Neither the second nor third studies examined athletes’ perceptions of spatting compared to other conditions, nor was it reported in any of the studies whether subjects wore the same model of cleat and sock (which may be an unaccounted variable in terms of proprioception). Using the same 4 ankle conditions, a different study of 10 male college athletes asked to execute 3 trials each of a 40-yard sprint or 40-yd cone drill found no differences in performance times or post-exercise eversion, inversion, or plantarflexion ROM between conditions (18).

The researchers found that spatting + taping was more effective than either of the other 2 conditions in reducing both amount and rate of ankle inversion both before and after exercise (12). Another study exposed 15 young adult male rugby players to sudden ankle inversions (via platform drop) before and after 30 minutes of rugby drills in 4 ankle conditions (taped, spatted, and taped + spatted as compared to untaped). Though subjects reported no differences in perception of movement-restriction or stability between the 2 conditions in Likert scales, they did perceive ankle taping as more comfortable than spatting (19).

In one study of 17 young men, ankle spatting was more effective than taping at reducing ankle inversion and plantar flexion during 60 minutes of playing non-tackle American football (19) in that study, taping and spatting were tested only as separate conditions (e.g., there was no taping + spatting condition). To the best of our knowledge, only three experimental studies on ankle spatting have been conducted which varied in modes of exercise and taping protocols. A retrospective study of anterior cruciate ligament injuries in National Football League players found that spatting did not lessen the risk of ACL injuries (16) although it is likely that the authors implied spatting was done in conjunction with taping, this was not specified. Spatting has been shown to reduce translational and rotational forces on the heel during cleat contact with playing surface in a mechanical model (5). Much less research exists regarding spatting in comparison to standard taping or bracing. Athletic trainers may be reluctant to routinely spat ankles due to the time, energy, and costs involved. Athletes sometimes request spatting because they perceive their ankles as being more supported (and hence better protected from injuries) compared to taping alone. As the authors can personally attest, ankle spatting is becoming increasingly popular among college American football players and is often performed in conjunction with standard ankle taping (closed basket weave taping technique on top of quick-drying tape adherent and pre- wrap applied against the skin), giving the players’ ankles 2 total layers of tape.

For example, one recent study in high school football athletes found that taping and bracing were equivocal in terms of ankle sprain prevention, yet bracing was financially and logistically much more pragmatic (9). Given these findings, athletic trainers are naturally weighing benefits and drawbacks to different ankle support options. Current data has focused on comparisons of traditional ankle taping to ankle bracing and most have reported equivocal results in terms of prophylactic benefits (most often in the context of ankle sprains) and performance outcomes (6, 7, 17), though these results may be contingent on the rigidity of the specific ankle brace used.

Spat taped cleats