Rebuttal argument-jdormann

American football players have been plagued with concussions for years. Typically, these concussions occur during tackles. The padding that players wear gives them a false sense of security and some even use their head as a tackling tool. On the other hand, rugby players do not suffer as many concussions, but they wear no padding. The tackling technique rugby players use is safer for the head and spine. There are some football coaches and teams that have adopted the rugby-style of tackling, but it is not practical for all teams to do this.

Football requires a team to move the ball a minimum of 10 yards for a first down and they have four tries to do this. Each and every yard in a football game matters. Stopping an opponent one yard can make or break a game. There is no first down in rugby, so there is nothing bad about giving up a couple yards. Rugby players can sacrifice yards and it will not effect the game. Of course, the team wants to get the ball to the end zone, but they can take as many tries as they need to.

In a rugby match, the attacking player will not try to squeeze every last inch out of a run because it will not effect the game, and they do not want to risk getting injured. Football players need to push for the extra inches and get the most out of every play. The battle for that extra little bit can cause injuries and unsafe play. Although it may be dangerous at times, football players must hold the attacking team to the minimum amount of yards on every play. The tackling technique football players employ is to stop the runner as soon as possible, with them gaining the least amount of yards. This requires tremendous force to be output by the defender and does not always result in safe play. The risk of personal safety is a price that football players pay to be good athletes. If a player is giving up the slightest amount of yardage, they are not doing their job to the best of their ability.

When rugby players attempt to make a tackle, they are risking their body without padding, and are careful and follow the proper technique. Players risk gruesome injuries in a tackle that could be prevented by using proper technique. The rugby tackle is a wrap technique that is not aimed at stopping the attacker immediately, but by safely stopping the attacker and keeping the defender in a safe position. It eliminates the use of the head in the tackle and does not force excessive pressure on the spine. Living With Sports Injuries,a book written by Elizabeth Shimer Bowers and Clifford D. Stark, reads, “Players frequently experience concussions, as well as neck and shoulder injuries, usually as a result of open field tackling.” Open field tackling can mean high speed collisions and poor technique. When an attacker is running full speed and the defender must make the stop, they will do it by any means necessary and not pay attention to technique. The lack of a safe technique often leads to injuries. The injuries that football players suffer from include fractured bones, dislocations, concussions, and “stingers”, the loss of feeling and inability to move the arm.

Although the fate of a football game may be decided from a few yards, the impact of how players tackle can leave a mark on them forever. Football has a major concussion problem because of how they tackle, and the mindset of the players during the game. Every inch matters to them, but not every brain cell. The rugby style of tackling is much safer for the brain. Rugby players still suffer from concussions, but not nearly as many as football players. The rugby-style tackling technique may result in the loss of a couple yards, or even the loss of a game. The sacrifice of losing one game can save a player the sacrifice of destroying their brain for the rest of their life.

2 thoughts on “Rebuttal argument-jdormann”

  1. You’ll need a References section before this post is complete, JD. At the moment, it would contain a bibliographic entry for just the Bowers, Stark source.


  2. I have two primary observations, JD.

    1) We could really use a detailed description of NFL “tackling technique” and rugby “tackling technique.” You sort of describe football’s “open field” tackling, and you sort of distinguish it from rugby’s “wrap technique,” but the concepts are so essential to your argument that your readers can draw no conclusions about your persuasiveness with a clear understanding of the concepts.

    2) You appear to be distinguishing between the two sports, two tackling techniques, two injury profiles, without making a recommendation. But that’s not entirely clear. You seem to be saying football players could learn a lot from studying rugby, and reduce injuries by adopting rugby’s tackling techniques. But at the same time, you’re making the case that the tackler’s objectives are radically different, and that therefore there’s no point recommending that NFL players tackle like rugby players, and no sense at all in suggesting that they play without pads as a way of making them more careful with their bodies.

    That choice between recommending and NOT recommending that football reform itself to be more like rugby is a decision you have to make. So far, you’re only observing differences. Before you’re finished, you’ll have to draw conclusions. Your two most obvious choices are:

    A. Football and rugby are such different games that the lessons of rugby cannot be employed to reduce injury in football.
    B. Football has already started to adopt safer tackling techniques already familiar to rugby players (for example, by outlawing helmet-first tackles), and it will continue to adopt safer methods of taking down offensive players as it tries to respond to public outrage at the epidemic of brain injuries caused by “smashmouth” defense.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: