k might be in thefuture. All three of those theories relate closely to the role of the fighter in sport and why it isthat he does commit the acts of violence. When leagues such as the National Football League (NFL) or the National Hockey League (NHL) areasked to try and remove the violence from their sport, they are hesitant because it is not what the fanswant. "Bryant and Zillman report that television viewers enjoy NFL plays more when they are rough andviolent" (McPherson 294). Why should these leagues remove the violence that is occurring if they are making money andkeeping people employed. The fans of the games want to see these situations and eliminating the fightingaspect would hurt the support. When I watch a hockey game or any other sporting event with contact,there is nothing better than seeing a good fight take place. "One of the best-selling videos in parts ofthe Northeastern United States has been a collection of the best fights in the NHL" (McPherson 294). Even former NHL president Clarence Campbell felt that the violence taking place in his sport wascalled for and was reluctant to remove the fighting and the body contact because he knew that it is whatthe majority of hockey fans want.Fighting is a well-established safety valve for players. If violence ceases to exist, it will not bethe same game. Insofar as fighting is part of the show, we certainly sell it. We do not promote it.We tolerate it and we bring it under disciplinary control which we believe satisfies the public (Snyder201). Its better that the violence take place between two willing combatants such as in sports than ina situation involving spousal abuse where the majority of the times the female is being attacked againsther consent. Allowing people not to be able vent their frustrations through sport in my mind wouldincrease the violence that is happening away from the playing field. It is a known fact th...
