he future. All three of those theories relate closely to the role of thefighter in sport and why it is that he does commit the acts of violence. When leagues suchas the National Football League (NFL) or the National Hockey League (NHL) are askedto try and remove the violence from their sport, they are hesitant because it is not what thefans want. "Bryant and Zillman report that television viewers enjoy NFL plays more whenthey are rough and violent" (McPherson 294). Why should these leagues remove the violence that is occurring if they are makingmoney and keeping people employed. The fans of the games want to see these situationsand eliminating the fighting aspect would hurt the support. When I watch a hockey gameor any other sporting event with contact, there is nothing better than seeing a good fighttake place. "One of the best-selling videos in parts of the Northeastern United States hasbeen a collection of the best fights in the NHL" (McPherson 294). Even former NHLpresident Clarence Campbell felt that the violence taking place in his sport was called forand was reluctant to remove the fighting and the body contact because he knew that it iswhat the majority of hockey fans want. Fighting is a well-established safety valve for players. If violence ceases to exist, itwill not be the same game. Insofar as fighting is part of the show, we certainly sell it. Wedo not promote it. We tolerate it and we bring it under disciplinary control which webelieve satisfies the public (Snyder 201). Its better that the violence take place betweentwo willing combatants such as in sports than in a situation involving spousal abuse wherethe majority of the times the female is being attacked against her consent. Allowing peoplenot to be able vent their frustrations through sport in my mind would increase the violencethat is happening away from the playing field. It is a known fact that sports does keep kidsoff the street and away from gangs which is why yo...
