[M T]

Boxing.... Football...  Soccer next?
"Association of Field Position and Career Length With Risk of Neurodegenerative Disease in Male Former Professional Soccer Players"

"...risk of neurodegenerative disease among former soccer players varied by field position and career length but was similar across era of participation."
"In this cohort study of 30 704 male individuals, 386 of 7676 former soccer players (5.0%) and 366 of 23 028 matched population control individuals (1.6%) were identified with a neurodegenerative disease diagnosis (hazard ratio(HR), 3.66; 95% CI, 2.88-4.65; P < .001). Compared with the risk among general population control individuals, risk of neurodegenerative disease was highest for defenders (HR, 4.98; 95% CI, 3.18-7.79; P < .001) and lowest for goalkeepers (HR, 1.83; 95% CI, 0.93-3.60; P = .08). Regarding career length, risk was highest among former soccer players with professional career lengths longer than 15 years (HR, 5.20; 95% CI, 3.17-8.51; P < .001). Regarding playing era, risk remained similar for all players born between 1910 and 1969."

I admit I haven't read the paper.  While I find such a correlation believable, I wonder if there might have been a selection bias toward soccer players who had such disease as they'd be most interested and be more likely to opt into the study than former players who had no such issue.  (That wouldn't easily explain a difference among positions.)

[M T]

Boxing.... Football...  Soccer next?
"Association of Field Position and Career Length With Risk of Neurodegenerative Disease in Male Former Professional Soccer Players"

"...risk of neurodegenerative disease among former soccer players varied by field position and career length but was similar across era of participation."
"In this cohort study of 30 704 male individuals, 386 of 7676 former soccer players (5.0%) and 366 of 23 028 matched population control individuals (1.6%) were identified with a neurodegenerative disease diagnosis (hazard ratio(HR), 3.66; 95% CI, 2.88-4.65; P < .001). Compared with the risk among general population control individuals, risk of neurodegenerative disease was highest for defenders (HR, 4.98; 95% CI, 3.18-7.79; P < .001) and lowest for goalkeepers (HR, 1.83; 95% CI, 0.93-3.60; P = .08). Regarding career length, risk was highest among former soccer players with professional career lengths longer than 15 years (HR, 5.20; 95% CI, 3.17-8.51; P < .001). Regarding playing era, risk remained similar for all players born between 1910 and 1969."

I admit I haven't read the paper.  While I find such a correlation believable, I wonder if there might have been a selection bias toward soccer players who had such disease as they'd be most interested and be more likely to opt into the study than former players who had no such issue.  (That wouldn't easily explain a difference among positions.)

[jonnyss]

Boxing.... Football...  Soccer next?
"Association of Field Position and Career Length With Risk of Neurodegenerative Disease in Male Former Professional Soccer Players"

"...risk of neurodegenerative disease among former soccer players varied by field position and career length but was similar across era of participation."
"In this cohort study of 30 704 male individuals, 386 of 7676 former soccer players (5.0%) and 366 of 23 028 matched population control individuals (1.6%) were identified with a neurodegenerative disease diagnosis (hazard ratio(HR), 3.66; 95% CI, 2.88-4.65; P < .001). Compared with the risk among general population control individuals, risk of neurodegenerative disease was highest for defenders (HR, 4.98; 95% CI, 3.18-7.79; P < .001) and lowest for goalkeepers (HR, 1.83; 95% CI, 0.93-3.60; P = .08). Regarding career length, risk was highest among former soccer players with professional career lengths longer than 15 years (HR, 5.20; 95% CI, 3.17-8.51; P < .001). Regarding playing era, risk remained similar for all players born between 1910 and 1969."

I admit I haven't read the paper.  While I find such a correlation believable, I wonder if there might have been a selection bias toward soccer players who had such disease as they'd be most interested and be more likely to opt into the study than former players who had no such issue.  (That wouldn't easily explain a difference among positions.)

thanks for posting. it's a retrospective study from anonymized medical records, therefore no opt-in. simply includes all patients in the database who listed soccer player as a profession.

goal keepers head the ball much less and likely have fewer collisions - some, but fewer as fouling the keeper results in a penalty kick.

[jonnyss]

Boxing.... Football...  Soccer next?
"Association of Field Position and Career Length With Risk of Neurodegenerative Disease in Male Former Professional Soccer Players"

"...risk of neurodegenerative disease among former soccer players varied by field position and career length but was similar across era of participation."
"In this cohort study of 30 704 male individuals, 386 of 7676 former soccer players (5.0%) and 366 of 23 028 matched population control individuals (1.6%) were identified with a neurodegenerative disease diagnosis (hazard ratio(HR), 3.66; 95% CI, 2.88-4.65; P < .001). Compared with the risk among general population control individuals, risk of neurodegenerative disease was highest for defenders (HR, 4.98; 95% CI, 3.18-7.79; P < .001) and lowest for goalkeepers (HR, 1.83; 95% CI, 0.93-3.60; P = .08). Regarding career length, risk was highest among former soccer players with professional career lengths longer than 15 years (HR, 5.20; 95% CI, 3.17-8.51; P < .001). Regarding playing era, risk remained similar for all players born between 1910 and 1969."

