Wow! What kind of sports are you watching? You make it sound like every sporting event is a gladiator match that's fought to the death, with the crowd cheering for more blood-lust.
Sorry, but I just don't see that happening. Is there an occasional fight that breaks out among (usually drunk) fans? Yes. Do teams compete on the field and are there fans that have a preferred team that they want to see win the competition? Of course. Does this mean that it's necessarily violent or even that the other competitors are necessarily an "enemy?" Not at all.
Does such a competition make the event worse than a coercive state that harasses, extorts, assaults, imprisons, and murders individuals on a routine basis? Not at all.
I get that some people just don't like sports, but trying to characterize sports as the problem with society is absurd. And in an anarchist society, who's going to forcibly prevent athletes from competing with each other? Who's going to prevent people from watching such competitions and being entertained by them? The fact of the matter is, athletic competition isn't going anywhere...probably ever. If nobody's rights are being violated, then it's not anyone's concern. If a rabid fan wants to attack someone, then they can be dealt with accordingly. I just don't see how someone participating in sports or watching them for entertainment is my business. They can do what they want and I'll be OK.
That's not my point. I don't think sports are bad. There is a lot of value in team sports. What I'm saying is that rallying a whole city behind sports fanaticism is philosophically incompatible to volutaryism, which I also think is good in many ways but also flawed. Saying that in an ideal world, people can follow the NAP and not infringe on other people's right to their own activities and beliefs is as silly as liberals believing in a communist utopia.
Competition, coercion, and deep personal connections are necessary for human beings. There is no steady state equilibrium. I think the world needs people with voluntaryist anarchist opinions, yet at the same time, it will never work for the whole world.
The religious nature of team sports I discussed in the previous post was not entirely an attack on either religion or team sports. They are simply inherently connected mindsets that makes us human, for better and for worse. There's a cost and benefit to such behaviors. For every cost that you list for statism, there's a counterbalancing benefit. For every cost of anarchy, there is also a counterbalancing benefit. Government is complex network of relationships. Human beings are largely irrational, and if you've ever played the telephone game, you know that information gets distorted the further away you are from the epicenter. That is the cause of conflicts in all relationships. Between 2 people, it could be a fight between spouses. When the network is bigger, like in a government, the miscommunications affect many more nodes, so the effects are amplified and could lead to deaths.
Until we can mind meld, we cannot solve the problem of imperfect information. What anarchists do is pointing out the superficial problems without offering any deep insights or solutions.
Don't just observe what happens as an immediate effect of an action. If that's all that matters, then everyone would have been libertarians already for thousands of years. When you realize that consequences of actions become extremely complicated when you expand the implications out 10 steps, you start to see the intrinsic connections between statism, team sports, religions, and many many more ideas. Now add in a random error parameter to every step, and you start to see that anarchy isn't as elegant and ideal of a proposal as people make it out to be.
Therefore, I can lean anarchist and personally enjoy playing sports while having this view of global dynamics. I consciously avoid confirmation bias.