3 . Growing up in the 80s as a child with lots of siblings, I played in the street until dark or until we were called for dinner. We had an amazing community of neighbours. However, one elderly neighbour hated us. Every time the football went into her garden, she would confiscate it – and then pop the ball. When she collected over 20 deflated footballs, she would take them down to the police station and complain. To her, at least, free and active children were a pest and a disgrace.
Actually, at that time, nothing but one stopped us playing: the shattering of a window and the scream of a parent coming outside to tell us off. On reflection, I was probably part of the last generation of children to play outside regularly. Now in London, the estate I live in is covered with historic signs saying: “No ball games”.
The signs function as a play ban for children. Even during the summer, there are only a couple of rebels who dare to play football on the street. They get my nod and a kick of the ball back when it comes in my direction.
The problem is, many people don’t know that these signs are not enforceable by law: they are simply a request from local housing associations.
Of course, if people are kicking the ball against someone’s house or out on the streets making noise late at night, it would be considered criminal damage and antisocial behaviour – and quite right. But most of the time the signs are just preventing children from playing.
The London Sport charity has recommended that these signs are removed. I agree - let’s burn them all. But I do think it is simplistic to imagine banning the signs will combat a national obesity epidemic.
The Active Lives Survey shows that just 47% of children in England are getting the recommended 60 minutes or more of sport and physical activity a day. Removing “No ball games” signs doesn’t mean that the other 53% of children will feel motivated to venture outside and play.
The Active Lives Survey also suggests that boys are more likely to be active than girls. Perhaps boys are still given more activity opportunities. The Lionesses(英格兰女足)win at the Euros football tournament highlighted the lack of opportunities for girls in football and inequitable sports curriculums in schools.
Children and young people of black, Asian and other minority ethnicities are least likely to be active. Perhaps because racism in sport is alive and kicking?
In addition, access to sport and physical activity is a social justice issue that depends on location and financial circumstances. For a child from an economically disadvantaged background, who lives in a high-rise flat with little green space around, the costs and practicalities of participating in sport are prohibitive. For example, a weekend tennis court costs anywhere between £10 and £27, without travel or equipment.
So, while we can burn all the “No ball games” signs in the country, the real barrier to combating low activity levels in children is social inequality. What really needs to happen to get our children moving?
1. What does the underlined word “confiscate” in Paragraph 1 mean in the context?
| A．Collect something as a hobby | B．Take something away as a punishment |
| C．Destroy something due to being annoyed | D．Remove and make something disappear |
2. Why does the author believe that removing “No ball games” signs may not effectively combat low activity levels in children?
| A．Because children prefer indoor activities. |
| B．Because boys are more active than girls. |
| C．Because access to physical activity is influenced by social inequality. |
| D．Because of the lack of interest in sports among children. |
3. What conclusion does the author draw regarding the relationship between “No ball games” signs and low activity levels in children?
| A．Removing the signs will directly address the issue of low activity levels. |
| B．Social inequality is the primary barrier to increasing children’s activity levels. |
| C．Boys are more likely to play sports than girls due to cultural biases. |
| D．Racism in sports is a significant factor in preventing children from being active. |
4. What is the main idea of the passage?
| A．The author reminisces about their childhood and the changes in outdoor play. |
| B．The ineffectiveness of “No ball games” signs in encouraging physical activity among children. |
| C．The impact of social inequality on children’s access to physical activity. |
| D．The author’s support for removing “No ball games” signs but recognition of deeper issues. |
