New Age Sport
‘When young boys do not get to fight wars, they love to sweat it out on the playing fields’
-- Anonymous
Over the years commentators have argued that sport is an extension of war. It involves two opponents slugging it out against each other, using strategies to attack, counter-attack and outwit each other. But what makes it even more interesting is that unlike the wars of today where there do not seem to be any rules that restrict the execution of strategies, sports are regulated by a set of rules that are framed with the concurrence of participating nations. They are expected to adhere to not only these written diktats but also respect the ‘unwritten’ traditions and compulsions that have risen because of the nature of the game.
However rules can only seek to control physical jousts – they fall severely short of regulating verbal duels that are part and parcel of every game. What is worrying is that the nature of these verbal duels has changed dramatically over the years. In the days of the gentlemen these verbal exchanges were limited to discussions about the weather and the friendly banters that were meant to distract the players, but with the advent of the Generation X’s and Y’s these discussions have degenerated into discussions that raise doubts about one’s paternity, class, race, spouses and color. With the human race becoming ultra competitive the desire to excel has become so intense that players are willing to cross the thin line between mental distraction and mental disintegration. One cannot but draw a parallel between the eighteen day war of the Mahabharata and the way games are played today. In this ancient war the code of conduct a warrior was expected to adhere to was openly flouted which resulted in a cycle of retribution that ultimately led to the downfall of young heroes on both sides of the conflict. Similarly, players today are willing not only to break the ‘unwritten’ code of sportsmanship but are extending the boundaries of these conflicts to the realms of the print and visual media. Planned press conferences are held where players are provoked, stories are penned in gossip columns about where a person slept over the previous night and financial muscles are flexed to hound opponents into submission.
Practitioners of these strategies argue that players need both physical and mental toughness to win a game. Accepted, but if the physical attributes of the game can be controlled by a set of governing rules isn’t it time to sit down and verbalize the extent to which these mental wars can be fought. As a race, we are an aggregation of several civilizations, and what may be acceptable to one part of the world may be frowned upon in another. It is one’s duty to respect these sentiments and behave according to them. Steve Waugh had rightly commented that the recent spat between India and Australia over the Harbhajan-Symonds issued needed to be examined from the frame of reference of cultural compatibility. Indian television commentators were arguing that even if Harbhajan had called Symonds a monkey there was nothing wrong in that because in India the monkey is venerated as a divine being. What they failed to realize was that in Australia being called a monkey is an instance of racial abuse. As they say the root of conflicts lies in our inability to appreciate the stand taken by our perceived opponents and it is this ignorance that may cause all games dearly.
It is high time that all governing bodies take a proactive stand in neutralizing any further occurrences of verbal abuse. I did not like it when Zidane butted an Italian player in one of the World Cup finals. But then if his culture regarded one’s inability to respond to taunts about one’s lineage and tribe as a sign of dishonor was it correct on his opponent’s part to provoke him into action, either knowingly or unknowingly? As the world progresses there will be a rise in instances of racial abuse because of our inability to accept inter-racial and inter-cultural mingling. It is necessary for us to examine this in detail and ensure that at least in sport a game is played in all fairness and it is one’s talent, skill, determination and perseverance that decide wars between two sides.
-- Anonymous
Over the years commentators have argued that sport is an extension of war. It involves two opponents slugging it out against each other, using strategies to attack, counter-attack and outwit each other. But what makes it even more interesting is that unlike the wars of today where there do not seem to be any rules that restrict the execution of strategies, sports are regulated by a set of rules that are framed with the concurrence of participating nations. They are expected to adhere to not only these written diktats but also respect the ‘unwritten’ traditions and compulsions that have risen because of the nature of the game.
However rules can only seek to control physical jousts – they fall severely short of regulating verbal duels that are part and parcel of every game. What is worrying is that the nature of these verbal duels has changed dramatically over the years. In the days of the gentlemen these verbal exchanges were limited to discussions about the weather and the friendly banters that were meant to distract the players, but with the advent of the Generation X’s and Y’s these discussions have degenerated into discussions that raise doubts about one’s paternity, class, race, spouses and color. With the human race becoming ultra competitive the desire to excel has become so intense that players are willing to cross the thin line between mental distraction and mental disintegration. One cannot but draw a parallel between the eighteen day war of the Mahabharata and the way games are played today. In this ancient war the code of conduct a warrior was expected to adhere to was openly flouted which resulted in a cycle of retribution that ultimately led to the downfall of young heroes on both sides of the conflict. Similarly, players today are willing not only to break the ‘unwritten’ code of sportsmanship but are extending the boundaries of these conflicts to the realms of the print and visual media. Planned press conferences are held where players are provoked, stories are penned in gossip columns about where a person slept over the previous night and financial muscles are flexed to hound opponents into submission.
Practitioners of these strategies argue that players need both physical and mental toughness to win a game. Accepted, but if the physical attributes of the game can be controlled by a set of governing rules isn’t it time to sit down and verbalize the extent to which these mental wars can be fought. As a race, we are an aggregation of several civilizations, and what may be acceptable to one part of the world may be frowned upon in another. It is one’s duty to respect these sentiments and behave according to them. Steve Waugh had rightly commented that the recent spat between India and Australia over the Harbhajan-Symonds issued needed to be examined from the frame of reference of cultural compatibility. Indian television commentators were arguing that even if Harbhajan had called Symonds a monkey there was nothing wrong in that because in India the monkey is venerated as a divine being. What they failed to realize was that in Australia being called a monkey is an instance of racial abuse. As they say the root of conflicts lies in our inability to appreciate the stand taken by our perceived opponents and it is this ignorance that may cause all games dearly.
It is high time that all governing bodies take a proactive stand in neutralizing any further occurrences of verbal abuse. I did not like it when Zidane butted an Italian player in one of the World Cup finals. But then if his culture regarded one’s inability to respond to taunts about one’s lineage and tribe as a sign of dishonor was it correct on his opponent’s part to provoke him into action, either knowingly or unknowingly? As the world progresses there will be a rise in instances of racial abuse because of our inability to accept inter-racial and inter-cultural mingling. It is necessary for us to examine this in detail and ensure that at least in sport a game is played in all fairness and it is one’s talent, skill, determination and perseverance that decide wars between two sides.
posted by Shreerang at 9:51 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home