USSF No Heading Under 10 & Games Only Under 13

Saw this last night...

http://soccer.nbcsports.com/2015/11/09/no-more-heading-us-soccer-unveils-new-concussion-protocol-for-youth-soccer/?ocid=Yahoo&partner=ya5nbcs

Opinions?

The awareness that the rule brings may be the biggest result of this.

Haven't seen much in the way of actual intentional headers in academy play.

The other thing will be to see how the rules are written down for implementation, and how the referees actually enforce them. Does a headed ball result in a free kick for the opponent? A drop ball? Some other mechanism? What about balls in the air that happen to hit a player's head unintentionally?

Ah, yes this is very good.

Foot faults and the rare headed ball at U9 are verboten!!!

Meanwhile Law 12 is completely ignored.

USSF lawyers all over this one. It's like the warning on the McDonald's coffee cup.

Not sure if this will be the final version of this law, but I am certainly in favor of it's intent. With luck, and maybe some pressure, I'm hoping this will be a world wide FIFA law/rule, to calm those concerned that this will put the US, or others who adopt it, in a disadvantage on the world pitch.

I'll take the other side for sake for argument.  I've been watching girls soccer for about 10 years.   I've probably seen 1,200 games and 2x as many practices.   In all that time, I have yet to see a concussion from a header.   I'm not saying they don't happen but I have never seen one.  I've seen dozens of concussions however.   I've seen kids get hit in the head with balls from strikes, crosses (no attempt to head the ball, just in the wrong place), head on head, knee or foot on head, ground to head, elbow to head, blows to the back so violent the head snapped back etc.  

I'm not saying that there has never been a header caused concussion but even then, it would seem that teaching girls the proper way to do something instead of prohibiting them from doing it is the better way.  

Perhaps mandatory headgear if concussions is really what you are trying to prevent.  I'm not sure that any of the concussions I've seen would have been prevented by the prohibition on headers.  Perhaps a liberal dose of yellow cards for good measure so I don't see girls flying through the air like Emmitt trying to score at the goal line.

DDdad wrote:I'll take the other side for sake for argument.  I've been watching girls soccer for about 10 years.   I've probably seen 1,200 games and 2x as many practices.   In all that time, I have yet to see a concussion from a header.   I'm not saying they don't happen but I have never seen one.  I've seen dozens of concussions however.   I've seen kids get hit in the head with balls from strikes, crosses (no attempt to head the ball, just in the wrong place), head on head, knee or foot on head, ground to head, elbow to head, blows to the back so violent the head snapped back etc.  

I'm not saying that there has never been a header caused concussion but even then, it would seem that teaching girls the proper way to do something instead of prohibiting them from doing it is the better way.  

Perhaps mandatory headgear if concussions is really what you are trying to prevent.  I'm not sure that any of the concussions I've seen would have been prevented by the prohibition on headers.  Perhaps a liberal dose of yellow cards for good measure so I don't see girls flying through the air like Emmitt trying to score at the goal line.

Tend to agree.  Something like mandatory headgear through U12 or something along those lines would be more effective at limiting concussions.

I've been watching for 12+ years and only seen 1 or 2 concussions from intentional headers, resulting from the ball, at all ages and those were at U14+.

Guessing it is more of a legal CYA to keep the trial attorneys at bay.

The press release is clear:

“The United States Soccer Federation and the other youth member defendants, with input from counsel for the plaintiffs, have developed a sweeping youth soccer initiative ..."

Translation: We got sued and this is part of the settlement

i dont know which is more of a joke, this or the new age matrix.... sheer stupidity.

Obviously another step in the right direction to help us continue down the path of world dominance in soccer.

I think this will be amended before it is official.  I expect the final ruling to read something like...

USSF has recommended the following changes in regards to heading the ball in youth soccer.  This is a recommendation that will be initiated on 01/01/16 and then be mandated by 01/01/17, unless people yell and scream, then we might move the dates around again.  For age pure U7-U10 players (age groups have yet to be finalized but we hope to have this done before 01/01/17) that are playing 7v7 with build up lines and no punting or 9v9 (field size and playing conditions have yet to be determined and will be dictated by the final age pure year groupings (which have yet to be determined) any heading of the ball will result in an automatic red card.  The player, club and coach will then be required to appear in front of the local disciplinary committee to accept either a) 4 match ban or b) $12.50 fine.  This new ruling holds true for all players in U7-U10 (birth year yet to be determined), unless the player is in their first year of select (yet to be determined) or is playing up on a U11 team (yet to be determined if this is allowed).  NTSSA bylaws apply and if the player heads a ball during the Classic League qualifying tournament (yet to be determined which ages will compete) or is on a team that has accepted a bye into next years league (yet to be determined) then they shall be banished to the younger age group the following year (which might end up being the correct age group) so they can play an entire season learning how to not head a soccer ball.  

Furthermore, USSF has decided to take up the following issues at our next AGM.  Please provide your feedback on the following topics.

1.  No slide tackling U6-U15 due to injury possibility
2.  No one may enter into the 6 yard box due to the risk of running into the post.  This includes goalkeepers
3.  Penalty kicks shall now be taken from 25 yards our to reduce the risk of goalkeepers being hit with a shot that is too powerful
4.  No goal may be scored by a player unless the shot is taken with their weak foot.  Official rosters will be required to note which foot is dominate for each player
5.  Games held in conditions with an outside temperature of >80 degrees or with humidity >80% will have 5 minute water breaks every 10 minutes
6.  If a coach or trainer is called on the field to help an injured player, that player must sit out the remainder of that game as well as the next due to the possibility that they may be "playing through the pain"
7.  Since heading the ball has been removed from the game, no team shall be allowed to take a corner kick or direct free kick inside their own half

Hey CoachDom...

