is sport a cure or a cause of agression in society
... years. Even if evidence of instinctive behaviour was presented, questions would still remain unanswered. Why rates of aggression vary from one group to another? Why is aggression highly correlated with certain social conditions? The instinct theory assumes that all sports are effective outlets for aggression. However not all sports provide such opportunities for release of aggression. Sports such as cricket and golf do not provide such opportunities as sports like rugby and football, and even in contact sports such as these the opportunities may be few. In the eyes of someone looking to exert aggression, these activities would be a poor substitute for actual violent behaviour. A different theory which supports sport as a cure for violence is the link between frustration and aggression. Some people claim that aggression is always a result of frustration, and if playing or watching sport can help people release frustrations, then it is less likely that aggression and violence will be a part of society. It is popularly believed that sport participation teaches people to control aggressive responses in the face of defeat. This ethic is believed to be taken through life, and learning to endure such negative conditions in sports will enable people to behave non-aggressively despite any adversity they may encounter. However, even if it could be shown that athletes learn to control their aggressive behaviour in a game situation, it would be hard to say for definite that this would carry on for the rest of their life. Despite the arguments supporting sport as a cure for violence in society, and although they have face value, there is no evidence that involvement in sport does much beyond making us physically tired and although this may calm a frustrated individual, we should not associate being tired with being non-aggressive. Sport as a cause The argument that sport acts as a cause of violence in society is based on 2 beliefs. The main argument is that sport, whether it be participating or watching, creates and builds up frustrations which can lead to violence. This argument is supported by the amount of violence seen in professional football today and as a spectator sport, the now worldwide problem of football hooliganism. There is also the belief that in certain sports violence often leads to success e.g. rugby, therefore violence is reinforced and linked with the feeling of success, which will make the individual more likely to act violent to achieve goals in society. When participating in sport, whether it is at an amateur level or professional level, violent behaviour and intimidation is often learned and have become widely used as strategies to use against opponents and both can be used to win games, but do violent strategies learned in sports carry over to the rest of life? It would seem that most athletes can differentiate between the playing field and the ’street’, and which behaviour is appropriate. Society has taught them that the aggressive strategies used in their sports are not appropriate in a social setting such as a café or bar or simply on the streets. However some athletes do carry violent off-the-field reputations and in many cases these are linked with violent reputations on-field as well. A prime example of this is in football and the behaviour of Dennis Wise, then of Chelsea and now playing in the colours of Milwall. To date Dennis Wise has made 625 league appearances for his various clubs and in that time has received 63 yellow cards and 8 red cards (Football 365). Compared to striker Gary Linekar who received one yellow card throughout his whole career, Dennis Wise portrays an image of a footballer who plays with an aggressive manner. This aggressive manner has also been exposed off the field as well. In 1995 Wise was convicted of assaulting a taxi driver and was jailed for three months, although the 3 month jail sentence for assault and criminal damage was later overturned on appeal, with the original charge still standing. This shows that Dennis Wise has carried over into society the violent behaviour he learned from his sport. Athletes in certain sports often talk about wanting to injure opponents enough to take them out of the game and also have an effect on their personal life. Recently Roy Keane of Manchester United publicised his autobiography in which he stated that he set out with the intent of harming Alfe Inge Haaland in a tackle which has ended Haalands career. Although Roy Keane is now facing legal action from Alfe Inge Haaland, no criminal action was taken. If this assault had happened in public, by a member of the public, would there be the same outcome? If a similar assault had happened on the streets the individual would have been arrested and charged with assault, so why should Roy Keane get away with it just because he is a high-profile football player. Even at the amateur level of the game, if an assault takes place criminal charges usually follow, however it is often seen in professional football that an assault worthy of a criminal charge goes relatively unpunished. This leads on to the issue of does viol...