New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

D1 Womens Lacrosse
Post Reply
Brownlax
Posts: 975
Joined: Thu May 09, 2019 10:43 am

New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

Post by Brownlax »

Pretty interesting. Similar results as to when they put girls in helmets in Massachusetts several years ago - game got more dangerous.

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20180 ... PsUv9OD5sU
njbill
Posts: 6835
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 1:35 am

Re: New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

Post by njbill »

So we armchair neurologists were right all along.
cltlax
Posts: 358
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2019 10:59 am
Location: Charlotte

Re: New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

Post by cltlax »

Anecdotally, I've seen it happen in games that my girls play. Those with helmets are much more aggressive going for ground balls and driving the cage.
nomofogo
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2019 11:54 am

Re: New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

Post by nomofogo »

I don't recall much from my one Stats class but I am wondering if the study held other variables constant in considering things like how many years playing lacrosse, changes in speed and athleticism of female athletes and the girls program conditioning and training. Were comparisons made to boys lacrosse or girls soccer, girls hockey regarding concussions and injuries. Are girls that choose to wear helmets already the more aggressive type.... ? I feel the jury can still be out on this one, kinda like coffee..... good for you, bad for you?
DMac
Posts: 8762
Joined: Sun Sep 16, 2018 10:02 am

Re: New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

Post by DMac »

Watched a girl for Cuse play for three years with no helmet, her senior year she did wear a helmet, only a blind person would not see that she was much more apt to duck her head and charge between two/three defenders than she was before wearing the helmet. Was no question that she was much more fearless and reckless with the helmet on. I find this to be pretty much a no brainer, put helmets on the girls and it's going to result in a rougher game. People in football didn't tackle the same when wearing leather helmets as they did with helmet "improvement". The more protected you feel, the more recklessly you'll play. I agree that, "we armchair neurologists were right all along", as stated by njbill.
nomofogo
Posts: 69
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2019 11:54 am

Re: New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

Post by nomofogo »

data from a study: Conclusion: Although permitting only incidental contact, women's lacrosse had higher rates of head, face, and eye injuries at both the high school and collegiate levels. Concussion was the most common injury. For men, the primary injury mechanism was player-to-player contact; women's injuries primarily resulted from stick or ball contact. High school injury rates were lower than were college rates, but the nature of injuries, body parts affected, and mechanisms were similar. The study: https://www.medstarsportsmedicine.org/r ... -injuries/
8meterPA
Posts: 1367
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:37 pm

Re: New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

Post by 8meterPA »

Everyone is looking at the issue backwards - the issue is not whether helmets reduce concussions, have no effect, or make the players more aggressive.

The issue is that the nature of the fouls, both those that are called and those that are not called (I maintain this is the primary culprit) have gotten to a point where a helmet is even being considered.

Then you have to ask yourself why are we at this point - simple - the referees and coaches DO NOT effectively control the outcomes. Make the penalty fit the crime and then you have outcomes that move behavior in the appropriate direction - less contact, purposeful or not, to the head which results in fewer injuries.

How many have ever seen a red card issued?

How can you justify a releasable 2 min yellow card as a penalty for dishing out a concussion or otherwise serious blow to head? Answer - you cannot.

Reduce the blows to head and you eliminate the need/discussion for helmets.
wlaxnut
Posts: 1939
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2019 5:00 am

Re: New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

Post by wlaxnut »

8meterPA wrote: Fri Nov 08, 2019 1:48 pm Everyone is looking at the issue backwards - the issue is not whether helmets reduce concussions, have no effect, or make the players more aggressive.

The issue is that the nature of the fouls, both those that are called and those that are not called (I maintain this is the primary culprit) have gotten to a point where a helmet is even being considered.

Then you have to ask yourself why are we at this point - simple - the referees and coaches DO NOT effectively control the outcomes. Make the penalty fit the crime and then you have outcomes that move behavior in the appropriate direction - less contact, purposeful or not, to the head which results in fewer injuries.

How many have ever seen a red card issued?

How can you justify a releasable 2 min yellow card as a penalty for dishing out a concussion or otherwise serious blow to head? Answer - you cannot.

