Mike Sack discussed an interesting topic with sportswriter Patrick Hubry, law professor Roger Abrams, and former player and coach Tim Reynolds, reversing the sociological understanding of the United States' cultural identification with football. The four men debated the draw to football, recognizing the danger of the sport, and the true concept of the game. In truth, football is almost a barbaric sport, yet as addressed in the debate, week after week, thousands of people pack the football stands, and behave almost as barbarically as the players. One of the men elaborates on this idea, referencing the code of conduct for the fans, set in place by the NFL for safety reasons. Do to the nature of the game, and the crowds attraction to violence, stadiums must ensure that rowdiness does not cross the line to present threat. When addressing football in this manner, it is a wonder that the sport has become such a phenomena in the American culture. If you were to describe football to someone who had never before heard of the game, the newcomer would probably be appalled by the concept. Grown men, run round on a field, hitting each other as hard as they can, in order to win a game and entertain their fans who watch, and cheer, surrounding the players in a large stadium. Wow. As stated by the men, their is a striking resemblance to the gladiator battles held in the ancient Colosseum. The debate was continued, as the host Mike Sack reviewed the question: Who is at fault? Just as Brooks used persuasion in order to craft an argument which completely reversed the standard Western viewpoint, these men reversed the argument that the NFL is at fault, instead blaming the American fans for the danger of football. Interestingly, the men removed blame from the NFL, concluding that "the fans have a responsibility because if the people do not desire to be entertained by football and dangerous hits, then people aren't killing themselves to play football." The men admit that though the fans are only partially at blame considering the players are aware of the danger, the players have an obviously reaction to the energy of the thousands of fans as they cheer for a major hit. One man declares that "it is not until a player does not get up, that fans get down and realize that it is not a video game, but real life with real people." Until then, fans are excited by life shortening hits and major plays. Furthermore, Americans endorse the contact nature of the sport by giving the players stronger pads to allow them stronger hits, and in our state of denial, claim that the pads are protection rather than the sponsoring of harder hits. However, as stated in the debate, research shows that sports such as boxing and football were much less detrimental to the players' health prior to the invention of more sturdy padding. Personally, being a football fan, myself, I found this segment very interesting, and was impressed by the host's use of logos, as he debated with knowledgeable men. The men also appealed to ethos, by addressing the emotional side of the pain felt by the players, forcing the audience to evaluate their behavior, and endorsement of the sport.
http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segment/nfl-football-roman-gladiators/50abcfbc2b8c2a40190004a0
No comments:
Post a Comment