The Instigator
Pro (for)
6 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Australian's place too much emphasis on sport

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/10/2012 Category: Sports
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 6,314 times Debate No: 24208
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




Hi, my name is Mitchell Robinson and I will be speaking for the affirmative side. I will be analyzing and defining the topic of today's debate and providing some examples of Australia's excessive love affair with sport. In the second round of this debate will be addressing the media's excessive coverage of sport and the branding of sport players. In the third round, will then summarise my position on today's topic and provide rebuttal.
We all know that today's topic is that "Australian's place too much emphasis on sport", however, I would ask you all to consider what the crux, the core, of this debate is all about. The key phrase is "too much emphasis", so my whole argument will be based on proving to you that Australia does indeed place too much emphasis on sport. At this stage, I want to clarify and emphasise that I fully supports sport in all its many incarnations and not for one minute am I suggesting that sport is in any way, shape or form, bad for you. In fact, I'm totally supportive of sport and the many good things that come from our involvement in and enjoyment of it.
To illustrate the problem that Australia has with excessive devotion to sport and sporting events, one only has to look to the Melbourne Cup. Only in Australia could a horse race be so brazen to boldly proclaim itself as the "Race that Stops a Nation". If one were to look at America with their Kentucky Darby and the United Kingdom with its English Darby, both races with even more international esteem than our Melbourne Cup, we would see that neither race stops their nation.
My position in this debate can be better understood if we use the analogy of a see saw. Visualizing this analogy, one can picture sport on one end and all the other opportunities in life such as music, theatre, the arts and other cultural activities on the other end. In Australia, this see saw is dysfunctional, because of the gross weight on the sports side. There is a lack of balance because of our excessive emphasis on sport. We need to understand this opportunity cost for Australia and shift our emphasis to a more balanced approach, reaping the benefits of both sport and cultural activities.
To summarize, I want to be clear about my position in this debate: we are not against sport, we are speaking today about the fact that Australians place too much emphasis on sport. My opponent team will wax lyrical on about how healthy sport is, how it stimulates the mind and the body, we concur with all these benefits of sport, however, what we have an issue with is Australia's excessive obsession with sport, which has clearly progressed beyond justification.

"Let's contort the emphasis on sport."


I accept.

Before I begin, I'd just like to correct the grammar in my opponent's title - "Australians place too...." (not Australian's).

Now, instead of countering my opponent's opening arguments, I wish to ask - Australia puts too much emphasis on sport, compared to which other countries?

He notes that the Melbourne Cup is advertised as "the race that stops a nation". But cannot the same be said about the USA and the Superbowl? Or any nation that has reached the final of the football world cup?

It seems to me that Australia places no more emphasis on sporting events than any other country.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 1


Hello once again. For the second round of this debate I will be looking at media's excessive coverage of sport and the branding of sport players. However, before I begin I would like to present some rebuttal.
Firstly my opponent has asked "Australia puts too much emphasis on sport, compared to which other countries?" In reply, the topic of this debate is that "Australians place too much emphasis on sport" not Australia but in fact Australians, the citizens. In addition, we are debating that sport is over emphasized by Australians IN Australia. Please try to remain on topic as best as you can. I was merely pointing out the Melbourne Cup compared to other major sporting events to prove a point. Other countries in this debate do not have any relevance past this point.
Secondly the Melbourne Cup is not advertised as being "the race that stops a nation", it is the race that stops the nation. Citizens all over the country stop work to watch this race, which is essentially some horses running around a track. I being in high school know that when that race was being broadcasted my teacher wheeled in the television to watch the race. Workers all stop and watch it. It IS the race that stops the nation.
Continuing on I will now begin with my main arguments for this round.
To understand the media's excessive coverage of sport, one only has to look to the popular free to air television channels. For example, Channel seven, a major culprit in this issue, Channel Nine and Ten. Some of these free to air channel's shows, such as "The Footy Show" and "Wide World of Sports" span from between two to even seven hours at a time. This sparks the question "when is someone really going to watch seven or more hours of sport in one day?" and "when does too much sport become too much?" I, vouching for Pro, say it has already gone too far. In retrospect this is excluding the new free to air channel, One HD featuring 24/7 sport. On a weekly schedule, games nights are on the weekends, Monday to Tuesday has reporters and commentators looking at the weekend games and commenting, analyzing and reviewing, while Wednesday up to the next game, is networks recirculating line-up reports and the injuries of each team. All this is for one reason. Money. Channel Seven, seeing as they have the broadcasting rights to the A.F.L are just one of a few networks that are guilty of this. Keeping all this football information circulating in the system keeps the football fever coming back to the general population. Thus inducing more people to watch the Friday night football, meaning more profit. Now any person should be able to realize just how immense the media's coverage of sport is and should now understand why Australians place too much emphasis on sport.
Day in-day out, we see our favorite football stars-Buddy Franklin and Chris Judd to name a few, have their names in borders and titles across the TV networks. Each and every football player that features in a sport report highlight, is branded a superstar, a god, a living legend, the list goes on and for what reason? How can football players in their right mind take these new found titles into their stride, when essentially all they are doing is running around an oval shaped grass field chasing a red ball? Compare these so called legendary or superstar players to the real legends and life savers out there, they are nothing. When I say the real legends I'm talking about the people who actually save lives and contribute to the betterment of humanity. People like Professor Patrick McGorry and Doctor Fiona Wood who don't receive the credit they should. Professor Patrick McGorry is in fact the Executive director of Orygen Youth Health organization which works to prevent mental illnesses in young children. While Doctor Fiona Wood, being the pioneer of a new spray on skin technique, works to help serious burn victims recover and return to the normal life they had before their tragic incident. These two people, possibly saving dozens of lives in a year alone deserve the title of living legends, life savers, superstars and more. Not the average football player.
In conclusion, I hope now that you can see that Australians place too much emphasis on sport for the reasons that it is circulated and broadcasted on national television to a point at which it has become ridiculous and because so called sporting heroes receive more recognition than the Doctors and Professors that are actually making a difference.