Reduce the blows to head and you eliminate the need/discussion for helmets.
I’ve seen a couple, but you make good points. Sheehan Stanwick-Burch has been outspoken about this as well.

https://youtu.be/TfFLgvy7ASI

https://youtu.be/awhYhJQMcrw
seacoaster
Posts: 8866
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm

Re: New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

Post by seacoaster »

The sprinting rundown of the BC player -- at the end of a game in which UNC is up by three -- is still likely the dirtiest play I've seen in women's lacrosse. No excuse. The harassment of Maggie Bill was routine stuff at this level. The retaliation, if that's what it was, was just inexcusable.
8meterPA
Posts: 1367
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:37 pm

Re: New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

Post by 8meterPA »

wlaxnut/seacoaster,

I think those 2 videos make my point....the referees did NOT control the game (meaning the cross checking and shots to the head which were not penalized) led the retaliation that got the cards.

Seacoaster, that was not "routine stuff" that was going on to the NC player, look at the 12 second mark when there is a check across the face and either hits the player in the head or shoulder that wasn't called and then the cross checks to the back (which are NOT allowed) and notice the coach on the sideline exasperated. The card is finally given for the 180 degree attempted flailing check which would have caused significant damage if she hit the kid.
Laxfan500
Posts: 1018
Joined: Sat May 25, 2019 5:44 pm

Re: New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

Post by Laxfan500 »

I agree. The refs don't do enough to control game early on. And now that a yellow card is realeaseable after a goal it feels like there isn't much of a deterrent. Take it from a parent who’s kids get routinely hit in neck, face and head as they go to goal. It's not fun being hurt every game. Control the game early on and don't let it get out of control!
wlaxnut
Posts: 1939
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2019 5:00 am

Re: New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

Post by wlaxnut »

seacoaster wrote: Fri Nov 08, 2019 2:45 pm The sprinting rundown of the BC player -- at the end of a game in which UNC is up by three -- is still likely the dirtiest play I've seen in women's lacrosse. No excuse. The harassment of Maggie Bill was routine stuff at this level. The retaliation, if that's what it was, was just inexcusable.
To be fair seacoaster, I should also include the other play that preceded the Klages foul. BC was really getting out of control in their frustration. This foul by Brooke Troy illustrates. Now--I'm not saying any of this was justified, but I can see how teammates on UNC must have felt that retaliation needed to be meted out to send a message that they wouldn't be bullied or intimidated. I think it's clear from Kara's body language after she fouled Walsh that that's exactly what she was doing. No emotion involved. Just--these are the unspoken rules: If you bully us, we're going to hit back. We won't allow you to be aggressively physical with us without striking back. No different in any sport. You stick up for your teammates.

https://youtu.be/sHXX-LWSXZw?t=10

Ultimately the fault lies with the NCAA. If they really wanted to clean up the sport, the sport would be cleaned up.
Last edited by wlaxnut on Fri Nov 08, 2019 8:06 pm, edited 2 times in total.
wlaxnut
Posts: 1939
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2019 5:00 am

Re: New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

Post by wlaxnut »

8meterPA wrote: Fri Nov 08, 2019 2:57 pm Seacoaster, that was not "routine stuff" that was going on to the NC player, look at the 12 second mark when there is a check across the face and either hits the player in the head or shoulder that wasn't called and then the cross checks to the back (which are NOT allowed) and notice the coach on the sideline exasperated. The card is finally given for the 180 degree attempted flailing check which would have caused significant damage if she hit the kid.
Not that seacoaster can't use his own words, but it seems to me you're being a little unfair to assume you know what he meant by "routine stuff". He qualified the phrase with "at this level". Why not ask him what he meant instead?
8meterPA
Posts: 1367
Joined: Sat Jul 13, 2019 3:37 pm

Re: New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

Post by 8meterPA »

I assume “routine stuff” meant at the D1 level since that was the video. My point is that it is not “routine” it’s a foul(s) that wasn’t called. To the extent the refs allow it (they shouldn’t , they are fouls) and we think of it as routine, that’s exactly the problem..it will lead to helmets and then lead to pads.

If you have a helmet to helmet hit in college football, it’s a penalty and automatic ejection. In wlax if you have a stick to the head, it’s at most a 2 min penalty to the culprit. The penalty does not fit the foul so it will be repeated over and over.

