Revise Final
Surname 1
Professor
Course
Date
Annotated Bibliography
Title: Should kids playing recreational football be banned from tackling?
"Tackling in Youth Football." PEDIATRICS, vol. 136, no. 5, 2015, pp. e1419-e1430.
The American academy of pediatrics analyses the whole issue, give insights on the effects of supporting and not supporting the whole issue. This paper analyses the literature regarding injuries related to football and the relationships it has with tackling as well as probable effects on injury if tackling is delayed. It further argues that instead of banning tackling in youth football, teaching proper tackling techniques would be the better approach. The paper concludes that coaches and football fraternity should focus on enforcing rules relating to tackling. Instead of banning tackling in football for young athletes only, a separate game where there is no tackling, not only at kid’s stage but also even to the mature adults. This game should be for people who are only wants to play football for fun.
Nowinski, Chris, and Robert Cantu. "Flag Football Under 14: An Education Campaign for Parents." 17 Jan. 2018,
The concussion legacy foundation states the support for delaying enrolling of a child in a tackle football until the age of 14. The white paper gives series of researches that al concussions are related to injuries sustained during playing football at the tender age. It reported that a study on CTE on former players and the post mortem found out that out of 111 player, 110 had CTE. It argued that a poll that was conducted found out that 4 out of 5 adults supported the banning of tackle football in children under the age of 14.
"Should Tackling Be Banned From Youth Football?" MedicineNet, www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=193494.
The article supports the banning of tackling football for the youth, citing studies made by American Academy of Pediatrics concerning concussions. It recommends non-tackling footballs for the kids, since playing football cannot be avoided.
"California Lawmakers Want to Ban Tackle Football Until High School." The Mercury News, 10 Feb. 2018, www.mercurynews.com/2018/02/09/california-lawmakers-want-to-ban-tackle-football-until-high-school/.
The Mercury news reported that there were negative reaction concerning the Californian lawmakers on the proportion of banning tackling football for kids. Among those who were disgruntled were coaches and some parents. Other especially parents are supporting the whole issue.
"Bill to Ban Youth Tackle Football is Government Overreach, Some Coaches Say." Orange County Register, 25 Feb. 2018, www.ocregister.com/2018/02/24/bill-to-ban-youth-tackle-football-is-government-overreach-some-coaches-say/.
This article reports that Southern Californian Football Coaches Association, as well as some high school coaches were opposing the proposed bill to ban kinds from playing tackling football. Their argument was that tackle football was safer. Coaches were of the opinion that instead of banning, introducing proper safe tackling techniques were appropriate.
Urban, Jillian E., et al. "Head Impact Exposure in Youth Football: High School Ages 14 to 18 Years and Cumulative Impact Analysis." Annals of Biomedical Engineering, vol. 41, no. 12, 2013, pp. 2474-2487.
This research paper recommended banning of football in schools because if the high concussion rates reported. The paper points out that the number of youth playing football as per 2013 statistics were 1.1 million as compared to 100,000 in college and only 200 at professional levels. The reasons for the banned is that physical damages outweighs it importance.
Literature Review Piece
There has been a lot of varying opinions regarding banning of tackling football in youth. Injuries associated with tackling football are numerous. This have captured the minds of parents, coaches and ultimately lawmakers. Other urge that there is no point of banning tackling football at youth level, as it will increase injuries at mature level. Both sides agree on thing, the dangers associated with playing of tackling football at all levels. This paper looks at both sides of arguments together with their evidences on why they support their point of arguments.
Despite the growing concern regarding injuries associated with playing tackle football, banning the whole game is insensitive. Despite these injuries, it is not the only sport that have reported such injuries. Boxing, ruby and even hockey have reported injuries to the players. Demonizing the game on the basis of injuries is being unfair. According to the Sothern California Football Coaches Association, the way to go is to improve equipment that minimizes injuries, train coaches on safety protocols and educate both the players and the coaches on how avoid injuries ("Bill to Ban Youth Tackle Football is Government Overreach, Some Coaches Say"). Coaches admitted that the game is prone to serious injuries but banning the whole game is not being fair and will not stop players from playing, because of the passion.
There are a lot of studies that have been done regarding trauma, CTE, concussions and other diseases related to brain. The research found out that the earliest age at which CTE was found was the brain of an 18-year old student. Tis means the damage began earlier, especially when the student was still a kid (Urban, et al. 2017).
Banning kids from playing tackling football is not solving the problem, but postponing it. This is because according to American Academy of Pediatrics, scientific research on the age at which most concussion occurs is at the higher football, where players are older. The probability of having a severe head injury increases with the age. Most of the injuries related to head are caused by tackling, but these tackles are as result of illegal and improper tackling. The only way to go, is to avoid spear tackling, which in any way illegal. Instead of banning the game for kids, the best approach is to train kids, coaches enforce existing rules concerning tackling. Tackling should be criminalized even at tender age, and as the child grows, they will be cautious concerning tackling ("Tackling in Youth Football" 2017).
