Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums, for communication between foot health professionals about podiatry and related topics.
You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members (PM), upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, earn CPD points and access many other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisments in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.
Have recently came across the new boot by Lotto with a 360 degree rotating stud at the forefoot beneath hallux http://video.aol.com/video-detail/fo...oot/1281254437
I am seeing this at the moment as a bit of a gimmick, although it may help in some aspects of turning i dont think it will help in all.
They are apparently claiming it will reduce knee injuries also. Again I see this as another marketing tool due to the complexity of movements in football I cant see how one rotating stud will reduce knee injuries.
Anyone else have any thoughts?
These guys are running on turf, wouldn't a round stud with no side grooves twist just as easy with 1% of the cost?
As demonstrated on first part of the video the other studs are level with the rotating stud, how are they going to clear the surface completely whilst the other stud is deep in the turf to allow the rotation? and if enough twist was found to clear the other studs l would think then the side of the boot would then restrict the twist also.
Have recently came across the new boot by Lotto with a 360 degree rotating stud at the forefoot beneath hallux http://video.aol.com/video-detail/fo...oot/1281254437
I am seeing this at the moment as a bit of a gimmick, although it may help in some aspects of turning i dont think it will help in all.
They are apparently claiming it will reduce knee injuries also. Again I see this as another marketing tool due to the complexity of movements in football I cant see how one rotating stud will reduce knee injuries.
Anyone else have any thoughts?
I agree that it is a gimmick. How often do have significant weight only on the first toe. If there are two, or more, studs dug into the dirt any rotation of the foot relative to the ground will be resisted whether or not the stud rotates.
Anyone bet that this doesn't last more than one season.
Blades claim the same thing with their product. The 'blades' cut through the turf and reduce resistance therefore less stress on knees. The problem with all these gimmicks is that they may well work on soft A grade turf, however the majority of soccer/footy players are on hard ground. Most local footy fields are hard as concrete dust bowls by the end of the season and the players just slide their studs across the top. They get very little purchase, some of them would be better off in runners.
I am interested in this. Where can I see it? There was in 2000 a British invention with a circular heel....Has anyone thought that Goalkeepers in soccer need a different kind of boot? Carole
I am interested in this. Where can I see it? There was in 2000 a British invention with a circular heel....Has anyone thought that Goalkeepers in soccer need a different kind of boot? Carole
I played goalkeeper on my High School soccer team. The field that I played was used for multiple sports all year round. By mid soccer season there would be no grass left in front of the goal and after the rains and subsequent drying there would be rock hard 1/2" deep foot prints. So, when you left the goal mouth you would be running on grass and then come back to extremely uneven terrain. There is no shoe that would be good on all of the possible terrain covered.
On well tended grass the keeper might want slightly longer cleats on the forefoot when diving to defend a penalty kick. Otherwise the demands of goal keeping are very similar to those of the rest of the team.
Cheers,
Eric
The Following User Says Thank You to efuller For This Useful Post:
Thanks Eric, but watching all the goalkeepers on Utube, I think some of them are balletic. A 2 part sole, like a male ballet shoe, and a protected over the toes area, to give better push in the vertical, and improved mid foot flexion. Carole
I did quite bit of background research into the design of soccer boots before World Cup 2002 and 2006 watching particularly for the 'new innovations' in design. The cleats which were introduced to AFL boots originally arose following analysis of injuries to footie players (in Australia). AFL was then the only football code to meticulously record player injuries. Simon Bartold may be able to develop here but as I understand it, injuries to players jumping and landing were kneecentric and the idea of the polymer cleats to replace traditional studs and the introduction of circular patterns was to alter the spiral radious which passed vertically to the knee on ground contact. By altering this the incidence of knee injuries appeared to reduced and Ascis made the prototype Asics Gel ,which was tested in the Western Australia. Remarkably the players from the soccer codes here picked up on the new boot design and a new market was found. A little later in the UK, cleats were heralded as the new panacea and Tony Blair, no less ,declared them as one of the outstanding innovations for the new millenium. Not long after cleats were introduced to soccer boots the incidence of skin lacerations was noted with alarm. Sir Alec Ferguson was no fan of cleatrs and banned them from Old Trafford after several of his players were badly cut. Most authorities who have tracked the injuries agree the damaged appeared to be wanton and deliberate suggesting a nastier form of play. The same injuries are not seen in AFL ( I am sure Ian North will keep me right here), suggesting it is to do with the style of play and not just because you are wearing that style of boot.
Subsequent to this 'cleats' have fallen from favour in soccer and manufacturers are looking at ways to promote safe play as well as reduce injury for the wearer. I would think the 'rotating stud' is but one example of this. At best it probably does no harm but is unlikely to be anything other than a novelty. Lotto boots have for several years trailed behind the brand leaders but are now making a strong effort to establish themselves with the football fraternity. No surprise to find them dabbling with designs, as well as seeking endorsement from big named players.
Not sure about goal keepers and special needs as I have not run across much if anything in the published literature. Will keep my eye open tho'. Something which has been recorded is the syndrome 'death by goal post' which afflicts the goalie probably more than other players. The soccer moms of North America have also influenced the rules of the game as well as sharped boot manufacturers wareness to be more safety conscious. It has been postulated that unless ball designs' improve, in the very near future, then heading the ball will become illegal.
