4 ms·

Well, there's some argument for stats and science here. Padding for Rugby might actually make sense whereas the trend where kids can't go to the park or the gr

Well, there's some argument for stats and science here. Padding for Rugby might actually make sense whereas the trend where kids can't go to the park or the grocery store alone is counterproductive. A world where kids playing actually risky sports use safety equipment but also have the independence to go to the park and do pick-up games with friends with no adult supervision, that sounds like the right balance. Not every change today is bad.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago
It's not settled science but there's decent evidence that the padding and helmets contribute to the more violent nature of American football (where serious and long term injuries are more common than in rugby).
- ghaff 5y ago
  It's difficult to separate out equipment from rules and just general attitudes--at least at lower levels of the sports. (And rugby is certainly not immune from concussion issues.) I do remember long-ago undergraduate we had some major problems in a match against a team where the rugby players were basically castoffs from that school's top-tier football program. We ended up walking off the field because they were basically deliberately trying to hurt people.
- wizzwizz4 5y ago
  This seems likely; the boxing equivalent is well-known.
- oh_sigh 5y ago
  That is comparing professional to professional. The reason young children in rugby get padding is not so they can hit harder, but because they haven't internalized proper tackling form yet. So many more kids are going to get a knee to the face as they tackle their opponent, or unintentionally truck a person they're trying to tackle, compared to older people who know how to tackle correctly and safely.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- omegaham 5y ago
  The issue with American football is the "line in the sand" nature of yardage. In rugby, as long as you wrap up the ball carrier and bring him down, it's fine if he gets another couple yards. In contrast, letting a running back get another couple yards is often the difference between a first down and a turnover. Another reason is the lack of laterals in American football. In rugby, if you commit too hard to tackling a player, he laterals the ball to the player next to him, and you're now in a really, really bad defensive position. In contrast, laterals are so rare in American football that you can commit as hard as you want without consequences. Neither of these things go away if you get rid of the helmets and pads; it just makes it more likely that people will die on the field, as they frequently did before helmets and pads were introduced. At one point, football was killing so many college students that President Roosevelt threatened to ban it.

throwaway0a5e 5y ago

It's not settled science but there's decent evidence that the padding and helmets contribute to the more violent nature of American football (where serious and long term injuries are more common than in rugby).

ghaff 5y ago
It's difficult to separate out equipment from rules and just general attitudes--at least at lower levels of the sports. (And rugby is certainly not immune from concussion issues.) I do remember long-ago undergraduate we had some major problems in a match against a team where the rugby players were basically castoffs from that school's top-tier football program. We ended up walking off the field because they were basically deliberately trying to hurt people.
wizzwizz4 5y ago
This seems likely; the boxing equivalent is well-known.
oh_sigh 5y ago
That is comparing professional to professional. The reason young children in rugby get padding is not so they can hit harder, but because they haven't internalized proper tackling form yet. So many more kids are going to get a knee to the face as they tackle their opponent, or unintentionally truck a person they're trying to tackle, compared to older people who know how to tackle correctly and safely.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
omegaham 5y ago
The issue with American football is the "line in the sand" nature of yardage. In rugby, as long as you wrap up the ball carrier and bring him down, it's fine if he gets another couple yards. In contrast, letting a running back get another couple yards is often the difference between a first down and a turnover. Another reason is the lack of laterals in American football. In rugby, if you commit too hard to tackling a player, he laterals the ball to the player next to him, and you're now in a really, really bad defensive position. In contrast, laterals are so rare in American football that you can commit as hard as you want without consequences. Neither of these things go away if you get rid of the helmets and pads; it just makes it more likely that people will die on the field, as they frequently did before helmets and pads were introduced. At one point, football was killing so many college students that President Roosevelt threatened to ban it.