
Contact sports are known for a few core things: hard hits, a fast pace, and the almost indescribable violence that leaves not only the athletes playing the game but also the spectators with an adrenaline rush and increased heart rate. Within a second, teeth can be knocked out, bones can be crushed, blood can be shed, and if anything can be for certain, the fans will be on their feet and will be just as loud as if a goal or touchdown had just been scored.  Since the time of the Ancient Romans, humans have included violence in a mass majority in their sporting events. While now in the modern era of sports the athlete’s objective is not to kill their opponent, there are still times today where athletes will pursue their opponents in such a relentless and violent fashion, that it is almost as if they want to make their opponent wish they were dead. But with modern medicine and general health knowledge at our disposal, many people, fans of the sports and non-fans alike have to ask, how much violence is too much; and by taking it out of the game at the sake of the health of the athletes, how much are you taking away from the game? As a person who played contact sports throughout my youth and throughout high school, wrestling, football, and hockey, where excessive violence is not taboo, I cannot ignore this important question our society faces as a whole. Is giving the athletes improved safety equipment enough? Should the sports that fall under this category be completely stopped because of their potential life and death injuries that they can cause? This debate has been argued throughout the sports community for decades. And with no clear answer in sight, unfortunately, this debate may continue to rage on for years to come. Violence in sports (especially contact sports) is not only a part of the game, but is inevitable as it is a part of human nature, part of the game, and if taken out, a loss to sports as a whole, and it should not be banned or curbed at all. 

Some say violence is a key aspect of the sport that without, would no longer be the same sport anymore. Others say that the athlete’s health and overall well-being is more important than, a barbaric and outdated form of entertainment.

While researching for this argumentative essay, I came across eight sources I feel fairly shed light and educate on this controversial and difficult topic. The first was an article written by Ryan Kennedy on The Hockey News and is called “Fighting in The NHL: Should It Stay or Go?”. It is an article that covers the almost too familiar topic that is associated with contact sports in today’s modern sports arena: excessive violence and its correlation to head and brain injuries. This article points out fighting is a part of the game of ice hockey and the fact that there are documented cases where when fighting is cracked down on or completely stripped from the game, players resort to dirtier hits, and slashes. If players are limited too strictly by the regulating bodies within their sports, emotions and aggressive behavior may flare and lead to serious and even life altering injuries. This not only helps strengthen my argument that violence in sports should not be taken out of the game, but if taken out gives documented cases where it only leads to more violent, and dangerous instances of violence within sports themselves.

My second source was an article written by Corinne Purtill on the Quartz and is called Hockey fights are in decline and fans are partly to blame.  It is an article that covers the topic of excessive sports violence and how the evolving modern sports area, new safety regulations, improved sports equipment, the rise of new fighting-exclusive sports (UFC, MMA, etc.), and the overall quicker pacing of the game of ice hockey in the modern era have affected the culture around fighting in ice hockey and its potential futures.  It also elaborates on how new modern fans viewpoints of the sports have affected this topic as well. With many modern sports fans not solely watching contact sports for the violence now, it brings up the question of whether or not violence in sports is longer necessary. But based off the reaction of fans when they view violence within the sport they are watching, it is still a very loved part of the sport, some could even say even more so that before now that it occurs less in the sport that it has in the past.

My third source was an article written by Dana Hunsinger Benbow on the Indystar and is called “Violence in Sports Treated Differently”.  This article was about how violence and how it is perceived/dealt with in general is vastly different from when it takes place in sports compared to in everyday life.  Even in the cases in sports where the violence that takes place is not at all part of the sport, but just the released bottled-up emotions and competitive nature of some athletes, it is still handled differently; it is viewed as part of the game. Unless the violence that takes place in the sporting event is excessive and un-mutual between the two parties committing the violence, the vast majority of the time, no criminal charges are pressed, and usually worst case scenario, the athletes in question will just get suspended for the rest of the season. I believe this is the case because there has always been an unspoken rule that when it comes to contact sports, it is okay to be overly aggressive and sometimes violent. On the football field, hockey rink, or wrestling mat, it is not only the appropriate place to let out all of your violence and aggression, it is healthy to do so.  