"Let's contort the emphasis on sport"


My opponent has said that the Melbourne Cup literally stops every citizen in Australia and they all watch the race. This is a bold claim and one which he has made without the use of facts or statistics. I find it really hard to imagine that every person in Australia watches the Melbourne Cup.

Until my opponent starts backing up his arguments with facts, his statement, that Australians place too much emphasis on sport, cannot be taken as truth.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2


I will firstly present a summary of our debate so far and then will be providing strong rebuttal, which will without a doubt, place the my opponent on his toes.
In the first round I clearly outlined that we support sport entirely as it has many beneficial outcomes, however we are arguing that Australians, meaning the citizens all place too much emphasis on sport. As stated earlier an example of this is the Melbourne Cup, or as it is often called, the race that stops a nation. Since when did a horserace stop an entire nation? During this race, almost everyone stops everything or anything they are doing, no matter how important, all just to watch one horserace. In Melbourne they even go so far as to declare a Public Holiday on the day of the Melbourne Cup. Now that's over the top.
Another way in which Australians place too much emphasis on sport is through television and it's over excessive coverage of sport. I already stated that channels such as 7 and 9 are major culprits, as well as One HD, which is sport 24/7. During the winter sporting season, Aussie Rules Football is broadcasted every single night of the week, whether it is in the form of a game or in the form of an analysis of prior games or of games still to come. This is a constant recirculation of sport, week after week after week. Just think to yourselves for a moment, will it ever stop? No. We also have our so called sporting heroes and legends such as Chris Judd and Buddy Franklin for example, who receive more recognition than the people who actually deserve credit, whether they are lifesavers or someone who has just done something important in this world. This is absolutely ridiculous and furthermore outlines that Australians, place too much emphasis on sport.
I would now like to present my strong rebuttal which will no doubt bring my opponent to his knees.
My opponent has accused me of stating that the Melbourne Cup race literally stops the nation however I never, in reality stated that this race stops the entire nation. I would ask him to quote me on this but as i already know the answer, he cannot. he cannot quote my exact words when this one race stops the entire nation dead on their feet. It doesn't take a genius to know this. In addition, I would like to outline that thus far my opponent has given no main arguments against the topic in question, he has rebutted only one of my arguments, he has given no statistics nor proof of any kind, no personal experience was portrayed and on top of that he is taking the topic in question as my statement of which it is not. He should, in reality, be debating for his side against the topic not that the topic itself is wrong. Until my opponent gives some evidence or any arguments I believe the voters should just take what he has been saying thus far as complete dribble.
After listening to my arguments and the lack of arguments thus far from my opponent you can now see clearly that Australians truly do place too much emphasis on sport, as our thorough and detailed points have no doubt persuaded you to support my side of the argument.

"Let's contort the emphasis of sport!"


My opponent is now backing up his claim by citing a 24 hour sports channel.

This has nothing to do with the emphasis Australian people place on sport. We have those types of channels here in England. In America they have numerous channels devoted to sport.

My opponent has made a bold claim, but he has not provided any facts or statistics with which to back it up.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by TheOrator 6 years ago
Arguments went to Pro because while he made sufficient arguments, Con made less than a proper paragraph's worth of an argument against each page, and those little paragraphs didn't actually refute Pro's arguments. Because Con didn't properly refute Pro's arguments or show he doesn't fulfill his BoP (which is the sole job of the Con), he lost the arguments.

Conduct went to the Pro because of Con's lack of seriousness by providing pointless and increadibly short arguments that never actually rebutted anything. It was also extremely similar to trolling, but I can't prove that.

Sources went to Pro because he actually used them in the round (like a sports broadcasting network), while Con just made a short paragraph per round based on idle speculation rather than evidence.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by TheOrator 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in Comments