Rules need to be enforced and refs, and to a certain extent coaches, need to held accountable.

That’s the issue, not a false argument of whether helmets reduce concussions or lead to more aggressive play.
wlaxnut
Posts: 1939
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2019 5:00 am

Re: New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

Post by wlaxnut »

8meterPA wrote: Fri Nov 08, 2019 5:21 pm I assume “routine stuff” meant at the D1 level since that was the video. My point is that it is not “routine” it’s a foul(s) that wasn’t called. To the extent the refs allow it (they shouldn’t , they are fouls) and we think of it as routine, that’s exactly the problem..it will lead to helmets and then lead to pads.

If you have a helmet to helmet hit in college football, it’s a penalty and automatic ejection. In wlax if you have a stick to the head, it’s at most a 2 min penalty to the culprit. The penalty does not fit the foul so it will be repeated over and over.

Rules need to be enforced and refs, and to a certain extent coaches, need to held accountable.

That’s the issue, not a false argument of whether helmets reduce concussions or lead to more aggressive play.
Well—at least you’re writing “I assume”, so that’s a little better. But you’re still not leaving much room for discussion as to what seacoaster meant precisely. He coaches, so I’m sure he’s well aware of all the issues you bring up. But again, sc doesn’t need me to speak for him.

For myself, I read a lot of “what should be” and “what shouldn’t be” in your post. I agree that the game should be called tighter, and rules should be enforced. But anyone who watches a lot of lacrosse knows that these fouls have indeed become routine. Whether they are called or not is a different issue. I think you’re being a little shortsighted as well by blaming referees and coaches. As I mentioned earlier, the real culprit is the NCAA. If they really wanted to stop the rough stuff, they would issue stern edicts to both coaches and referees to knock off the rough stuff and to call more strict adherence to the rules and they would then make sure their mandate was enforced and hold those officials and teams accountable. Until that happens, the rough stuff and fouls that aren’t called have become, and will continue to be, routine in division 1 women’s college lacrosse.
seacoaster
Posts: 8866
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm

Re: New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

Post by seacoaster »

8meterPA wrote: Fri Nov 08, 2019 5:21 pm I assume “routine stuff” meant at the D1 level since that was the video. My point is that it is not “routine” it’s a foul(s) that wasn’t called. To the extent the refs allow it (they shouldn’t , they are fouls) and we think of it as routine, that’s exactly the problem..it will lead to helmets and then lead to pads.

If you have a helmet to helmet hit in college football, it’s a penalty and automatic ejection. In wlax if you have a stick to the head, it’s at most a 2 min penalty to the culprit. The penalty does not fit the foul so it will be repeated over and over.

Rules need to be enforced and refs, and to a certain extent coaches, need to held accountable.

That’s the issue, not a false argument of whether helmets reduce concussions or lead to more aggressive play.
Sorry; just seeing this. I agree with a lot of what you say here. I do think, in the video (ACC Final, waning minutes, UNC up by three with the ball), Maggie Bill should have moved the ball to someone else. She kept possession, until a BC player fouled her, and I agree, badly. But I watch a lot of Division 1 lacrosse, and the foul was unfortunately not out of the ordinary for a situation like that.

I can't count the many times I have seen a team lose a player to a yellow for contact to the head late in a game like this. I can count one time I have seen a player engage in a full field, all out sprint to cross-check a player to the ground from behind at nearly full speed.

I agree with everything you say about officiating and establishing the ground rules early, firmly, often and consistently. It is the principal issue for me when I coach -- to ensure that the game is safe.
wlaxnut
Posts: 1939
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2019 5:00 am

Re: New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

Post by wlaxnut »

laxfan22
Posts: 218
Joined: Fri Aug 02, 2019 10:02 am

Re: New Study on Helmets and Increased Concussions

Post by laxfan22 »

I can't speak for college as much as high school and younger, but if they allowed the defenders a little more leeway on body to body contact and concentrated on calling fouls that were neck and above, a good amount of this may be resolved on its own. As it is, there are calls in games where body contact is minimal, and often caused by an aggressive offender. The defender basically has little to no opportunity to defend without contact - allow the more contact on the body and the torso!
Post Reply

Return to “D1 WOMENS LACROSSE”