The Wide World of…

A few days ago, Dan at BFS raised an interesting debate based on a Jim Leach broadcast.

I only noticed it this morning (sorry, Dan, I’ve been busy), so I figured it was pretty much after the fact for me to add my two Lincolns, so I’ll just do it here, and if people still want to disagree, we can continue Dan’s discussion. I think everyone that commented on Dan’s post had pretty valid points.

If you didn’t click the link above, the debate was about what is considered a “sport” and what isn’t.

My opinion is that the line between “sport” and “game” (or “competition” or “activity” or whatever you choose to call something that is “not a sport”) at least CAN be wah-fer thin, for several different reasons. The “sport” (or “not sport”) in question may be one you enjoy watching or playing, for example, or you have some other vested interest that provides you with a bias for or against a particular “sport” (or “not sport”).

Dictionary.com, my usual go-to all-things-vocabulary source (when I can’t track down my brother), defines “sport” as, among other things, “an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature, as racing, baseball, tennis, golf, bowling, wrestling, boxing, hunting, fishing, etc.“. That definition in and of itself seems to automatically denote all nine of the above listed activities as “sports”. Again, every person can find argument with each as to whether it is a sport or not. Some of that could be related to the amount of manliness (or perceived manliness) associated with a given sport. Most men think football and hockey are “manly” because they’re such brutal games, and think soccer is nothing but a bunch of fairies runnin’ around in tight shorts. Personally, I think there’s plenty to be said about guys with testosterone imbalances (and the fact that “macho” is actually a Spanish word meaning “small penis”), but that’s another post for another day.

I think for something to be considered a “sport” requires several criteria (again, solely my opinion, so don’t go zipping me pissy comments stating “what about this or that”):

A) the participants, in order to be able to excel, must possess some degree of athleticism (meaning at least moderately physically fit);

B) there must be at least moderate physical exertion involved;

C) there is at least some amount of hand-eye coordination required;

D) not just anybody can do it {well};

E) there is a clear winner and loser (i.e., no ties).

That said, there were other criteria people on Dan’s site mentioned- direct competition between the participants, some degree of strategery involved, do you sweat when you play it, things like that. I liked whoever said on Dan’s site that there needs to be some sort of outside element involved to make achieving greatness be up to more than just someone’s own abilities. Or however they worded it. I have a short attention span.

Ooooh, a ladybug!

Anyway, I feel that the “big four” (baseball, football, basketball, hockey) are definitely sports (so long as the games don’t end in ties!!!). I don’t like soccer in the least (it’s hockey on grass and without the weapons, basically), but I do still consider it a sport. A totally boring sport, in my eyes, but still a sport. I have respect for {good} soccer players; there’s no way in hell I could do that. I just can’t bear to sit through watching it. Or hockey, for that matter. My dislike of it, however, does not diminish the “sport” aspect. I just don’t believe the games should end in ties. In any “sport”. If a game doesn’t have a “winner”, then it wasn’t a game, it was an exhibition. Things like volleyball and tennis must be considered sports as well, whether you “like” them or not.

Bowling, golf, and auto racing seem to fall into the “depends on how much one likes watching/playing it” category. There are fat slobs like me that are great bowlers and golfers (NOT like me), so that kind of eliminates the “athletic” aspect. I can’t really see the athletic ability required in auto racing- how “athletic” must one be to turn left 800-1000 times- but racing does require an insane amount of concentration and lightning-quick reflex.

Fishing and hunting, I have a real hard time considering them “sports” as such. Again, physical fitness of the participant is not a requirement for success. Hell, in fishing, you do nothing but sit in a boat and cast and wait. The most “athletic” part of fishing comes from trying to reel in a 30-pound fish on 12-pound test line without snapping it. (SIDE NOTE: I like to fish, and I understand that the spectator aspect has no impact on this debate, but does anyone really watch fishing shows on TV?! Even the actual fishing tournaments, not just the Bubba Ray Hilljack’s Fishin’ Hole demonstration shows?!)

Then you have things like gymnastics, skiing, swimming, figure skating, diving, snowboarding, etc. Those certainly require athletic ability (for example, the “Iron Cross” move on the rings in gymnastics always impresses me), but in most events in these sports, a strong performance is essentially dependent on the participant’s own abilities, as well as {supposedly impartial} judges’ opinions of how well you did. Anything open to interpretation, I have a hard time classifying as a sport. I’m not saying, I’m just saying. Now with skiing and snowboarding, there is a caveat for the events that are merely “best time” (slaloms, for example) that don’t involve judging “artistic merit”, but there again, the participant is basically only at the mercy of his or her own ability. Yeah, yeah, I know that things like wind, snow conditions, and visibility do affect performance, but there’s not 300-lb men trying to tackle you, throw you into the boards, or otherwise hinder your performance, either. Essentially, you’re still the only thing keeping you from performing to the best of your abilities. Even in swimming- the other swimmers should have no bearing on how well or how fast you swim. Although, that’d make swimming more interesting to watch if they did- say, half the swimmers swim lengthwise, half swim twice as many laps side to side.

But I digress.

Lastly, there are all the “leisure time activities” that are becoming organized and calling themselves “sports”. Things like cheerleading, Frisbee Golf (or Disc Golf, if you prefer), darts, Ping Pong (or table tennis- what-the-hell-ever), badminton, Hacky Sack, ballroom dancing, etc., and the most perplexing of all, Texas Hold ‘Em. Folks, it’s friggin’ poker. Other than the “there is a winner and a loser(s)” thing, how can a game of cards even remotely be considered a “sport”?! Oh, and my other new favorite- Air Guitar (and now Guitar Hero, as though playing a video game with an electronic replica of a guitar somehow makes it more “respectable”) competitions. I found that featured on Fox Sports late one night. Don’t even get me started. I’m not “knocking” any of them (except maybe the Air Guitar and Guitar Hero); I’m just not sure they can be considered “sports”. Cheerleading, for example, while requiring lots of athleticism and hand-eye coordination, still is dependent on judges’ interpretations. Again, I’m NOT knocking cheerleaders or their competitions, which I know are a huge deal for the participants, as they should be. It’s just that being shown on a sports-themed television network doesn’t automatically make something a sport.

Bottom line, just about any activity you can name can be argued “sport” or “not sport”, depending on who is talking about it, so the only safe thing that the ESPNs and Fox Sports Channels of the world can do is to call everything a “sport” and just leave the debate to people like you and me to discuss ad nauseum over the beer/wine/hard liquor/foo-foo drink/coffee/other beverage of our choice. There is no right or wrong in this debate; it’s all based on what each person believes. For every person who calls baseball a sport, there is someone who will argue it isn’t. For every person who calls soccer a sport, there is someone who will argue it isn’t. Same with golf, bowling, racing, track, or anything. Until someone comes out with a clear cut, no room for interpretation definition of what a “sport” is, this argument will never be resolved. But it’s still kinda fun to debate- especially because it provides a chance to rip on soccer and NASCAR.

Oh, and one final note, to commenter “Russ” on Dan’s site: I lettered in band, thank you very much. Trumpet, French horn, baritone horn, and percussion, baby. Go Band Geeks!!!