Here in Australia games for kids under a certain age inthe future will have no goalie which is under the pretext of promoting open competition but in reality has more to do with liability and injury prevention.
Eric is right about 'no perfect shoe" for all conditons. The 'old bootmen ' were old lads who would be retained by the professional clubs and their job was to advise the players on the best boots and stud selection to wear for the weather and ground conditions. Much goes on in the Boot Room and knowing the kind of footwear to wear will make the difference between a mediocre perfomance and and outstanding brilliance on the field. Screw -in studs were one of the most important innovations in soccer boot development. But many amateurs are lazy and prefer moulded studs. In the big bown land where ground conditions in the warmer climates give hard playing surfaces moulded studs are ideal. But with a little rain on the pitch the players would perform better, wearing skates.
Always noteworthy at big games when key players are slipping about and cannot control the ball it may be there are wearing their sponsor's boots with moulded studs. The old bootmen just shake their heads in disgust.
On the debate of banning the blades as Alex Ferguson did I played pro under Gary Megson and he also banned them but not due to lacerations but because he thought the grip was not that of the standard screw in stud. In fact he made us wear studs all year round even on the hardest turf which was ridiculous.
In terms of any circular bladed design reducing injury risk then i would like to see research to prove this. I have worn all types of boots and always come back to screw in studs as my prefered choice as most proffesionals will tell you even if the boot doesnt fit right, it is of poor design etc but if they play best in that boot then they will wear it despite the potential injury risk and I think this is why football boot design is so behind in much of its technology.
Personally I wear nike and they are starting to at least introduce a mid sole with some success as some of the biggest players in the premier league wear them. Previous efforts by asics that i know of were largely unsuccesful.
To add to this a lot of top flight players will get moulded boots, cut the moulds off and get a cobbler to add screw in slots for them. Again as moulded boots are generally of greater comfort the player finds performance enhanced in these boots.
The Following User Says Thank You to KBruce For This Useful Post:
Simon Skirrow is an Australian who claims to have designed a soccer boot called Glove FC which helps prevent metatarsal injuries. He previously worked with adidas, but now runs his own company called Nomis with their newest outlet in Berlin, called the Right Boot Store. According to the company’s website Nomis boots have been endorsed by the Governing body of the Professional Rugby League Players of Australia as their preferred football boots.
As part promotion for the new range of kangaroo boots, Nomis has commissioned an amusing new called “Damn Boots”</a> which lampoons celebrity endorsements to the apparent exclusion of safety.
The Nomis idea seems interesting though I would like to read a few studies into their claims of the stud design reducing stress to the metatarsals.
As I am currently working on a study on pressure at metatarsals in football boots these would be an intersting boot to compare too.
Thanks for the links toeslayer, very interesting
I played goalkeeper on my High School soccer team. The field that I played was used for multiple sports all year round. By mid soccer season there would be no grass left in front of the goal and after the rains and subsequent drying there would be rock hard 1/2" deep foot prints. So, when you left the goal mouth you would be running on grass and then come back to extremely uneven terrain. There is no shoe that would be good on all of the possible terrain covered.
On well tended grass the keeper might want slightly longer cleats on the forefoot when diving to defend a penalty kick. Otherwise the demands of goal keeping are very similar to those of the rest of the team.
Cheers,
Eric
**Due to the frequent involvement of goalkeepers now in outfield play with abolishment of the backpass longer studs in the front of the boot even by a few mm may have an adverse effect on kicking the ball as the studs catch the ground on swing and follow through. Sprinters/jumpers have cleats and spikes in the front portion of the boot/shoe - but they dont kick anything. I think as a keeper i prefer longer studs in the rear and normal length in the front. Also not a fan of cleats..they work well on dry ground but just glide through wet ground rather than catch the turf.
**Due to the frequent involvement of goalkeepers now in outfield play with abolishment of the backpass longer studs in the front of the boot even by a few mm may have an adverse effect on kicking the ball as the studs catch the ground on swing and follow through. Sprinters/jumpers have cleats and spikes in the front portion of the boot/shoe - but they dont kick anything. I think as a keeper i prefer longer studs in the rear and normal length in the front. Also not a fan of cleats..they work well on dry ground but just glide through wet ground rather than catch the turf.
Agreed,
My original post was trying to come up with a situation where a goalie might want a different shoe than the rest of the team. The position is not that different from the rest of the team in terms of shoe needs.
Uhlsport had tried to have a specific boot for goalkeepers a few years back with a flange/bridge from the lateral forefoot around to the boot apex - again - gimmicky and not really achieving anything. Most keepers i know prefer the six stud. But it would be a good avernue to pursue i think.
Yeah i remember the Uhlsports boots, the few i knew who wore them didnt find any benefit in them and yes I agree the goalkeepers I know all prefer six studs even on dry ground as any slip as goalkeeper will prove costly to the team.
So any ideas what differences a specific goalkeeper boot may need? i am an outfield player so would just be speculating but i guess the goalkeeper does a lot of springing from the forefoot when diving so some sort of addition to assist this may be useful?
Rotating stud on football boot
Linear Mode
