Home Latest Frysinger: Football players are not lab rats

Frysinger: Football players are not lab rats

0
Frysinger: Football players are not lab rats

[ad_1]

High school football is back….or is it?

There will be a lot of pressure put on parents to allow their kid to play. I think it’s important to give parents some cover if they choose to opt out.

Football players want to play the game they love.

If they are allowed to play, they will play.

But…

Virtually every health professional around the world has advised us that we should social distance to be safe. And yet for some reason we believe football players are invincible gladiators immune to COVID-19. Football players are not lab rats.

There’s already evidence that “experiments” with football at the college level and some high schools has ignited COVID hot spots. Testing is a huge safety issue that isn’t even close to being resolved. Professional athletes are tested every day; aren’t our high school kids worthy of this precaution? Taking temperatures is only a superficial and unreliable way to identify a contagious COVID carrier. And something else to keep in mind, if this experiment goes bad, then it’s another reason for those who argue that football is already too dangerous.

Then there’s the problem of the fluctuating criteria coaches are being confronted with. For example, just days ago there was talk of a spring football option. That sounded like a reasonable solution that allows for a shortened season that would accommodate other sports. And it would be played after a vaccine would likely be available. One other big advantage to a spring season is the number of spectators wouldn’t be limited. I’m not sure I’ll be allowed to watch my grandson play in the fall season. But just as coaches began planning for a spring season it fell apart, at least for now.

We all want things to get back to normal, but today there is no normal. It’s difficult enough to plan for a safe competitive football program in the best of times. We’re asking coaches to do something that’s almost impossible.

On the positive side, football is a contact sport played outdoors that mitigates SOME of the danger in the transmission of this extremely contagious virus. But there are other indoor components of the game that can’t be ignored.

Team meetings together. (In good weather they could be held outside, and you could make a case for Zoom meetings. Both are poor options at best.)

Watching film together. (Logistics nightmare.)

Dressing together in the locker room. (Another logistics nightmare.)

Showering together. (Probably just a college issue.)

Halftime together. (Those halftime meetings under the goal posts only work for Pop Warner football programs.)

Riding in a bus together. (Can this be done safely?)

Socializing together. (Post game social distancing would be difficult to monitor.)

These things are as much a part of football as the time spent on the field.

Football is a team sport; that makes football exactly the opposite of social distancing. If you modify football to make it safe enough to play, then football will lose its identity.

Every family has their own set of personal risk factors that weigh into their decision on whether or not to allow their son to participate in football this year. Let’s keep that in mind.

Lastly, don’t construe what I’m saying here as a criticism of parents who decide that allowing their son to play is the best option for them. In fact, one of my grandsons will be allowed to play football and the other won’t. I just don’t want football to become another wedge that divides us.

Football means too much to me to see that happen.

Terry Frysinger is a Frankfort resident.

Follow @Jamescook14 on Twitter.



[ad_2]

Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here