’t.

I believe that heading is being or has been already banned for younger age groups. Is there medical evidence that the risks are higher the younger you are? This could be the way ahead to lower the risks if this is the case. In legal terms it may be that those under 16 have the decision made by their parents whether they play or not and so the probability would be then, that banning heading for under 16 is the default setting. Let’s face it no kid is going to say they don’t want to play because of something that might happen in the future. Kids at that age have no concept of being as ancient as 35 let alone 65. Parents on the other hand would be naturally more protective. The decision would need to be taken out of emotional hands. 

As I say there still needs to be more research. The answer is unlikely to be that there is a risk free option that doesn’t fundamentally change the game. We don’t live in a risk free world. But this can’t be ignored and it won’t and shouldn’t go away. My Mom’s final years were ruined by severe dementia and she never headed a football in her life. If there is a way of lowering the risk of dementia and still playing the greatest game on earth then we must do everything we can to find the solution. 

Agree, they also don’t know if people have underlying or pre existing conditions that have been passed on ie hereditary links or other that mean these conditions were always going to occur, or heading brings the condition on.earlier in life.

[DaveAV1]

54 minutes ago, Kiwivillan said:

. I was playing loose forward at school and got concussed for 2nd time

That explains a lot. 

[a m ole]

1 hour ago, dont_do_it_doug. said:

It isn't though. The link between repeatedly heading objects and neurological disorders is based in science. What we do with that is a different question, how much 'risk' is it worth taking, as long as the athletes are complicit?

We are already hearing stories of defenders adapting their game to utilise cushioned headers to feet wherever possible rather than walloping the ball away with their bonce as they used to, I don't think it's long before protective headgear for centre halves becomes the norm. Frankly, I'm all for it. 

Agree aside from the headgear, I don’t think it would be at all effective against CTE, the weight of the ball coming down is still fully transferred to the brain rattling around in the skull if we’re talking about the rugby style ones.

[Panto_Villan]

Scrum caps for players in certain positions wouldn't exactly be the worst thing ever, even if they were mandatory. I'm sure some players wouldn't want to ruin their good looks but while the new halo cockpits on F1 cars did a pretty good job of ruining the looks of those cars, they've also saved at least one life in the last couple of years (and funnily enough all the drivers stopped complaining after that).

At the very least it needs to be thoroughly investigated so players can make informed choices about whether they want to risk brain damage.

[Panto_Villan]

3 minutes ago, a m ole said:

Agree aside from the headgear, I don’t think it would be at all effective against CTE, the weight of the ball coming down is still fully transferred to the brain rattling around in the skull if we’re talking about the rugby style ones.

It's not, though? The padding cushions the blow and reduces the force. It's still fully transferred to your brain but over a longer period of time (or greater distance), which causes less injury.

It's the same principle why you'll hurt yourself less if you jump onto a sofa instead of a concrete block. The concrete has absolutely no give so all the force is transferred immediately, whereas the sofa will still take the same weight but will cushion the impact.

[a m ole]

13 minutes ago, Panto_Villan said:

It's not, though? The padding cushions the blow and reduces the force. It's still fully transferred to your brain but over a longer period of time (or greater distance), which causes less injury.

It's the same principle why you'll hurt yourself less if you jump onto a sofa instead of a concrete block. The concrete has absolutely no give so all the force is transferred immediately, whereas the sofa will still take the same weight but will cushion the impact.

Wildly off topic now, but take a look at this:

https://www.wired.com/2016/08/olympic-boxers-arent-wearing-headgear-anymore/

Head gear is great for protecting against cuts, abrasion, sharp impacts like elbows etc, but the dull force of a ball landing repeatedly on the head, because the brain is slightly loose inside the skull, it doesn’t do anything. The ball moves the head with the headgear with the same force, and that rocks the brain.

just re-read what you said re the padding, but that reduction is so, so minimal.

Edited July 5, 2021 by a m ole