How Bad is the No Header Rule?

C

carlitos10

BRONZE
I totally understand the intent from US Soccer on the rule. However, implementation across CSL and SCDSL games was terrible in the 1st weekend.

We now have 9 year olds completely turning around when there's an aerial ball. Limit GK punts, make goal kicks and corners? too be played on the ground. That's fine and should limit balls in the air. But when the ball is in the air (because a defender clears or a long through ball is sent) it's terrible to enforce this rule.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PE4
Couldn't agree more. The rule is very poor. Makes for an awful game. Saw an 07 game this weekend. It's made a mess of things, along with poor enforcement of the no-punt rule and play -out line.

No chance this heading rule is going away given the political sensitivities, but you could argue for expanding the rule to include penalizing teams that use the long ball. For example, call a reset and loss of possession for a team who lumps a long ball that can now be headed, unless it's a legit shot on goal. It would also encourage more passing and balls played on the ground, which is what a lot of these changes were meant to do.

I would add one other rule...all free kicks are indirect, except for PKs. Enough of this 10yd free kick nonsense. It's too easy.

Bottom line...institute and enforce rules that encourage and reward possession soccer played on the ground. These youngsters will "graduate" to the other stuff soon enough.
 
I also agree. I think just eliminating punts would have done the trick. Saw a girl get hit in the face in the box in an 06 game and the ref awarded a free kick. She couldn't have gotten out of the way if she tried. Just wait until we see tons of ER visits for stitches bc of all the high kicks this rule is going to cause. Also what good does the play out line do if the goalie just puts it down on a roll or partial bounce and then boots it. Saw one team do that every time. Hopefully they fine tune this rule.
 
My favorite part of it was how over the course of the game parents started screaming bloody murder at the suspicion of a header like their baby had just been mauled by a vicious leg-breaker.

It's important to remember that the header rule isn't related to the new rules pushing stylistic changes but came about because of a class-action lawsuit. having said that I do kinda like the idea of free kicks being indirect. free kicks are such a massive scoring opportunity it really promotes ugly soccer.

Personally I think it would have been better if the u10s and u11s had been grandfathered in with headers since it's taking away a weapon from skilled players. but it's not worth moaning about. might even be good if kids start to use their chests more which I did see in the second half of our game. I do like that kids aren't allowed to practice headers at practice. so much more important stuff to learn at this age. My guess is that in a couple of years everyone will be used to it and it'll be fine.
 
Bubbles said:
It's important to remember that the header rule isn't related to the new rules pushing stylistic changes but came about because of a class-action lawsuit. having said that I do kinda like the idea of free kicks being indirect. free kicks are such a massive scoring opportunity it really promotes ugly soccer.

Personally I think it would have been better if the u10s and u11s had been grandfathered in with headers since it's taking away a weapon from skilled players. but it's not worth moaning about. might even be good if kids start to use their chests more which I did see in the second half of our game. I do like that kids aren't allowed to practice headers at practice. so much more important stuff to learn at this age. My guess is that in a couple of years everyone will be used to it and it'll be fine.
Click to expand...

You are absolutely right that this no headers rule comes about because of a lawsuit in Northern California against USSF, USYSA, AYSO, etc (even FIFA, before they were dismissed from the suit). The original complaint asked for a ban on headers in all games U18 and under. I suspect that USSF was willing to broker this compromise settlement because a ban on headers for players under 11 is consistent with their developmental philosophy in terms of short-sided games etc. So, while it may not have been adopted as part of the new rules, I think the new rules made it easy for them to accept this settlement.
 
Dargle said:
You are absolutely right that this no headers rule comes about because of a lawsuit in Northern California against USSF, USYSA, AYSO, etc (even FIFA, before they were dismissed from the suit). The original complaint asked for a ban on headers in all games U18 and under. I suspect that USSF was willing to broker this compromise settlement because a ban on headers for players under 11 is consistent with their developmental philosophy in terms of short-sided games etc. So, while it may not have been adopted as part of the new rules, I think the new rules made it easy for them to accept this settlement.
Click to expand...

Has the lawsuit been settled?
 
espola said:
Has the lawsuit been settled?
Click to expand...
Yes

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/10/s...ill-limit-headers-for-youth-players.html?_r=0

A judge ruled in the summer that the case against FIFA had no standing, but that an amended complaint could be filed against U.S. Soccer. The announcement of Monday’s initiatives will serve as a resolution in the case, and Steve Berman, the lawyer who brought the case, agreed not to appeal the dismissal.

