Ankle support

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 BRILLBRUM 14 Feb 2023

The kids are off on a couple of night-hikes and competition multi-day (think Ten Tors but in the Midlands) nav exercises over the course of the next couple of weeks with the Scouts and D of E and we've just had the kit lists, all of which are you know, the usual bits and bobs they must have.

There is one stipulation that has set me wondering, and that's 'boots - with ankle support, no approach shoes/walking shoes, trainers, wellington boots, DM's.'

Given that as a collective (we some to be any way) we're moving more towards approach shoe style of walking/hiking footwear when not doing big hills and winter stuff, is this not a bit of overkill or are teen ankles still so fragile that they do need this level of protection from rolling-over?

There's also the point that correct footwear or not, given that teen feet are still growing, most boots are not going to be top of the range keepers, more what's cheap, easy to get hold of, and can be binned/donated when quickly grown-out of. So not necessarily the best design - think Shoe-Zone.

 Tringa 14 Feb 2023
In reply to BRILLBRUM:

The organisers might be just, understandably, covering themselves.

If one of the participants trips and injures(or worse) themselves and they were wearing, trainers/wellies the incident could easily make the local(or national) press and you can imagine the story.

Dave 

1
 plyometrics 14 Feb 2023
In reply to BRILLBRUM:

Yes, it’s overkill. But if it’s a stipulation, then Decathlon or Sports Direct probably worth a visit. 

 Alkis 14 Feb 2023
In reply to BRILLBRUM:

Overkill, but it is what it is. I have had a twisted ankles since I stopped wearing boots as a matter of course*, but a lot of people are sticking to what they know and to be honest have to protect themselves in case kids do something silly.

* Even when doing walk-ins in winter, I lace my B3s to the bottom of the ankle and only lace the rest once crampons are on.

OP BRILLBRUM 14 Feb 2023
In reply to Tringa:

Def n the side of trainers & wellies being a big no, was more leaning towards the approach shoe style.

In reply to BRILLBRUM:

It depends on the individual. Anyone who is doing a regular sport which places dynamic loading in multiple orientations on the ankles (football, rugby, dance, gymnastics, etc) is likely to have strong ankles already. The 'ankle support' argument for boots is a contentious topic, with conflicting views; some arguing boots protect, some arguing they increase the risk (due to reduced proprioception). This stipulation almost certainly comes from a risk assessment, with questionable preventive measure to address the risk.

Working with DofE groups, I was more concerned with decent tread and stiffish footbed, than with ankle cuffs.

The one ankle injury I encountered (a minor sprain that had recovered by the next day) occurred in an area of 'babies heads'; teaching dynamic risk assessment and avoidance measures is probably more useful.

 girlymonkey 14 Feb 2023
In reply to BRILLBRUM:

I suspect part of it is that some people are still very old school and don't understand that boots don't support ankles, particularly the type that you buy for kids. 

But also, part of it probably ensures a slightly better level of grip on the soles. Obviously, you and I understand the difference between trainers, trail shoes and approach shoes, but many parents don't. Even crappy walking boots will have some sort of grip on the sole, so it's a good measure to ensure a basic level, whereas if someone doesn't know the difference between approach shoes and trainers or town shoes then you get kids turning up with a bigger mix of stuff and more could be unsuitable. 

I happily take kids out in approach shoes or trail shoes, but maybe that's because I absolutely will not wear boots unless in crampons so I'd be a hypocrite and that might not go down so well!


New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...