MARCOS: Did you hear that in last night's soccer game, Matthew got his third concussion this season? He thinks it's just a risk that's part of the game, but I'm not so sure it has to be.
ARIKA: I heard! You would think the refs would do a better job enforcing the existing rules. Doing that would give kids a better chance of not getting hurt.
Remember last year when the ref wasn't paying attention, and Emma was tripped?
MARCOS: That's the problem/ The rules aren't good enough. There's been so much research done on concussions. Based on doctgrs findings, the school really needs to make changes to the rules.
ARIKA: I'm not sure that's a good idea. The way socceris played is what makes it exciting. If there are new rules, the game would change and it would lose players and spectators. Last year, they tried to change basketball rules by lowering the number of fouls. Players were afraid to foul out, so people got bored with the games.
MARCOS: 1 disagree. Football hasn't lost any fans or players since a new rule to protect against condussions started in 2018. It's now illegal for a player to lower his head before a tackle. This lowered concussions by 45%. If something can be done to keep kids safe from concussions, it should be.
Which statement best summarizes Marcos' claim?
• Football rules are more effective at protecting athletes fróm concussions.
• The current rules of soccer already protect players from injury.
• Concussions are a risk when playing sports that athletes are willing to take.
• Soccer rules should be changed to protect players from concussions.