Supplement 1
Sport for All! - Fair Play for All?
Prof. Dr. Jürgen PALM
President of TAFISA
There must be a motive for you to choose Sport for All as the subject for the European Congress and to choose me, the President of TAFISA, as one of your speakers. Thank you for this chance. I agree that the idea of Fair Play has an important role in Sport for All. And I insist that Sport for All presents a major task for the Fair Play movement.
I come to you with four positions.
My first position: Sport for All has grown into a dimension that should be recognized as an equally important part beside competitive sport and top sport.
My second position: Sport for All rediscovers the indigenous sports of the world and expects them to be recognized as a part of the sport curriculum for the future.
My third position: Sport for All participants are the largest number of persons to address the message of fairness and the biggest resource of volunteers as promoters of fairness.
And my fourth position: in Sport for All the attitude of fairness develops less in social competition and more in social cohesion.
The organizers of the Congress probably see that wide new territory of sport with hundreds of millions of people today that are physically active around the world:
Sport for All
Sport for All, that means hundreds of millions of people walking, running, swimming, playing, doing aerobics, biking along rural roads and making inner city paths a place for rollerblading. We see kids and grey haired people, slim and overweight, able-bodied and awkwardly moving. People that in former times would not have joined the sports scene. People not striving for Olympic victory, people who are never mentioned in the TV sports news, people for whom other motives are valid than being a winner. People who play for fun, are active for health, find friends in sport.
These are people who where not participating in sports at the time when the term Fair Play was introduced.
Sport has changed since the first founder generation of contemporary sports a good one hundred years ago . Especially the last forty years are a period of essential change. To recognize these changes and to evaluate them as a new foundation time in sport is the first task I would like to engage you in today.
After outlining the changes brought about by the Sport for All movement I will come to the main part of my paper. It consists of two requests and of two offers.
• The first request is to understand Sport for All as an integrative part of the established sport system.
Be fair to Sport for All!
• The second request is to discover and integrate indigenous and new contemporary sports as parts of the sports system.
Be fair to other forms of sport!
• The first offer is to realize Fair Play in the context of the Sport for All world and to establish it as a motive of voluntary action.
Sport for All is a resource of Fair Play.
• The second offer is to develop Fair Play in the human relationships of Sport for All.
Sport for All is a fair medium of community building.
But before the requests and offers let us look at the changes that Sport for All has brought about.
They are all these new forms and names of sports that are present now.
Look at how diversified gymnastic exercises have become since aerobics entered the scene: low impact aerobics, high impact aerobics, steps, hip hop, spinning, tae-bo, Svetties and Friskies etc. Oldies in physical exercise programs are becoming newcomers again like gymnastics, rope skipping, callanetics, pilates.
Swimming back and forth is one thing. But today there is also aquajogging, aquarobics, water-wellness, waterstepping.
Look at all the types of mountain-, fitness-, skill-bikes that are on the market. Are we not overwhelmed by what the kids are doing in half-pipes and on the market square with their skate boards, rollerblades and skill-bikes.
The winter sport scene has changed with the snowboards and the new types of carved skis making learning to ski even easier. The water scene has developed new types of surfing and boating.
Martial arts from Asia and Oceania found a huge attendance in Europe, whether from China, Japan Korea, Thailand, Hawai, Fiji, Philippines.
Fitness gyms originally conceived for ocean liners are present now all over the world in cities and even in the countryside.
Another aspect of the essential changes in sports is the extension of the venues in which sport is practised.
To participate in a sport or a game one does not necessarily have to enter a sports arena, a gymnasium or an exercise complex.
Joggers are populating the parks and walkways. Bikers and skaters are crowding roads and paths. Systems of bike paths like in Holland are the biggest exercise surface in the country-bigger than all the soccer fields together. More and more cities have skater nights in the summer like Rome, Frankfurt, Paris where thousands cross the town and for a little time human figures dominate the streets instead of automobiles. Karlsruhe for instance in the skater nights on Thursdays closes 11 km of its inner City streets and 34 000 join the rolling fun.
The most outstanding example of these city sports happenings is the one in Bogota, Colombia. Here Ciclovia originated nearly thirty years ago when some 10 km of streets in the city where closed on Sunday mornings. The participation grew continuously: nowadays every Sunday from 7 a.m. to 1 p.m. 120 km of streets in the Colombian capital, in rich and poor areas, are closed for automobile traffic and open for human locomotion. Two million bikers, walkers, runners, skaters are moving on the streets. This is the biggest Sport for All event in the world, copied now in more Latin American cities and in planning status of some cities in Europe like Budapest, Asia like Taipeh and Australia like Melbourne.
The dimension which can be reached by exercise and sport for everybody in public areas of communities can be measured by the example of the World Challenge Day where pairs of equally sized cities compete on streets and squares etc. to see which city has more citizens active in a sport or an exercise on the last Wednesday of May. 2003 the global participation in this TAFISA event reached 42 million people.
In order to understand and explore the chances and challenges that the Sport for All movement gives to the Fair Play movement, one has to look deeper into the phenomenon of a sport that directs itself not at the competitive young but at everybody.
These are very different people than those found fifty years ago on the sport fields and in the arenas of competition.
Look at their age: we have programs now for toddlers as well as for octogenarians. Look at their gender: in many programs women outnumber men. Yes, there is still for quite some percentage the thrill of competition. But the majority looks for other benefits:
To play, to stay healthy, to meet people, to shape their body, to understand themselves, to be active in the family, to show themselves as members of the contemporary “active living culture”.
The world of Sport for All is colourful. Poor and rich. For millions of participants there are no sporting grounds, no modern equipment, no fashinable attire. A volleyball in Bangladesh costs as much as a person earns a month.
