Liverpool FC Forum

by **red37** » Tue May 02, 2006 4:09 pm

ive often thought this myself about the safety/protection of the modern boot versus style.... no great need to flame me for putting this up but id like to hear your views.

Former Liverpool midfielder Craig Johnston claims Wayne Rooney's World Cup-threatening metatarsal injury was directly attributable to the boots he wore at Stamford Bridge.

Johnston, who was born in South Africa but raised in Australia, designed footwear for Adidas upon his playing retirement and has been a critic of recent boot designs.

England internationals David Beckham, Steven Gerrard and Michael Owen have all suffered a similar injury to that of Rooney's and Johnston insists it is no coincidence.

"Rooney's metatarsal was broken because his studs engaged in the turf at Stamford Bridge and it didn't release quickly enough so these injuries are a direct cause of the studs sticking when they should be releasing," Johnston told Sky Sports News.

"It has to be looked at immediately. I've been talking about this for two or three years.

"I did originally design the Predator traction studs which Gerrard, Zidane and Beckham wear and, towards the end of my time at Adidas, I kept saying we need to make these studs smaller so they don't grip as much so the forces on the knees, ankles and metatarsals aren't as severe.

"It's a responsibility factor and everybody in the sports merchandise industry has a responsibility to the ordinary customer as well as these highly-tuned pieces of machinery that are our professional footballers."

by **pur3 rav3r** » Tue May 02, 2006 4:16 pm

i think it has something to do with the boots cause u never used to c player getting injured like wat they r now. king didn't land badly or anything and now he is out for a while. i would say it is something to do with them

by **Leonmc0708** » Tue May 02, 2006 4:45 pm

red37 wrote:ive often thought this myself about the safety/protection of the modern boot versus style.... no great need to flame me for putting this up but id like to hear your views.

Funny that, I would like to hear your views, and not the printed story from a newspaper/website. Yuo do have a point of view dont you ?

by **RAFABENITEZ** » Tue May 02, 2006 4:53 pm

Leonmc0708 wrote:
red37 wrote:ive often thought this myself about the safety/protection of the modern boot versus style.... no great need to flame me for putting this up but id like to hear your views.

Funny that, I would like to hear your views, and not the printed story from a newspaper/website. Yuo do have a point of view dont you ?

Hes got ya there red37

by **SouthCoastShankly** » Tue May 02, 2006 4:54 pm

I think its a combination of both footwear and games played. Its common knowledge that the number of games we play in England is significantly higher than in europe.

I was reading at the weekend that these types of metatarsal injuries are often suffered by long distances runners who wear light footwear and cover lots of miles. They inevitably get stress fractures. The article pointed out that this could be a small piece of the puzzle regarding footballers foot injuries.

The combination of bad footwear and constant stress to the foot bones, i.e. the miles covered in games across the season , seems to be why 'us' as a nation are having so many metatarsal injuries.

Whats the betting that Adidas or Nike have a new revolutionary boot out in the summer that reduces risk in foot injuries and coincidentally cost a record breaking price!?

by **red37** » Tue May 02, 2006 5:08 pm

i used to....til evry thread in this place turns into one of the following:

1. a dressing down because of either, poor grammar or lack/quality of topical content.

2. a battle of the 'internet goodfellas'

or..

3.spam city.

==============================================

forgive my gross misconduct for f.ucking up point one.

as for the thread, i dont wear the things so i would know very little about them, in any authority. however it isnt beyond the scope of minimal contribution on this forum, to expect other people who DO know about them to share and discuss is it?

that way we all learn something... did you in all honesty expect me to elaborate on craig johnsons many years of excellent research? or even contradict it? with anything other than curiosity. the idea that ill fitting/designed footwear causing injury is i admit something i know FA about, it may be b.*ll*c*ks. in any case im sure you yourself could have contributed far more to the thread than 2 sentences.....

WTF.

cue... the resident and oh so whiter than white 'ton of bricks' brigade.

the reply ive written looks as though im trying to be clever... nothing is less true. its c.rap though leon.... ive been in here nearly everyday since joining and though im not in any of the 'cleeks'

ive tried to at least participate constructively .... there are new members coming in here every day and i respect ALL of the people in it. even you anyway rant over.....

by **red37** » Tue May 02, 2006 5:08 pm

RAFABENITEZ wrote:
Leonmc0708 wrote:
red37 wrote:ive often thought this myself about the safety/protection of the modern boot versus style.... no great need to flame me for putting this up but id like to hear your views.

Funny that, I would like to hear your views, and not the printed story from a newspaper/website. Yuo do have a point of view dont you ?

Hes got ya there red37

well...........

by **Sabre** » Tue May 02, 2006 6:18 pm

Pah. THere always have been that kind of injuries in football. And balls aren't as hard as used to be, so I don't think it has to do with boots.