Any truth to the rumor that Primetime, in keeping with their trend of being ahead of the curve of all of the recent changes, will be offering an age-pure, small-sided, bubble-soccer league this spring???

I need to know so that I can get an FBR set up...

Also, does this mean all of us parents now get to scream out "HEADBALL!!!!" From the sidelines 10-15 times per game???

 Had a good laugh on that one BW. I just wish they'd come with this when mine was ulittle so I wouldnt have had to bribe her to stop ducking!  

I think it's a good rule...the plaintiffs were only seeking changes to protect the brains of very young players, not money.

bwgophers wrote:Also, does this mean all of us parents now get to scream out "HEADBALL!!!!" From the sidelines 10-15 times per game???

Hey BW, I gotta know, who are the best bubble league soccer coaches? And, let me be clear, when I say best I mean the one's that win the most.

RightWingDad wrote:Hey BW, I gotta know, who are the best bubble league soccer coaches? And, let me be clear, when I say best I mean the one's that win the most.

John Travolta

4-3-3 wrote:  Had a good laugh on that one BW. I just wish they'd come with this when mine was ulittle so I wouldnt have had to bribe her to stop ducking!  

I think it's a good rule...the plaintiffs were only seeking changes to protect the brains of very young players, not money.

bwgophers wrote:Also, does this mean all of us parents now get to scream out "HEADBALL!!!!" From the sidelines 10-15 times per game???

What will be even better is when someone comes on here to explain that there is no such thing as a "headball." The proper terminology for the infraction is "heading"...


...(and they'll say it with a British accent)...

I think they should also ban running until u19.

I've seen lots if concisions and injuries from kids running on the pitch. I've never seen injury from kids just walking.

I've also seen statistics that show 9 out of 10 kids who do not play soccer are never injured in a soccer game.

I'm sure we can do something about that as well.

MrRogers wrote:I think they should also ban running until u19.

I've seen lots if concisions and injuries from kids running on the pitch. I've never seen injury from kids just walking.

I've also seen statistics that show 9 out of 10 kids who do not play soccer are never injured in a soccer game.

I'm sure we can do something about that as well.

They're working on it. They've already decided U8 players are still learning to walk. You can look it up...

No,no,no. They've been working on getting the Ref's to not run. As soon as they can break the last 2 or 3 from this dangerous and irresponsible habit then they'll get to work on the players.

DDdad wrote:I'll take the other side for sake for argument.  I've been watching girls soccer for about 10 years.   I've probably seen 1,200 games and 2x as many practices.   In all that time, I have yet to see a concussion from a header.   I'm not saying they don't happen but I have never seen one.  I've seen dozens of concussions however.   I've seen kids get hit in the head with balls from strikes, crosses (no attempt to head the ball, just in the wrong place), head on head, knee or foot on head, ground to head, elbow to head, blows to the back so violent the head snapped back etc.  

I'm not saying that there has never been a header caused concussion but even then, it would seem that teaching girls the proper way to do something instead of prohibiting them from doing it is the better way.  

Perhaps mandatory headgear if concussions is really what you are trying to prevent.  I'm not sure that any of the concussions I've seen would have been prevented by the prohibition on headers.  Perhaps a liberal dose of yellow cards for good measure so I don't see girls flying through the air like Emmitt trying to score at the goal line.

Who?

As my non-soccer playing daughter said - "The only thing that needs to be changed are the people making the rules."

Scenario...

U10 game... A ball is played into the box from deep in the corner (either from a corner kick or during regular run of play)... Ball deflects off of the forward's foot and is "popped up" into the air about 8 feet or so. Not a high velocity ball, just popped up over the GK's head and now going towards the goal at the far post... Alert defender was covering the back post on the play, and jumps straight up at the goal line to deflect the ball away from crossing the goal line with her head at the apex of her jump... Instead of celebrating an athletic, heads up (pun fully intended) play, we will now be awarding a PK, correct???

Yes......and a red card for denying an obvious goal scoring opportunity. It's pure genius.

bwgophers wrote:Scenario...

U10 game...  A ball is played into the box from deep in the corner (either from a corner kick or during regular run of play)...  Ball deflects off of the forward's foot and is "popped up" into the air about 8 feet or so.  Not a high velocity ball, just popped up over the GK's head and now going towards the goal at the far post...  Alert defender was covering the back post on the play, and jumps straight up at the goal line to deflect the ball away from crossing the goal line with her head at the apex of her jump...  Instead of celebrating an athletic, heads up (pun fully intended) play, we will now be awarding a PK, correct???

It's u10. Winning the game shouldn't trump safety of the still developing brains of little kids. A nine-year-old kid isnt going to naturally jump up and stick their head in the path of a flying ball...have to be coached to do that. This rule is telling coaches wait until their brains are more developed. I see nothing wrong with it. It might actually help the american style if it makes coaches teach kids to learn how to play the game with their feet and keep the ball instead of spending time teaching them to head punts, goal kicks and crosses. Until the neuroscience is fully understood, reduce the risks for the youngest players. Makes sense to me.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/does-heading-a-soccer-ball-cause-brain-damage/

Isn't this small sided, non-heading game called futsal? I know many advocate futsal for skills and development. Is that where all this is heading?