Chris Chilton

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Aug 16, 2018
8,064
4,937
113
I’m aware that heavier things take more energy to move, but as the articles above point out, they didn’t actually absorb much water, certainly not a bucketful. According to one of those articles they soaked an old-style leather ball in water and it gained 2-3 grams. Even with my knackered legs that wouldn’t make much difference.

I know we all ‘seem to remember’ them being heavy, but apparently not.

“An enduring myth”.
In which case the mass has hardly increased so the force isn't substantially different either. Article says ball is 16oz, roughly 450 grams. It gains according to you 2-3grams. Or 0.5% in percentage terms.

And is still offset by even that slightest decrease in speed due to the slight increase in weight.

I'll admit I was surprised the weight hasn't changed. I sued to have an old fashioned style ball of leather with laces on and it was massively heavier than the more modern one. I admit it wasn't a professional ball and we never weighed them to see but that old one really took some wellying to get any power behind the shot. Newer one a casual swing would get it travelling faster easy.

To use a golf analogy I needed the driver for the older one, but only a 7-iron for the new.
 

BornSlippySkyBlue

Well-Known Member
May 21, 2015
1,875
1,467
163
In which case the mass has hardly increased so the force isn't substantially different either. Article says ball is 16oz, roughly 450 grams. It gains according to you 2-3grams. Or 0.5% in percentage terms.

And is still offset by even that slightest decrease in speed due to the slight increase in weight.

I'll admit I was surprised the weight hasn't changed. I sued to have an old fashioned style ball of leather with laces on and it was massively heavier than the more modern one. I admit it wasn't a professional ball and we never weighed them to see but that old one really took some wellying to get any power behind the shot. Newer one a casual swing would get it travelling faster easy.

To use a golf analogy I needed the driver for the older one, but only a 7-iron for the new.
I wonder if a part of the reason is we remember playing with those balls when we were children, as that style of ball is what, 30/40 years old? So they ‘seemed’ heavy at the time. Having watched my son playing from age 4 (and his teammates / fellow learners at coaching), they all avoid heading the ball as if it’s made of concrete until about the age of ten, and then they start getting their head to it more often.


The BBC article references a study done by the University of Glasgow where they used high-speed cameras to film new and old balls fired at a wall at an equivalent speed to how a pro would kick it, and they both exerted the same force upon impact and both balls collapsed to the same degree which would imply they are doing similar amount of damage to players’ heads.

It surprised me a bit too, but I had a feeling I’d read something about it before.
 

Sky_Blue_Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Aug 16, 2018
8,064
4,937
113
I wonder if a part of the reason is we remember playing with those balls when we were children, as that style of ball is what, 30/40 years old? So they ‘seemed’ heavy at the time. Having watched my son playing from age 4 (and his teammates / fellow learners at coaching), they all avoid heading the ball as if it’s made of concrete until about the age of ten, and then they start getting their head to it more often.


The BBC article references a study done by the University of Glasgow where they used high-speed cameras to film new and old balls fired at a wall at an equivalent speed to how a pro would kick it, and they both exerted the same force upon impact and both balls collapsed to the same degree which would imply they are doing similar amount of damage to players’ heads.

It surprised me a bit too, but I had a feeling I’d read something about it before.
Maybe but I had the old leather ball and a newer (for the time) one at the same time (not one of the plastic kids balls for the beach but a panelled one) and I could feel the difference between the two. Keepie-uppies were more effort with the old one and if I kicked the ball up to my head (equivalent to 'dropping the ball' I felt more on an impact from it and would avoid heading that ball compared to the newer one. But if I was in goal and someone fired a shot both stung my hands as much as the other, indicating that they were impacting a similar force and the newer ball could therefore be struck harder.

As I say they weren't pro balls so that difference may well have existed due to the manufacture not needing to adhere to the same weight restrictions etc and so the older one was actually heavier.
 

Irish Sky Blue

Well-Known Member
Jan 25, 2014
3,263
4,252
163
North Warwickshire
I was behind the goal at Chesterfield a few years ago when the players were warming up. On shot cleared the bar and headed towards me, just above head height. I put my hand up to stop it and the ball simply smashed my hand out of the way. Now being over 60 I am no doubt not as strong as I was, but I played Football when young and still go to walking football now. Nothing scientific about this, but it really surprised me the force behind that ball ten rows back in the stand. I still think the old fashioned balls were heavier, wet or not. I remember being told that if you used the correct part of your head, you wouldn’t get hurt. If that is the case then I obviously never learnt, as it was like heading a bag of cement. We occasionally head the ball in walking football and it is definitely less ( no pain really) painful.
 

bringbackrattles

Well-Known Member
Aug 19, 2013
6,443
3,417
163
Chris Chilton was a centre forward bought by Noel Cantwell in the early 70s. He played most of his career for Hull and arrived at City and in the top flight quite late in his career. He didn't have the best of times with us and I think he was forced to retire through injury not to long after signing.
Like most centre forwards in those days, a large part of his job was to win the ball in the air.
Chris and his son featured on the national news today, as sadly Chris is suffering from dementia. They were on the news item as it was reporting on the campaign by the Stiles family to highlight the plight of many old footballers suffering with dementia.
The figures show that footballers suffer much more from dementia than the general population with the reason seeming to be the amount of times that they head the ball.
I don't know what the solution to this will be. Heading the ball is such an integral part of the game that it is hard to see how it could ever be banned. How can you therefore protect the players from what may happen in later life?
On 606 now Chris Chilton's wife has called in talking about her husband's Alzheimer's. Chris Sutton's dad also has Alzheimer's and same age as Chris Chilton. Sounds bitter at the lack of help from the football authorities at all. She mentioned his time here at Coventry, how it never worked out.