Ladies Football League?

Although I'm a Brit, I do enjoy watching American Football and have wondered about the possibility of having the opportunity to play it myself one day; but not if this is the outcome: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ukV86PAXKGA

No, the L doesn't stand for 'Ladies' but rather 'Lingerie'. Can someone tell me if this is really serious or someone's (I am presuming a man here) idea of a joke? Indeed, when one of the rules is that all players must wear low cut bra and short briefs, one wonders whether there is any point in having the helmets and shoulder pads if the rest of the body is open for contact.

The controversy raised from the clothing regulations for beach volleyball is one thing but this really takes the biscuit.

For me the issue is about the part that clothing plays in sport. Surely it should be for the benefit of the player not for the benefit of the spectators. If someone asked me to play rugby in similar attire I certainly wouldn't think that they are interested in my athletic skill and ability. And on the basis that these women are selected for their physique not their ability to play football, it makes a mockery of the game itself. And reflects a sad state of affairs if this is the only way that women's sport becomes viable as entertainment.

"a bunch of women are threatening to break a men's record"

After win No. 88 in a row was in the books, Geno Auriemma finally let loose: He thinks some people are rooting against his record-setting players because of their gender.

Auriemma

"I just know there wouldn't be this many people in the room if we were chasing a woman's record," the Connecticut coach said Sunday near the end of his postgame news conference. "The reason everybody is having a heart attack the last four or five days is a bunch of women are threatening to break a men's record, and everybody is all up in arms about it."
For the rest of the story, go here.

I am hopeful that they will break the record, and receive the abundance of recognition and praise they deserve for their sustained display of excellence.

Philosophy of Sport in Non-English-Speaking Countries

The new issue of the Journal of the Philosophy of Sport contains a special section on this topic. The following countries/regions of the world are covered: Nordic countries, Japan, Chinese-speaking regions, Slavonic countries, Germany, and Latin America. This is an excellent opportunity for understanding where the discipline has come from, where it is, and where it might be headed in these parts of the world.

Football, Fame, and Fortune

This paper was just published in the online journal, The Other Journal, and is available here:
http://bit.ly/eucRRX

Here's a short excerpt:

The external goods that are available through participating in football (and many other practices) include fame, fortune, status, social influence, and power. Football players at the professional level often acquire a fortune and some achieve a significant amount of fame. These goods are external to football because one could play football and even achieve excellence in the sport without receiving any of these goods. In fact, in the past this was true of many of the great players who excelled prior to the escalation of salaries and media coverage of the sport. They experienced football’s internal goods but not the external ones. This shows that the external goods are not essential to football.

What is the significance of the difference between the internal and external goods when considering the relationship between football and celebrity? As I will demonstrate, in football (as well as many other sports), the pursuit of the external goods by individual players can undermine the pursuit of the internal goods of the sport, some of which are grounded in a Christian understanding of the nature of God.

What's wrong with a potential NFL lockout?

According to the organization American Rights at Work, plenty.  I received the following in an email today from this organization:

"The NFL is preparing a 'lock out' next season unless football players agree to its demands.

If there's no football season, it would impact 150,000 jobs – and cause more than $140 million in lost revenue – in each and every city with an NFL team.

Local economies will be devastated. All because of the NFL's greed.

It's easy to see how crushing a lockout would be... Picture a 60,000-seat football stadium... EMPTY. Now picture all the bars, restaurants, hotels, t-shirt shops, hot dog carts surrounding the stadium... CLOSED. And all of the stadium's janitors, vendors, and support staff... OUT OF WORK.

But the NFL and team owners don't care, because they'll still make billions. They've already signed TV contracts that will pay out even if the season is canceled.

The NFL owners' greed is unbelievable. In ditching an agreement that was working just fine, the owners actually want players to make absurd, unjustified concessions around wages and benefits – like taking away ALL healthcare benefits from players and their families.

It's only fair that NFL owners pick up the tab for these health costs when players risk their lives for the game. An average football player's career lasts only three and a half seasons – but the injuries they face on the job aren't short-lived at all. Tackles, hits, and blocks result in intense physical trauma, impacting players' health, well-being, and medical expenses far into retirement."

One area of disagreement I have with this is that the greed of the players is not addressed. Surely it isn't only the greed of the owners in play here?  However, it does seem to me that one of the wrong-making properties of a lockout is the negative economic impact in each city with an NFL team. And it does seem that healthcare benefits are obligatory, given that most players don't have long careers, with some not adequately prepared for life after football (for more on this, see Racing the Sunset, by Scott Tinley).  Even though one might argue that the players make more than enough money to cover health care expenses, I still think that healthcare benefits should be offered by the owners, perhaps as a matter of principle.

Moreover, I believe that the wealthy, which includes the owners and players, have an obligation to those whose livelihood depends on the season happening.  Whatever responsibilities there are for promoting the common good, it arguably includes avoiding a lockout, in part because of the negative impact of this on the lives of other human beings.