At which age should young adults be to play violent sports
Debate Rounds (5)
To the audience, I must reiterate my contention: In these so-called "violent" sports, there is no serious harm to the players that could affect them more than temporarily. In football, ice hockey, and other sports a significant amount of safety equipment is worn to make sure these problems don't happen. Furthermore, kids are slower and not as strong as they are in later years, so the risk of serious injury is also reduced by the fact that they aren't moving as fast or with the same amount of force as kids who are going/have gone through puberty. In fact, the real danger is in high-school and in college sports, where we have seen serious concussions severely affect these players for the rest of their lives. However, I must remind the audience that my opponent contends that these sports should be restricted to *youth* leagues, not high-school or college leagues.
Thank you for your time, and I urge you vote against this resolution.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Tie. Both had proper conduct throughout the debate. S&G - Con. Pro had a few spelling and grammatical errors in this debate whereas Con had none of the sort. Arguments - Con. Con was able to effectively point out the flaws in Pro's arguments, which were really just assumptions with no supporting evidence given. What Pro needed to do was provide articles or studies showing the permanent effects injuries could have. By not doing so, it left Con open to challenge these assumptions and he did so. Due to Con showing the flaws in Pro's arguments, and Pro never really overcoming those challenges, Con wins arguments. Sources - Tie. Neither utilized sources in this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.