Violent sport?

Would you say a hockey is a violent sport?

[Jabez54]

Maybe, as much as American Football ... less than Boxing and MMA ... and way, way less than the Bar room brawls ... ...

[CD1083]

I'd argue that MMA is less violent than American football with it being at the top of the list.

Football > Boxing > MMA > Hockey > Basketball > Baseball > Soccer

[ihatenames]

To answer OP question I would definitely say so. The speed of the game alone causes a lot of trauma even when you don't factor in body checks and of course fighting in some leagues. Add in a bunch of sticks swung in close proximity and the hurling of rubber 100 plus MPH at men in front of nets makes for a pretty violent game.

I would also say soccer is always way under valued in terms of violence. The game is a lot more violent than many people think.

[rudel.dietrich]

Depends on if you mean violent or risky. In terms of injuries, cheerleading causes the second most injuries per 1000 participants in high school athletics.

[PotatoPeeler]

Originally Posted by CD1083

I'd argue that MMA is less violent than American football with it being at the top of the list.

Football > Boxing > MMA > Hockey > Basketball > Baseball > Soccer

Once again, I agree.

[Cryomaniac]

Originally Posted by rudel.dietrich

Depends on if you mean violent or risky. In terms of injuries, cheerleading causes the second most injuries per 1000 participants in high school athletics.

After what? (American) Football, I assume?

[rudel.dietrich]

Originally Posted by Cryomaniac

After what? (American) Football, I assume?

IIRC, yes

I got curious and did a Google search for the Sports Illustrated article in question but could not find it.
But I distinctly recall reading it some years ago.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by CD1083

I'd argue that MMA is less violent than American football with it being at the top of the list.

Football > Boxing > MMA > Hockey > Basketball > Baseball > Soccer

I'm dubious about those rankings. I take it you don't watch soccer much? No way baseball is more violent and it's really hard to make a case that basketball is either.

As to the top of the list, I don't see any way MMA or boxing isn't on top. I know wikipedia isn't a good source but it does have this to say.

"Because of the young age of the sport and the small number of fatalities to date, little statistical inference can be drawn. A 2006 study suggests that the risk of injury in general in MMA is comparable to that in professional boxing.[1] For professional boxing matches, the Manuel Velazquez Boxing Fatality Collection lists 923 deaths during the 118 year period of 1890-2007."

There've been a few American football deaths but except for one death in the arena league from contact, all have come from heart issues or heatstroke or something other than the violence inherent in the sport.

Pro football players just don't die on the field or in the arena from getting hit. MMA fighters and boxers do, frequently.

I'd say MMA > Boxing > American Football > Hockey > Rugby > European Football > Basketball > Baseball > Cricket.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by dmytron

Would you say a hockey is a violent sport?

I take a different viewpoint from these other guys.

Boxing and MMA are the only sports in which the competition demands, and rules allow for, physical harm to be done to your opponent in order to win. These are the ONLY essentially violent sports, therefore. (And they should be banned, IMO, but that's for another thread someday).

Hockey, to answer your question, is not inherently a violent sport. The rules of hockey do not call for harming your opponent in order to win.

HOWEVER, to the extent that bad behavior like excessive checking and high sticking are treated with slaps on the wrist (in the form of mere penalty minutes), then hockey becomes violent. When fighting is permitted (yes, permitted if not tacitly encouraged) as part of the game and allowed to be part of its appeal and excitement, then hockey becomes violent. When goons are recruited and retained as players who really aren't that good at playing hockey but are very good as "enforcers," then hockey becomes violent.

Hockey, the game, is not a violent sport. Hockey, the spectator extravaganza, is indeed violent.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

I take a different viewpoint from these other guys.

Boxing and MMA are the only sports in which the competition demands, and rules allow for, physical harm to be done to your opponent in order to win. These are the ONLY essentially violent sports, therefore. (And they should be banned, IMO, but that's for another thread someday).

Hockey, to answer your question, is not inherently a violent sport. The rules of hockey do not call for harming your opponent in order to win.