My fourth source was the book, Sports, games, and play: social and psychological viewpoints written by Jeffrey H. Goldstein. The book Sports, games, and play: social and psychological viewpoints in Jeffrey H. Goldstein’s words is, “an overview of theories and research on violence in sports. The focus is on the perceived relationships between violence and sports, that is, the views of sports violence people hold their beliefs about the nature of aggression and play, and the individual and social functions served by each of these.” This book helps bring psychological aspects in the topic to help support my arguments, but also sociological aspects as well. It brings the argument down into the topic of basic human behavior and thought and how violence and aggression within sports fits into this niche. While modern society and the media may be trying to discourage aggression and violence in sports, social and psychological viewpoints show that violence and aggression are base human behaviors that if blocked out for too long, can lead to horrible results, such as illegal and dirty hits, which could lead to worse injuries that a legal hit could produce.   

My fifth source was the book Sport, Violence and Society by Kevin Young. This book takes on the scientific approach to the social debate around violence in modern day sports. He incorporates three core scientific ideas into his arguments on sports, violence in our sports, and our society’s reaction to the violence in sports. Some of these core arguments from the book are, “Instinct theory” where “Humans are naturally aggressive; aggression is an innate biological drive.” The second is “Hostile and instrumental aggression” and this is where “Humans use aggression to achieve specific goals.” And the final core idea presented in the book is “Catharsis” and this is “In routine, everyday life, humans accumulate frustrations.” And off of these three core ideas, Young really elaborates on each and every core point where there is scientific evidence to back them up, the points are stated clearly, and in general the reader feels more educated on the topic at that point.

My sixth source was a YouTube video about sports’ violence. This YouTube video called “Examining Violence in Sports flipped vid” and it covers what causes violence within sports itself. According to the video, causes of violence in sports fall under two categories, Athletes causes and Spectator causes.  Athlete causes include emotional intensity of event/match, abuse or provocation, frustration, and the overall nature of the game. Spectator causes include fanaticism, overcrowding in the stadium, mob culture, and alcohol. Given these factors, it leaves the readers thinking that the spectators are the main cause for violence in sports. I find this argument to be untrue as violence and aggression is still a part of sports for athletes as competitive nature dictates that it does not matter if nobody is watching or if the whole world is watching, if given a chance, an athlete will compete in a violent and competitive fashion to make the play, score the touchdown, get the sack, etc. 

My seventh source was an article in the European sports journal called Sports Violence and the Media by Dolf Zillmann and Jennings Bryant. Throughout this journal Dolf Zillmann and Jennings Bryant examine at what cost does violence within sports come at in regards to the fans enjoyment at the sport as a whole.  Are sports just a game, or are they more than that? “Although the notion that spectators enjoy violence in sports seems to be a truism in contemporary society, it has received scant scholarly attention. In this chapter we consider the nature and consequences of sports violence; present popular notions, formal proposals, and empirical evidence for the enhancement of spectators’ enjoyment of sports contests through aggressive play; and examine ways in which the media exploit sports violence.” Sports are more than a game, they are a part of human culture, a healthy form of exercise, and a way for people to come together, despite race, religion, and age under one common cause (sports).

My eight source was an article written by Michael D. Smith called What Is Sports Violence? A Sociologic Perspective. Michael D. Smith uses historical instances of sports dating all the way back to the 19th century to discuss how modern western society has dealt with violence within sports in the past. One such historical instance Michael D. Smith uses is from the 1878 British case, Regina v. Bradshaw. “These were Lord Justice Bramwell’s instructions to the jury in an 1878 British court case, Regina v. Bradshaw. A soccer player was accused of manslaughter after he charged and collided with an opposing player, who subsequently died, in a game played under “association rules.” The defendant was acquitted, but the judge’s pronouncement has been cited of late in North America by those who wish to make the point that sport should not be exempt from the laws that govern our behavior elsewhere.” This helps to prove the point that this difficult issue has literally been argued for centuries and is a part of human nature and the nature of sports as a whole.

In conclusion, violence is a fundamental part of contact sports, it always has been and as I believe, it always should be. Having access to a violent contact sports allows athletes to relieve stress and let out anger in a positive and healthy way. I thoroughly believe that violence in sports (especially contact sports) is not only a part of the game, but is inevitable as it is a part of human nature, part of the game, and if taken out, a loss to sports as a whole, and it should not be banned or curbed at all.
