Donate SIGN UP

How "sporting" Is Sport These Days ?

Avatar Image
Canary42 | 12:44 Fri 29th Jun 2018 | Sport
20 Answers
Is sport really "sporting" any more, at the highest levels. The latest farce being the last 10 minutes of the Japan v Poland World Cup match.

But there are other examples of course (e.g. F1 drivers pranging rivals, Cricketers sandpapering the ball)

It appears that once Big Money gets involved, corruption and cynicism arrives in a big way.

Not the best role models for today's youngsters I feel.

Gravatar

Answers

1 to 20 of 20rss feed

Avatar Image
I keep mentioning the badminton at London 2012. I'm bringing it up again. Two teams were both trying to lose a match, as coming second would give them an easier path through the knockout stages. They were both DQ'd and rightly so. People have paid a lot of money to watch matches and they deserve to see a proper contest. Chuck the wasters out if they're not trying.
09:37 Sat 30th Jun 2018
sadly there's very little that is 'sporting' in football these days, every two minutes someone is trying to con the ref ...

Ball tampering in cricket is a new thing?
Sport is about winning and always was. There have been examples of bad sportsmanship through out the history of sport it's just got more coverage in the modern world.
// It appears that once Big Money gets involved, corruption and cynicism arrives in a big way. //

a bit like politics really

cicero once said ( backed the wrong party in the civil war) no one should profit from the Roman State,
erm yes - he was sequestered on a farm later on
Once big money is involved it's no longer sport.
The problem there was the daft rule about yellow cards etc being used to decide places.
Although it was unwholesome it was perfectly understandable.
In 1982 W Germany and Austria stitched up their gane with each other to ensure they both qualified. Again reprehensible, but on the other hand teams play to win to progress. If you need take no risks to do it then why bother?
I keep mentioning the badminton at London 2012. I'm bringing it up again. Two teams were both trying to lose a match, as coming second would give them an easier path through the knockout stages. They were both DQ'd and rightly so. People have paid a lot of money to watch matches and they deserve to see a proper contest. Chuck the wasters out if they're not trying.
I'm not sure about "these days".
I remmeber the Bodyline series from the 1930s; the dreadful fouling in the 1966 world cup; the drug cheating that was rife in the 1970s/80s especially by East Germans/Soviets but also Ben Johnson, 1904 Olympic games when the marathon winner was found to have travelled almsot half the route by car; 1981 Trevor Chappel bowled an underarm delivery when the batsman needed a 6 to win; Francis Lee's diving for penalties circa 1970; plus lots more
The issue of manipulating results to ensure an easier progression is simply solved. The problem stems from having pre-determined draws. Competitions such as the World Cup should have no "Round Robin" formats but should be a simple knock-out. Once you lose you're out. This would have the added advantage of requiring only 16 matches to eliminate 16 teams instead of the ridiculous total of 48 needed under the current World Cup format. It would also reduce the ludicrous length of tedious TV coverage required. Added to that each round should be followed by a random draw (as with the FA Cup). Quite simple really if only a bit of thought was applied.
‘It would also reduce the ludicrous length of tedious TV coverage required’

The TV coverage which pours £millions into the sport, you mean?
You must be reading my mind,new judge!!
Question Author
/// The problem stems from having pre-determined draws. [etc]///

Would you apply your proposed [random draw] principles to Wimbledon too NJ - same tedious extensive TV coverage after all.
"Would you apply your proposed [random draw] principles to Wimbledon too NJ"

Yes. No seedings. A simple draw to pair the 128 participants and a draw after each round. If the top two favourites are paired in round one, tough luck.
"The TV coverage which pours £millions into the sport,..."

Which pours millions into the pockets of the participants, you mean (bearing in mind that some football league clubs in the UK disperse over 95% - some up to 99% - of their turnover in the form of "wages").
-- answer removed --
I can't believe how many asthmatics do really well at cycle racing.
Hopefully someone could zap the spammer at 20:31
I want to know how FF 'remembers' the Bodyline Series? ;0)))))
I've got the Sunday Times DVD, Captain.
Not quite the same as 'remember' FF, but I was only trying to ascertain if you are over 86 - with a smile on my face. :)))

1 to 20 of 20rss feed

Do you know the answer?

How "sporting" Is Sport These Days ?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.