HOWEVER, to the extent that bad behavior like excessive checking and high sticking are treated with slaps on the wrist (in the form of mere penalty minutes), then hockey becomes violent. When fighting is permitted (yes, permitted if not tacitly encouraged) as part of the game and allowed to be part of its appeal and excitement, then hockey becomes violent. When goons are recruited and retained as players who really aren't that good at playing hockey but are very good as "enforcers," then hockey becomes violent.

Hockey, the game, is not a violent sport. Hockey, the spectator extravaganza, is indeed violent.

You hit the nail on the head. Absolutely right.

[CD1083]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

I'm dubious about those rankings. I take it you don't watch soccer much? No way baseball is more violent and it's really hard to make a case that basketball is either.

As to the top of the list, I don't see any way MMA or boxing isn't on top. I know wikipedia isn't a good source but it does have this to say.

"Because of the young age of the sport and the small number of fatalities to date, little statistical inference can be drawn. A 2006 study suggests that the risk of injury in general in MMA is comparable to that in professional boxing.[1] For professional boxing matches, the Manuel Velazquez Boxing Fatality Collection lists 923 deaths during the 118 year period of 1890-2007."

There've been a few American football deaths but except for one death in the arena league from contact, all have come from heart issues or heatstroke or something other than the violence inherent in the sport.

Pro football players just don't die on the field or in the arena from getting hit. MMA fighters and boxers do, frequently.

I'd say MMA > Boxing > American Football > Hockey > Rugby > European Football > Basketball > Baseball > Cricket.

Originally Posted by Déjà Bru

I take a different viewpoint from these other guys.

Boxing and MMA are the only sports in which the competition demands, and rules allow for, physical harm to be done to your opponent in order to win. These are the ONLY essentially violent sports, therefore. (And they should be banned, IMO, but that's for another thread someday).

Hockey, to answer your question, is not inherently a violent sport. The rules of hockey do not call for harming your opponent in order to win.

HOWEVER, to the extent that bad behavior like excessive checking and high sticking are treated with slaps on the wrist (in the form of mere penalty minutes), then hockey becomes violent. When fighting is permitted (yes, permitted if not tacitly encouraged) as part of the game and allowed to be part of its appeal and excitement, then hockey becomes violent. When goons are recruited and retained as players who really aren't that good at playing hockey but are very good as "enforcers," then hockey becomes violent.

Hockey, the game, is not a violent sport. Hockey, the spectator extravaganza, is indeed violent.

Violence by definition is defined by acts of aggression, which most sports contain in some level, so to state only MMA and Boxing are the violent ones is flat out wrong by definition.

American Football rewards violence. Basketball rewards violence. The level of which we define it is subjective, but it's violence none the less.

The reason I put American Football at the top of the list is easy. It's a game that includes the most severe injuries at a frequent level. Every play involves collisions, hitting, pushing, shoving, tackling, and cheap plays. It's a game of violence and it's the reason why America loves it. It being on top of the list is a no brainer.

Boxing is #2 because it's a sport that essentially revolves around hitting each other in the head for 12 rounds. Sure there are body shots but for the most part boxers are going after the head.

MMA is deceivingly less violent than boxing. Although the highlight reels are better, the fights are shorter (Fights get stopped much quicker in MMA and less rounds) and there is a far larger variant in the way people compete. Although there is a lot of straight up boxing, there is also martial arts, wrestling, judo, etc.

I'm willing to concede that European Football is more violent than it appears, however it still stays at the bottom of my list, unless someone can point out 'plays' that are as violent as a home plate collision or being hit by a 100 MPH fast ball. I don't watch a lot of soccer, but from what I've watched I don't see an equivalent which puts it at the bottom of my list.

[Déjà Bru]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

You hit the nail on the head. Absolutely right.

Heh, don't say anything, but here is a case in point - my viewpoint described above . . . from our own forums!

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...no-fights.html

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by ihatenames

game is a lot more violent than many people think.

No, it only looks violent because of all the diving. Two players so much as tap each other, and one, if not both, will fall to the ground as if they'd been shot.

[ihatenames]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

No, it only looks violent because of all the diving. Two players so much as tap each other, and one, if not both, will fall to the ground as if they'd been shot.

One could say that about hockey and basketball too. Clearly you don't watch a lot of soccer. The game is much more physical then it is stereotyped.

