|
Post by Young Ireland on Sept 13, 2018 19:14:10 GMT
Matthew Schmitz has an interesting article on American football here: www.catholicherald.co.uk/issues/sep-14th-2018/the-wonderful-dread-of-american-football/I think he is very blase about the damaging effects of American football, even dismissive: "If we reach a different conclusion from Cather, it will not be because our scientific knowledge has advanced, but because our intuitions have changed. We will have decided that extending life and maximising cognitive ability are more important than honouring daring and fortitude. But what is the point of increasing an IQ meanly used, or lengthening a life poorly spent? Will a nation be better governed by safety-minded managers of high intelligence, or by spirited men trained to suffer for a great cause? It is neither intelligent nor healthy to prize intelligence and health above all else."While he is correct in principle, surely such risks should be taken for the faith, not simply for sport. St. Paul also warned us that our bodies are temples and we should take care of them within reason. There is also the fact that sports such as rugby league are even more physical but are actually safer since the players have much less protective gear. It's actually more demanding as well, as in American football the action stops very frequently and the pace of the action appears almost glacial. Perhaps it's because I'm not American, but I don't understand what makes the sport so popular over there? What do others here think?
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Sept 14, 2018 6:32:27 GMT
I've always found the sport immensely boring to watch, but I feel the same way about rugby. I dislike all those spasmodic sports. However, I do cherish it as an American tradition. (The Superbowl only began in the sixties, but I also like newer traditions.) Fr. Mike Schmitz of the Ascension Presents channel argued against Catholics participating in Mixed Martial Arts and got a huge blowback in the comments, I think he had to make a second video. I recently read about a Brazilian priest who died setting a record for cluster ballooning. It was for charity, I wonder if that makes it better. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adelir_Ant%C3%B4nio_de_CarliI don't have any theological foundation for this, but I would be inclined to say reasonable risks in sport are OK, since the risk isn't the point of the activity. I actually really dislike articles like this one, which make some tenous and strained argument for the Catholicity of something or other. An article-writer who loves some particular author, film, TV series, activity or philosopher tries to persuade us all that it's deeply Catholic in some sense of other. Well, yes, because there is so much universal truth in Catholicism that it would be almost impossible not to resonate with it in some way.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Sept 14, 2018 11:25:04 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Sept 14, 2018 21:41:44 GMT
The problem with the gentleman quoted in the first post is that college football notoriously exploits student players (who get very little education and a great deal of unpaid football from which the college makes a lot of money), and that pro football is a big business which uses and spits out players (who often lead a self-destructive lifestyle). I don't know if it's a good idea to risk brain damage for that. Arguing it from the position of a spectator rather than a participant seems uncomfortably like the audiences for the Roman gladiatorial games (and the best gladiators were celebrities in a "live fast, die young" style, too - is THAT to be commended?)
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Sept 14, 2018 21:49:45 GMT
The problem with the gentleman quoted in the first post is that college football notoriously exploits student players (who get very little education and a great deal of unpaid football from which the college makes a lot of money), and that pro football is a big business which uses and spits out players (who often lead a self-destructive lifestyle). I don't know if it's a good idea to risk brain damage for that. Arguing it from the position of a spectator rather than a participant seems uncomfortably like the audiences for the Roman gladiatorial games (and the best gladiators were celebrities in a "live fast, die young" style, too - is THAT to be commended?) I agree that college players are exploited, the problem is that such scholarships are often the only way that a poor talented athlete can get a degree of any sort in the States, hence they are much more likely to take such risks. Incidentally, the same argument could be made about the GAA, considering the huge sacrifices inter-county players are expected to make for nothing but county pride, while Croke Park gets eight figures in revenue.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Sept 15, 2018 6:21:04 GMT
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_football#Popularity_and_cultural_impactWell, the game is very widely played, so it's obviously not just students on scholarships or hoping to become professional who take these risks. I understand the G.A.A. re-invests most of its profits into local clubs, which are the soul of so many communities. Although I'm a cultural nationalist, I can't overcome a lifelong aversion to G.A.A. games. All my associations with these sports are unpleasant-- primarily the fact they are played on Sundays, so I always associated them with school the next day. I don't even like the gameplay. People boast that hurling is the fastest field game in the world, but that doesn't make it at all appealing, to me. So while I fully support the G.A.A. in principle, and especially the preservation of amateurism (though the commercialism of the games does seem to make it a bit hypocritical), just hearing a snatch of commentary like:" Jimmy Barry Murphy surging down the left hand side now" instantly depresses me. Now and again I have watched an All-Ireland Final out of a sense of duty, but never with pleasure.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Sept 18, 2018 13:21:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Sept 23, 2018 21:04:18 GMT
The problem with the gentleman quoted in the first post is that college football notoriously exploits student players (who get very little education and a great deal of unpaid football from which the college makes a lot of money), and that pro football is a big business which uses and spits out players (who often lead a self-destructive lifestyle). I don't know if it's a good idea to risk brain damage for that. Arguing it from the position of a spectator rather than a participant seems uncomfortably like the audiences for the Roman gladiatorial games (and the best gladiators were celebrities in a "live fast, die young" style, too - is THAT to be commended?) I agree that college players are exploited, the problem is that such scholarships are often the only way that a poor talented athlete can get a degree of any sort in the States, hence they are much more likely to take such risks. Incidentally, the same argument could be made about the GAA, considering the huge sacrifices inter-county players are expected to make for nothing but county pride, while Croke Park gets eight figures in revenue. The same argument is often made about boxing, whose links to dementia are well-established (recent research indicates the brain injuries caused by American pro fotball resemble those from boxing). Professional boxers often come from impoverished social or ethnic groups (in the past many British public schools had boxing clubs but this is now rare, though I believe it survives in military colleges). The GAA does indeed plough back its profits into the facilities, and it is a real source of community pride and identity. I never played it and don't take much interest in it any more, but it makes a lot of people happy.
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Sept 23, 2018 21:21:54 GMT
I agree that college players are exploited, the problem is that such scholarships are often the only way that a poor talented athlete can get a degree of any sort in the States, hence they are much more likely to take such risks. Incidentally, the same argument could be made about the GAA, considering the huge sacrifices inter-county players are expected to make for nothing but county pride, while Croke Park gets eight figures in revenue. The same argument is often made about boxing, whose links to dementia are well-established (recent research indicates the brain injuries caused by American pro fotball resemble those from boxing). Professional boxers often come from impoverished social or ethnic groups (in the past many British public schools had boxing clubs but this is now rare, though I believe it survives in military colleges). The GAA does indeed plough back its profits into the facilities, and it is a real source of community pride and identity. I never played it and don't take much interest in it any more, but it makes a lot of people happy. I don't contest anything you say here, Hibernicus, the problem is that with the exception of Croke Park, these facilities (much like the huge college football stadia) are essentially white elephants that are used only four or five times a year. And as we can see from the Liam Miller testimonial, they seem happy to keep it that way in spite of Pairc Ui Chaoimh being part-funded by the taxpayer. Being a Kerryman, I do take some interest in the GAA, even if I'm not its biggest fan, but I do believe that the players are being short-changed by the current system, particularly in light of the ESRI report that shows inter-county players spending 31 hours a week on GAA activity on top of their day jobs.
|
|