“With the development of the youth concussion initiative by U.S. Soccer and its youth members, we feel we have accomplished our primary goal and, therefore, do not see any need to continue the pursuit of the litigation,” Berman said in a statement.
 
It's not so much the header rule that is annoying, but the no punt/build out line that really sucks. Especially at the '06 age group.

Why not institute that with the '08 group and grandfather the "older ages" with that rule and simply enforce the new field dimensions and player count.

Our game last weekend, the referee wasn't enforcing the no punt/build out line. Much to both teams relief! Then A parent from the home team for the next game being played at the field started complaining to the referees that we aren't playing by the rules. Took her rule book to them at halftime and began lecturing them about it....gee, thanks lady!
 
Kicker4Life said:
It's not so much the header rule that is annoying, but the no punt/build out line that really sucks. Especially at the '06 age group.

Why not institute that with the '08 group and grandfather the "older ages" with that rule and simply enforce the new field dimensions and player count.

Our game last weekend, the referee wasn't enforcing the no punt/build out line. Much to both teams relief! Then A parent from the home team for the next game being played at the field started complaining to the referees that we aren't playing by the rules. Took her rule book to them at halftime and began lecturing them about it....gee, thanks lady!
Click to expand...
What circuit do you play with? Coast, presidio, scdsl?
 
The worst part is the parents yelling "HEADER!!!!" looking for the free kick as a chance to score. Win or lose kids are used to heading the ball and it is still second nature to do so. Most refs let it slide until the parents start screaming.
 
I watched part of U10 game a couple weeks ago and I have never seen so many Dangerous Play calls for high kicking. The players thought they could get their foot high enough to stop or redirect the ball that would normal have been headed. Two kids got kicked in the face.
 
Surfref said:
I watched part of U10 game a couple weeks ago and I have never seen so many Dangerous Play calls for high kicking. The players thought they could get their foot high enough to stop or redirect the ball that would normal have been headed. Two kids got kicked in the face.
Click to expand...

I was at a game and the refs would not call high kicks or at least hardly call them amd when asked they stated if we call all the high kicks you wont even be able to play soccer. So now this particular ref took out headers like the rule states but allowed dangerous play. We did have a kid get kicked in the chest and they said it was his fault for running into it.
 
Y this forum so dead no info or gimmicks. Don't like the no header rule & the one where you allow the keeper to just roll the ball to a wingback with space I like pressure all the time
 
Now that the season is over, how did the rule affect the overall play of the teams it was meant to govern? Did your team learn how to control the ball on the ground better? Bring the ball down using their bodies? Positive or negative results? Curious to know whether good or bad. As for our squad, it took a couple of weeks but, they dealt with it pretty well. They redirected with their bodies, usually the chest area and learnt how to take over play from their teammates after collecting the ball from a body trap...ooohhh but, the opportunities for goals by headers still gets the sidelines jumping. Next year will be curious as well for they will be able to use headers again.
 
Legit_play said:
Now that the season is over, how did the rule affect the overall play of the teams it was meant to govern? Did your team learn how to control the ball on the ground better? Bring the ball down using their bodies? Positive or negative results? Curious to know whether good or bad. As for our squad, it took a couple of weeks but, they dealt with it pretty well. They redirected with their bodies, usually the chest area and learnt how to take over play from their teammates after collecting the ball from a body trap...ooohhh but, the opportunities for goals by headers still gets the sidelines jumping. Next year will be curious as well for they will be able to use headers again.
Click to expand...
Next year teams stay 9v9 and no header rule stays in place during all short sided games. this year u12 were grandfathered in tonplay 11v11 since they did the previous year.
 
Caltek said:
Next year teams stay 9v9 and no header rule stays in place during all short sided games. this year u12 were grandfathered in tonplay 11v11 since they did the previous year.
Click to expand...
Is that quoted somewhere? It might make sense for a league to adopt that as a bright-line rule to distinguish between short-sided and full field games, but the concussion settlement with USSF was written so that ages 11-14 would be permitted to head the ball in games (but not practices). Next year, all players would be 11 in the 2006 age group (except those playing up, but that was true this year in the 2005 age group and they used the heading rule for the regular age group (11 year-olds) regardless of a kid's actual age). Of course, a league could adopt a rule that was stricter than that agreed to in the settlement, but I just haven't seen anyone state that yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top