Money’s nice and all but what about safety, isn’t football a safer alternative?
One of the biggest arguments against rugby is that the games lack of pads and helmets puts players in a plight. However, the pads football players use cause far more harm than good. They create The Peltzman Effect; the tendency of people, when given safety precautions, to act dangerously. For example: When football players wear pads they are more likely to hit harder than if they didn’t have pads on. In fact, some link this back to the growing rate of concussions and injuries in football--leading to coaches and facilities demanding change in techniques and apparel. Recently college football teams have resorted to recruiting rugby coaches and players to teach traditional rugby tackling techniques in order to decrease and prevent these injuries. So, for those arguing football is safer than rugby, it’s
not.
Athleticism is yet another perk of the international sport. Like most sports it requires mental preparation and patience but unlike most, university-level and professional-level players are expected to be at peak physical condition 24/7. Even U16 (under-16) players are expected to train year round at intense conditions according to The Sports Science Institute of South Africa. Plus, high-level games are 80 minutes long with a ten minute break; during this time players on both teams are constantly moving, there’s never a second where one position doesn’t play a crucial role. Although these conditions may not seem ideal for some they’re perfect for keeping athletes in shape during the off-season of other sports.