I'd put play all those posh basts with a 1955 ball, and hear their complaints.

. Hard luck, that's all.

by **red37** » Tue May 02, 2006 6:21 pm

Sabre wrote:Pah. THere always have been that kind of injuries in football. And balls aren't as hard as used to be, so I don't think it has to do with boots.

I'd put play all those posh basts with a 1955 ball, and hear their complaints. . Hard luck, that's all.

imagine getting struck by a 'riise-rocket' with one of them :wwww

by **Gareth G** » Tue May 02, 2006 6:41 pm

red37 wrote:
Sabre wrote:Pah. THere always have been that kind of injuries in football. And balls aren't as hard as used to be, so I don't think it has to do with boots.

I'd put play all those posh basts with a 1955 ball, and hear their complaints. . Hard luck, that's all.

imagine getting struck by a 'riise-rocket' with one of them

I think Riise would probably break his foot striking that style of ball that hard...besides, Cisse is the hardest striker of the ball in our team, well according to Reina anyway.

Back on topic, I think it's a number of thing's causing the injuries, not just the boot's.

Recently while shopping for a pair of boot's I came across the Nike Vapours, I lifted them up and immediately thought I had dropped them or something, for they were so light that thay barely registered any reaction from my sensetive nerve tip's on my hand's and fingers. Anyway, I had a look around the boot and was shocked at how thin the material was all the way round, I even wondered if it would sting your foot if you hit the ball too hard. In general there was lack of support, but they claimed the boot's will make you run faster?

Another factor can be the players running style, matched with his boot's, you obviously can't help the way you run of course. But an odd style coupled with a badly designed boot could cause stress in various part's of the foot.

Playing condition's is another thing that would play a part in an injury of course, but what can you do about that, nothing really, you play if the pitch is deemed playable.

by **L-type** » Tue May 02, 2006 10:42 pm

Well unfortunately Rooney was wearing Nike boots, not the Adidad that Craig raises doubts about. My personal opinion is that these metatarsal injuries are just a string of bad luck.

I mean just look back at last year and you'd have thought every decent goalie in england had been executed, except chelsea's and their sucess was directly attricuted to strength in goal, while it was seen as Arsenal's, Man Utd', and Liverpool's. But my point is, a year later everything is back to normal and no one even thinks about it. That's what I believe will happen to this issue.

by **ivor_the_injun** » Wed May 03, 2006 12:34 am

I have to say, I think sports footwear in general places too much emphasis on lightness as opposed to protection. There's been a long-held fascination with shaving grams off the weight of shoes to make athletes quicker and more manouvreable, but the price is definitely being paid by the likes of Rooney.

I'm a member of an athletics club, and every week people are off with shin splints or knee problems, all caused by shoes that just don't protect feet and legs from the basic impact of your foot hitting the ground when you're running. I myself have had a nightmare with my shins in the last 6 months, but after moving away from unbelievably comfy and light Asics running shoes to a pair of brick hard Nikes (about 4 times the weight of my old shoes), my problems seem to be at an end.

It's much the same problem with football boots these days. I've had a pair of Umbro boots around the house for about a decade, and when you put them next to a pair of poncy looking Nikes I picked up last year, the difference is absolutely unbelievable. There's just no protection for the foot in the newer boots. Lift your foot up with the old Umbros and ask someone to kick you in the sole, and you don't feel a thing. With the Nikes it's really quite painful. It's exactly the same all over the boot - the material is ridiculously thin in places.

Personally I'll gladly trade off a split second of speed for a bit of extra protection against injury.

by **bng89** » Wed May 03, 2006 2:47 am

Thats what the pros were saying about them aswell, 'players are goin for more lighter weight less protection of the ankle'

I got last seasons total 90's (the ones with the big 90 on the side) and they have no ankle support.

by **Judge** » Thu May 04, 2006 12:42 pm

for the athletes that wear the boots, then perhaps an individual moulding of the foot is required to get a better fit. As we know, boot design is based on an average foot, but who has an average foot.

so for the athlete, the boot should be totally custom (rooneys were not, just standard), but for us grunts, we will have to make do with the standard type and the metatarsel problem

by **dawson99** » Thu May 04, 2006 12:47 pm

its got nothing to do with style. yeah we could still wear steel toecaps and newspapers for shin pads but the evolution of the boot has changed the entire game. they are more lightweight but that ensures that more skill can be attained in the game.

injuries will always happen and changing the boots will only change the skill level of the game if u ask me.

someone above said they would change the fraction of speed for more protection. try asking henry if hed do the same.
see if luis garcia would have scored against juventus in sucha way if he was wearing big old boots.

Liverpool FC Forum

Football boots - Are they to blame?

Who is online