The Definition of Sport
1) It must be athletic. In other words, you have to in good shape to play it. This eliminates things like golf, bowling, billiards, etc.
2) It must be objective. In other words, no judges. This eliminates things like figure skating, gymnastics, martial arts, diving, etc.
3) It must have a ball, and a point-scoring system based around the ball. Yes, a hockey puck counts as a ball.
4) It must have a goal, and it must be possible to defend that goal. If there is no way to stop your opponent from scoring, it is not a sport. Yes, a football end-zone counts as a goal.
The last two sort-of flow together, but they eliminate things like "extreme sports", wrestling, and NASCAR. They eliminate all races of any kind, including swimming, cross-country, and track and field. Competitions to see who can run the fastest, or jump the highest, or throw the farthest, or the lift the heaviest, are not sports.
I have argued this several times before, so I would like to clarify a few points. First off, I know what the dictionary says, and I think it's wrong. I'm giving you my definition of sport, the way I think it SHOULD be defined. I don't care what Merriam-Webster has to say about the subject. Secondly, just because I don't consider a certain activity a sport does not mean that I think it is easy to do. I am fully aware that they require talent and dedication to master. Thirdly, I am aware that referees/umpires are not always objective. The recent integration of instant replay into most sports has helped, but has not solved the problem completely. However, I think there is a clear distinction about the subjectivity of activities like gymnastics and the subjectivity of activities like basketball. The former disqualifies the activity as a sport, the latter does not. (and almost all judgement-based activities are disqualified by 3 and 4 anyway...) Lastly, it's called the Olympic GAMES, not the Olympic sports. A sport is game, but a game is not necessarily a sport - much like a square is a rectangle but a rectangle is not necessarily a square. Most Olympic events are not sports, but a few are.
I have tried to be as narrow as possible, but there is still room for debate within these rules. A few debatable activities include:
Baseball: Does baseball have a goal? Is it necessarily athletic? I've gone back and forth on this one, and I can see both sides. I usually lean towards calling it a sport, but it's definitely up for debate.
Tennis: Does tennis have offense and defense? There are certainly offensive shots and defensive shots, but most of the time it's both at once. Does tennis have a goal? I go back on forth on this one as well, but lean toward sport. And if tennis is a sport, does that mean the rest of the "net sports" are included? What about volleyball, badminton, table-tennis etc.? What about racquetball? Again, I lean toward calling them sports, but they are not at all definitive.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
"A sport is game, but a game is not necessarily a sport - much like a square is a rectangle but a rectangle is not necessarily a square."....You are a math dork, and I love it. Perfect analogy, too!
I think tennis is a sport. It meets your first three criteria, and you're right, the 4th is open for interpretation. I consider it like football, where the goal is to get the ball into a rectangular-box past your opponent(s), as your opponents try to stop you. Although the fact that the scoring system keeps track of "games" won doesn't really help my argument...
I also lean towards baseball being a sport. I think it has a goal, but in an abstract, non-traditional sport sense. The one that gets me is criteria number one. Do you have to be athletic? Cecil Fielder??? Perhaps he was athletic for his size, but no one would say he was in fine shape- but then again perhaps his size helped him produce more power, and thus more homeruns and success. Who could know.
The other day I was watching an Oriole's game and their first baseman, in between batters, pulled out a giant bag of sunflower seeds from his pants and put a bunch in his mouth. Perhaps a fifth criteria for a sport should be, "You can't eat snacks while in the middle of playing it."
Thank you for this post; I shall share it with Grace. Well done, sir.
Baseball definitely has a goal - it's home plate. You try to defend it by preventing players from rounding the bases and passing over it. While particular players may appear overweight (CC Sabathia) he does have the ability to throw a ball 90+ mph. It maybe more about strength than athleticism, but that must pass your first rule.
In tennis and all other net SPORTS, the goal is your side of the net. Your objective is to defend it by not allowing the ball to bounce twice in your goal. Your objective on offense is to put the ball on their goal so as that they can't defend it.
In all other sports, the ball scores goals. But in baseball, the ball PREVENTS goals. (if the goal is home plate) That seems wrong to me.
And I'm not sure the ability to throw 90MPH makes C.C. athletic. I guess I'm not really sure what I mean by "athletic." But it definitely has something to do with a combination of strength, speed, agility/quickness, and stamina. But I don't how much of which attributes makes a person "athletic."
Is a stick-figure marathon runner who weighs 90 lbs and couldn't lift C.C.'s dinner plate "athletic?"
In tennis, if I am serving, is your return shot playing defense, offense, or both?
Post a Comment