I admit I haven't read the paper.  While I find such a correlation believable, I wonder if there might have been a selection bias toward soccer players who had such disease as they'd be most interested and be more likely to opt into the study than former players who had no such issue.  (That wouldn't easily explain a difference among positions.)

thanks for posting. it's a retrospective study from anonymized medical records, therefore no opt-in. simply includes all patients in the database who listed soccer player as a profession.

goal keepers head the ball much less and likely have fewer collisions - some, but fewer as fouling the keeper results in a penalty kick.

[BobK]

Stanford had a goal keeper retire.

---

https://www.ncaa.com/news/soccer-women/a...e-conc?amp

---

Plus a track runner

https://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow...?_amp=true

[BobK]

Stanford had a goal keeper retire.

---

https://www.ncaa.com/news/soccer-women/a...e-conc?amp

---

Plus a track runner

https://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow...?_amp=true

[Baez87]

While watching the US Women’s soccer game this past week I was in awe of a player’s ability to put so much into her return on a long kick with the stroke of her head. At the same time, I was concerned about the long range effects of the blow she took to her head.
It’s doesn’t take a rocket scientist to suspect that repeated blows to the head will enact a toll. Something needs to be done to protect the players and I can’t think of any solution that would bode well with players or fan. It’s a great game with a long tradition and deserves to be preserved. So, how can the sport survive without changing the traditional look and feel of the sport? Rule changes would be difficult, protective attire would alter its appearance on the field.

[Baez87]

While watching the US Women’s soccer game this past week I was in awe of a player’s ability to put so much into her return on a long kick with the stroke of her head. At the same time, I was concerned about the long range effects of the blow she took to her head.
It’s doesn’t take a rocket scientist to suspect that repeated blows to the head will enact a toll. Something needs to be done to protect the players and I can’t think of any solution that would bode well with players or fan. It’s a great game with a long tradition and deserves to be preserved. So, how can the sport survive without changing the traditional look and feel of the sport? Rule changes would be difficult, protective attire would alter its appearance on the field.

[BostonCard]

goal keepers head the ball much less and likely have fewer collisions - some, but fewer as fouling the keeper results in a penalty kick.

Are you sure about that?  I think fouling the keeper just results in a free kick at the spot of the foul.  Refs will have a lower threshold for carding the player, but I don't think fouling the keeper on your offensive end results in a penalty kick.

BC

[BostonCard]

goal keepers head the ball much less and likely have fewer collisions - some, but fewer as fouling the keeper results in a penalty kick.

Are you sure about that?  I think fouling the keeper just results in a free kick at the spot of the foul.  Refs will have a lower threshold for carding the player, but I don't think fouling the keeper on your offensive end results in a penalty kick.

BC

[DC 86]

goal keepers head the ball much less and likely have fewer collisions - some, but fewer as fouling the keeper results in a penalty kick.

Are you sure about that?  I think fouling the keeper just results in a free kick at the spot of the foul.  Refs will have a lower threshold for carding the player, but I don't think fouling the keeper on your offensive end results in a penalty kick.

BC

Correct. It can't be a penalty kick because it's not a foul against an offensive player in the offensive penalty area. It's a only a free kick. It is true that goalkeepers are involved in far fewer challenges than outfield players.

[DC 86]

goal keepers head the ball much less and likely have fewer collisions - some, but fewer as fouling the keeper results in a penalty kick.

Are you sure about that?  I think fouling the keeper just results in a free kick at the spot of the foul.  Refs will have a lower threshold for carding the player, but I don't think fouling the keeper on your offensive end results in a penalty kick.

BC

Correct. It can't be a penalty kick because it's not a foul against an offensive player in the offensive penalty area. It's a only a free kick. It is true that goalkeepers are involved in far fewer challenges than outfield players.

[jonnyss]

goal keepers head the ball much less and likely have fewer collisions - some, but fewer as fouling the keeper results in a penalty kick.

Are you sure about that?  I think fouling the keeper just results in a free kick at the spot of the foul.  Refs will have a lower threshold for carding the player, but I don't think fouling the keeper on your offensive end results in a penalty kick.

BC

Correct. It can't be a penalty kick because it's not a foul against an offensive player in the offensive penalty area. It's a only a free kick. It is true that goalkeepers are involved in far fewer challenges than outfield players.

oops! good points all.

[jonnyss]

goal keepers head the ball much less and likely have fewer collisions - some, but fewer as fouling the keeper results in a penalty kick.

Are you sure about that?  I think fouling the keeper just results in a free kick at the spot of the foul.  Refs will have a lower threshold for carding the player, but I don't think fouling the keeper on your offensive end results in a penalty kick.

BC

Correct. It can't be a penalty kick because it's not a foul against an offensive player in the offensive penalty area. It's a only a free kick. It is true that goalkeepers are involved in far fewer challenges than outfield players.

oops! good points all.