Boxing gloves reduces visible damage, but vastly increases CTE and straight up fatal blows. Gloves spread the surface area, but adds weight doesn't lessen the force of the punch which rattles the the brain inside the skull.

There were 400 fatalities in the ring in the 50 years after introduction of gloves and 0 in the 50 years before, and that's not mentioning CTE.

[–] KuroXppi@hexbear.net 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Different types of injuries/trauma, types of impact, so I don't think comparing boxing to gridiron is strictly apples to apples

https://qbi.uq.edu.au/concussion/do-helmets-protect-against-concussion

Suggests that foam padded hard helmets protect against traumstic brain injury by dispersing the energy of the impact, but are less effective in preventing concussion caused by translocation (the sudden head movement which causes internal displacement of the brain). No support to say the soft helmets have an appreciable impact in AFL against either TBI or CTE.

That's not to say that helmets have a net negative impact, unless the argument is that decreased FOV means you have less ability to avoid the imapct in the first plave

[–] CloutAtlas@hexbear.net 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Would it not increase the instances of translocation? You're less likely to run at full speed at someone else if neither party were wearing armour.

[–] KuroXppi@hexbear.net 2 points 2 weeks ago

Yep, that's what other commenters have replied

https://hexbear.net/comment/6727690

The increased risky play taken by players more than invalidates the benefits of the gear itself. I was getting hung up about the gear in a vacuum since I don't follow codes where it's already a settled topic

Idk how you'd put the genie back in the bottle in gridiron though if players, coaches and audiences are used to the current high impact play, then you'd have to reel that back in before players may feel comfortable doffing the gear

[–] RandallThymes@hexbear.net 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Protective padding significantly increases the risk of CTE and long-term injuries

[–] KuroXppi@hexbear.net 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

Citation please

Edit: sorry thst reply is a bit too short/dismissive

I don't follow any sporting codes that wear protective padding, so my outsider understanding is that it is designed and shown to prevent that kind of injury

It's surprising to me that the opposite is true, so I'd like to read some more

[–] RandallThymes@hexbear.net 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Sorry my reply could have included more detail. I don’t have list of citations at hand, but this discussion has been ongoing for decades now. The main argument is that padding allows for tackles that would not normally be attempted due to short-term pain and injury risk to both players. The accumulation of these high impact tackles made possible by padding results in long-term CTE and serious injuries that risk retirement. If you’ve ever played rugby the type of tackles you see in American football are terrifying. For another comparison in soccer, only shin pads are typically worn and most contact injuries hurt like hell and are gone two minutes later because you bumped kneecaps together.

[–] KuroXppi@hexbear.net 3 points 2 weeks ago

Okay yup that makes a lot of sense

[–] Mindfury@hexbear.net 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

i think the argument is that the hard helmets and shouderpads have ingrained deliberately harder hits and leading with the head in NFL when compared to say Union or AFL. League is questionable.

the NFL have seemingly very strongly come down on head-to-head contact and leading with the head in recent years as the CTE situation has been uncovered further, but i'm not sure that there's been significant advancements in the protective gear

[–] KuroXppi@hexbear.net 3 points 2 weeks ago

Ty for explanation rat-salute-2