To CD, do a youtube search for hard tackles and fouls in soccer. You'll see plenty of evidence. I don't think it's as violent as Football or Hockey, but it is definitely more violent than baseball, and one could argue basketball.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

No, it only looks violent because of all the diving.

That not true at all. There is a lot of diving but there is also a great deal of genuinely rough, physical play and there are regularly some truly vicious tackles. There have been players who played at the top levels of soccer who had little skill and whose main role was to serve as hockey type enforcers.

Google Vinnie Jones or Julian Dicks. Or Dunga, though he's not quite the same as the first two since he actually had a great deal of skill too.

[John Madden]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

That not true at all. There is a lot of diving but there is also a great deal of genuinely rough, physical play and there are regularly some truly vicious tackles. There have been players who played at the top levels of soccer who had little skill and whose main role was to serve as hockey type enforcers.

Google Vinnie Jones or Julian Dicks. Or Dunga, though he's not quite the same as the first two since he actually had a great deal of skill too.

Or just watch the video of Roy Keane ending Alfie Håland's career.

Roy Keane Ends Håland's Career In Manchester Derby - YouTube

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by CD1083

The reason I put American Football at the top of the list is easy. It's a game that includes the most severe injuries at a frequent level. Every play involves collisions, hitting, pushing, shoving, tackling, and cheap plays. It's a game of violence and it's the reason why America loves it. It being on top of the list is a no brainer.

Boxing is #2 because it's a sport that essentially revolves around hitting each other in the head for 12 rounds. Sure there are body shots but for the most part boxers are going after the head.

MMA is deceivingly less violent than boxing. Although the highlight reels are better, the fights are shorter (Fights get stopped much quicker in MMA and less rounds) and there is a far larger variant in the way people compete. Although there is a lot of straight up boxing, there is also martial arts, wrestling, judo, etc.

There is no way American football "includes the most severe injuries at a frequent level". Boxers and MMA fighter fight what, a couple times a year? That's because they're usually so badly injured and beaten after their bouts that they just couldn't fight more often.

And some of the most severe injuries in American football usually come not as a result of violence, but in non-contact situations as a result of a foot being planted wrong and knee or ankle ligaments being torn.

And as I pointed out in my post that you quoted, boxers and MMA guys not infrequently die, during bouts or immediately after, as a direct result of injuries sustained during the matches. Only one pro football player has ever died on the field due to the violence of the game. Hundreds of pro boxers and several MMA fighters have died in the ring or immediately after a fight.

American football includes violence, but also includes a great deal of other non or minimally violent aspects. It also includes protective gear.

MMA and boxing have no non violent aspects to them at all. There's no ball to throw or catch, no running, nothing like that. There's nothing involved in either sport except violence. And neither has any protective gear, unless you count boxing gloves.

So there's no question at all in my mind which sports are more violent.

[Le Grande Orange]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

That not true at all.

My comment was in large part tongue-in-cheek. I didn't think a smiley was necessary, but I apparently misjudged things.

Every time I've seen but just a few minutes of a soccer match there's a dive of one sort or another. The really ridiculous part is when a player is rolling around on the ground, supposedly in agony, gets carried off the field on a stretcher, then just a few minutes later has miraculously recovered and returns to play apparently perfectly fine from what seemed like such a terrible injury that he had to be carried of the field. That sort of thing makes the sport look like a joke.

Interestingly, from what I saw of the Women's World Cup, there was almost no diving at all. That made the women's game far more enjoyable for me.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by Le Grande Orange

My comment was in large part tongue-in-cheek. I didn't think a smiley was necessary, but I apparently misjudged things.

Every time I've seen but just a few minutes of a soccer match there's a dive of one sort or another. The really ridiculous part is when a player is rolling around on the ground, supposedly in agony, gets carried off the field on a stretcher, then just a few minutes later has miraculously recovered and returns to play apparently perfectly fine from what seemed like such a terrible injury that he had to be carried of the field. That sort of thing makes the sport look like a joke.

Interestingly, from what I saw of the Women's World Cup, there was almost no diving at all. That made the women's game far more enjoyable for me.

Oops, sorry about that

I agree that diving is frequently out of control, and just overall ridiculous.

But there's so much more to soccer than that, and I enjoy the rest of the sport so much that while the guys are writhing in "pain", I just grin and bear it.