Hence why I referenced fishing, hunting, and skeet shooting because people could make they case those "sports" have a very low (if any) "physical" requirement to participate in them. At least the "physical" requirement to participate in those "sports" could be on par with the "physical" requirement to play a video game. Darts, pool, and billiards are some other examples of "sports" that require minimal "physical" effort to play.

In order to play any video game, there is at least some "physical" requirement with the hands, wrists, maybe the arms, and maybe the upper torso depending on how much moving the person does while playing a video game. When I was younger and used to play sports video games, it wasn't uncommon for me to tilt the controller at angle or even my upper torso at angle (like a motorcyclist would with his/her bike during a race) whenever I played a racing game. Basically, I would lean in on turns thinking it would help my vehicle even though it probably had no impact on the game itself.

If you owned a Wii and played the bowling, tennis, or golf game, then you had to move whichever arm you were holding the controller as if you were actually bowling the ball, hitting the ball with your racket, or swinging the gulf club. If you owned the original Nintendo and played Duck Hunt (or similar games), then you would often move the gun controller around so you can shoot the duck (or dog laughing at you).

Honestly, I can see why someone would think that playing video games is not a "sport." However, since it requires movement of body parts, then I do understand why people may consider that a "physical" requirement.
[Post edited by VTHokie2000 at 07/01/2019 4:46PM]