The recent survey indicated that most people are for the banning of the tackling football in kids. The study indicated that out of five people, only one is not for the idea of banning ("Should Tackling Be Banned From Youth Football?"). The issue is, why not take the idea of the majority? I will be giving people what they want. This shows how people are concerned about concussions obtained just for recreation.
Delaying tackling will not solve the issue at hand. This is because players will not have experience on how to avoid tackling. And since injuries at advanced age are severe, this will lead to more and severe injuries than that would otherwise be, if players were exposed to tackling at tender age.
CONCLUSION
There are dangers associated with American football. Tackling have been the main issue concerning nearly all injuries associated with the sport. The contentious issue here is how to stop these injuries. Many researches and opinion leaders have differed on the way forward regarding the issue and the approach. Those who are for banning tackling in kids have their own valid point of arguments. Those opposing the issue also have their own valid and scientific conviction. The only way forward concerning the banning of tackling for kids playing recreational football is to provide quality equipment that minimizes injuries, not only to the kids but also to the mature players. Enacting of strict laws regarding tackling should be effective. Training of both the coaches and the players on the negative effects of tackling will reduce these injuries.
Works Cited
"Bill to Ban Youth Tackle Football is Government Overreach, Some Coaches Say." Orange County Register, 25 Feb. 2018, www.ocregister.com/2018/02/24/bill-to-ban-youth-tackle-football-is-government-overreach-some-coaches-say/.
"California Lawmakers Want to Ban Tackle Football Until High School." The Mercury News, 10 Feb. 2018, www.mercurynews.com/2018/02/09/california-lawmakers-want-to-ban-tackle-football-until-high-school/.
Nowinski, Chris, and Robert Cantu. "Flag Football Under 14: An Education Campaign for Parents." 17 Jan. 2018,
"Should Tackling Be Banned From Youth Football?" MedicineNet, www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=193494.
"Tackling in Youth Football." PEDIATRICS, vol. 136, no. 5, 2015, pp. e1419-e1430.
Urban, Jillian E., et al. "Head Impact Exposure in Youth Football: High School Ages 14 to 18 Years and Cumulative Impact Analysis." Annals of Biomedical Engineering, vol. 41, no. 12, 2013, pp. 2474-2487.
Rebuttal Essay Piece
Introduction
There are people who are for the opinion that tackling football for the kids should be allowed to continue, despite the overwhelming evidence of concussions at tender age. These opinions support the idea that recreational football is more important than personal health. The point for those opposing the idea is that preparing kids early for tackling will make them be less vulnerable to injuries when they grow up, because they would be experienced. This paper analyses weaknesses of those who do not support banning of tackling football in kids who play recreational football and therefore discredit the whole idea.
OPPOSING ARGUMENTS
It is pointless to oppose a clear point of argument. Considering that everyone I for the idea, why should we let our kids continue to injure themselves for the sake of recreation? The idea of coaches claiming that killing the game is pointless, and then admitting that there is real concern regarding injuries. It is pointless to continue with the game.
The American Pediatrics association seems much focused on the game rather than the health status of the kids. Their point of argument is that the game rules need to be changed, and even stricter. The truth is, these rules concerning tackling football are already in existence, and then it means these rules would not save kids from the injury. Training of coaches and players is really necessary, but would it stop the kids from injuring themselves?
The point that coaches should be putting across is that recreational football is not a must. The game need to be enjoyed, and injuries need to avoid as much as possible. Rules are always there player follows these rules is not practical. The other point about making rules be tougher, is that this only applies in mature people. Kids under the age of 14 do not understand what rues are. All they want is to play and enjoy themselves. These rules will not make them safe in any way. It will only just make them hate the game. Rules should be applied in tackling football at advanced age, where players understands the implications of tackling.
Coaches argue that banning tackling football for kids is being insensitive, and that there are other games like hockey and boxing which are equally injury prone is not being mature. Two wrongs cannot make a right what coaches and teachers would say is that all games that exposes our students, especially kids to injuries need to ban all together. They would first support the whole idea of banning tackling football for kids under the age of 14, and then become ambassadors for change to other risky games. The other argument that states that kids should be allowed to play tackling football, and introducing this game at teenage stage will make injuries worse because players will have to learn how to avoid tackles is not an holistic way to approach this issue.
Conclusion
Their point is, we should allow kids to injure themselves as they learn, so as to enable them to become hardy. The point is, most of these kids will never become professionals’ footballers. Why then should we subject them to injuries, which will affect their lives and yet it is just a recreational game? At the age of 14, kids would have matured enough to understand the rules of the game, and whether to pursue the game professionally or not. At this stage tackling should be allowed.