The moral outrage over Run It Straight competitions is a tricky one. 

As more and more young men ran at each other head-on and tried to knock each other out, as the injuries piled up, the outrage was palpable. Lots of pearl clutching and horror. 

The reaction from some rugby stars and sporting legends was more nuanced, for obvious reasons. 

They also run full steam ahead at one another on a Saturday, with great risk of personal injury and even death. Certainly, the chance of broken bones and concussion. 

They do this because A. They enjoy it. B. It's often all they've ever known. And C. Presumably, because it pays well. 

And that's the problem with the outrage over Run It Straight. 

They had a guy in the news yesterday who won $20 thousand in trials held in Auckland. He's booked a spot in a final in Dubai. The money, he says, is putting clothes on his kids backs. 

He said this:

"We got to pay off some debts and stock up the fridges and the cupboards, food for our little ones, especially with the economy and stuff like that here in New Zealand. Nothing's cheap these days."

He saw it as a couple of hours work with a huge payday. 

I happen to think if somebody wants to play a high-risk sport like rugby, or UFC, or anything with horses, then good on them. It's their life, I'm not here to judge. 

The question for the rest of society —and this is what our listeners most often email me about with Run It Straight— is ACC. 

To qualify for ACC, your injury has to be the result of an accident. An accident is basically something you didn't intend to happen, happening. A mistake. 

Run It Straight is bloody dangerous but I think ultimately, its injuries are accidents, like rugby or horse riding. 

The system doesn't judge based on the threat of injury, just whether it's an accidental one or not.