And because you're obviously naive enough to get pissed about it, I just might do it again.
First of all, being naive and being easily irritated by someone else's ignorance bear no or little relationship.Second, I'm hardly pissed about it. I'm just advising you not to make yourself look like even more of a fool by attempting to make a statement regarding a subject in which you are completely uninformed. It's for your own good, really, but unfortunately it seems that your own pride, and nationalism in a sense, won't let you take my advice.
Someone informed about American football would know that the pads do little to reduce the pain of getting hit, and that they are there only to increase safety; this increased safety, of course, being necessary thanks to increased size and strength of players as well as a different nature to the game than similar sports. This person would also remember how just a few weeks ago someone died in a routine tackle in ordinary football, which is the latest in a long list of tragic injuries that end careers and lives of the players. Clearly, the person would note, the pads of American football are there for a reason.
Furthermore, this good friend of ours would realize that the rules are in the game as a result of potential excessive violence, and the lack of such rules in a sport would only mean that the sport is less violent and less dangerous than American football. If such rules, which lessen the excitement for fans, weren't necessary, the league obviously wouldn't have them. On the same line of thought, the person remembers that there have been many attempts to ban American football due to its roughness; the most notable being Roosevelt's attempt after seeing a picture of a bloodied player (this attempt led to the foward pass being legalized--a monumental event in the sport).
This person's mind now wanders to other sports; thinking about a 'problem' that has such an obvious answer isn't all that interesting. In reaching basketball, he remembers that there is a controversy about age limits in the league, and thus he is reminded of yet another think that he must note when considering the violence of the two sports: that the NFL has strict age limits on its rookie players. The League does this for an obvious reason, of course, and this reason is the simple fact that until one's body has completely matured, he or she simply cannot handle playing proffessionally. The new player wouldn't survive.
Of course, he's also realize that merely watching a sport is cannot give a person a good feel for what the players go through on the field. A thinking person, such as our hypothetical friend here, knows that it is best to play the sports oneself, or at least talk to people who have played. It is only then can a person even start to compare the toughness or violence of each sport.
But since this someone is not you, further elaboration would be meaningless. You would obviously prefer to wallow in your own pride and nationalism rather than free yourself from blind ignorance. But hey, who am I to judge?
All that said, there's nothing like attending a Nebraska football game in Lincoln, Nebraska. The enjoyment felt there cannot possibly reproduced anywhere except in a major sports arena (and even then it is rare).
★ ★ ★ ★ ★[This message has been edited by Meteora (edited 04-20-2005 @ 03:57 AM).]