On the other side of the spectrum we have the well-to-do who have the latest rollerblades, exercise on electronic weight-machines and use their tennis balls just once.
The world of Sport for All can be one world, where exercise costs nothing, just join the walk. Or it can cost a fortune with the latest attire, thousand dollars health spa memberships, alpine holidays in New Zealand.
The world of Sport for All is a world of enormous diversity. It is a world of big numbers. It is a world that differs from elite sport.
It is this diversity of people, motives, sport forms, their enormous number and social composition that we can evaluate as a major chance and challenge for Fair Play.
What can we say that this world has to expect from Fair Play? And what can it contribute to this human idea?
My belief is that in Sport for All - exceptions granted- the quest for victory, the drive for status improvement and financial benefits - three factors of competitive sport- play a much smaller role here and may often have no role at all. The chance to apply Fair Play in Sport for All events and circumstances is definitely higher than in tournaments, where victory counts so much. We may be relieved: Fair Play seems less difficult to obtain in Sport for All. Fair Play may also find in Sport for All the biggest crowd of those that can be taught and abide by it.
With this I come to the first request.
Sport for All demands that the established sports systems with their dominance in competitive and elite sport regard Sport for All as one of their own.
Be fair to Sport for All.
We will have our World Congress - the 18th!- next week in Munich. In the abstracts of sport leaders for instance from Eastern Europe or Africa I always read the same remark: nearly all the money in the national sport budget goes into top sport. Probably this is the case in the majority of the nearly two hundred nations of the world.
What a waste of chances, Ladies and Gentlemen. Sport for All contributes to education, health, life quality, community building. Ask the Lord Mayor of Bogota how much Ciclovia does to the citizen culture of this troubled city. Ask the Director General of the World Health Organization how much sport and physical activity can do to limit the exuberant costs of non-communicable diseases.
It is indeed a matter of fairness between the customary sport system and its new relative, Sport for All , that has to be applied. If Sport for All is not integrated then it must establish itself outside. With its huge numbers it has the potential to do so. But what a waste of chances such a separation of Sport for All from the customary sport system would be and what an example of unfairness it is to let the poorer relative Sport for All camp outside the established power.
But it must not be-as we can see in quite a few other countries. Regarding Sport for All as a part of the sport system has many consequences.
In Sweden, Netherlands, Germany, Switzerland - for instance - the Sport for All movement is integrated into the National Sport Confederation. In Italy, Hungary, Croatia it builds separate units. A full and equal recognition and support is still a rarity worldwide. Most Sport for All organizations are struggling for recognition and finances.
I come to my second request.
The sport system should recognize the variety and wealth of indigenous sport and the qualities of newly invented sport forms.
Be fair to other sports.
It was only in 1992 that the 1st World Festival of Traditional Sports was held in Bonn, Germany. 32 countries presented a beforehand not imaginable wealth of sports outside the customary understanding. Yabusame-archery in full gallop-from Japan-fascinated a 125 000 spectator crowd as well as Bastani from Iran, the swing from China, Fierlijeppe from the Netherlands, Sepak Takram from Malaysia, Stick Fencing from Portugal, Loop Takraw from Thailand, the Boomerang from Australia and Pelota from Peru-to name just a few. The Festival was so impressive that it is now repeated every four years and comes to Montreal next year with 60 countries and over 100 activities in August 2004.
The concentration on some 50 sports as they are played in the Olympic Winter and Summer Games is only a minority in the creativity with which humankind has produced physical cultures.
This minority overshadows with its worldwide applicability the regional sport cultures.
There are - from region to region-an incredible number of variations of wrestling, archery, martial arts, ball games, endurance runs, water sports, strength tests, riding exercises, skill exams, fitness tests. Nobody has yet collected and described them all. They are a part of the regional culture like the songs and the dances of the area.
Some of these activities have the necessary quality for developing global regulations and thus are becoming an international sport. This has happened for instance with Dragon Boat Racing from China, Sepak Takraw from Malaysia or Capoeira from Brazil.
Others are not fit for international representation and global uniformity. They have their regional or even local character. But they, too, deserve to survive the big uniformity pressure of mainstream sport.
In our age of globalisation indigenous games and sports are one important expression of cultural identity and diversity beside language, music and art.
There are four different paths the indigenous sports and games can take:
One path is the conversion of the indigenous sport into an internationally played competitive activity. This is a course for a minority only.
The second way is the one into the disappearance of traditional games with some small traces in history books and in museums.
The third way is the use of these games in a touristic context, in commercial shows for foreign visitors.
The fourth way however gives these old games and activities a position in the Sport for All programs of the respective country and in the national sport and physical education system.
Very often this is connected with the advantage that these sports do not need high financial investment, they are rather inexpensive to be played. They can be integrated into regular exercise classes, into festivals and into the physical education curriculum in schools.
The invention of new sports and games, the import of physical culture-like dances or martial arts-from one part of the globe to another offers enormous chances.
That is true both for participation but also for business. The bicycle was nearly extinct in many developed countries; now with mountain bikes, touring bikes and fitness bikes they represent a multimillion business sector. Do you remember the sport shoes of let us say thirty years ago? More or less there were only a few types. And today there is enormous specialization. It is in all these cases not the top sport participant who makes these waves of activities and businesses possible but the millions of people who belong to the Sport for All categories.
With this I come to the potential that Sport for All has for the message of Fair Play.
I see this potential in two regards.
• One is the enormous number of people to which the message of Fair Play can be brought and the acceptance it can find here. The other is the potential of messengers that we explore in the volunteers dedicated to Sport for All. This is offer number one.
• Offer number two is the process of social cohesion and community building as a specific chance of Fair Play in Sport for All.
You see now: Whereas in the first part of my paper we were confronted with the request of fairness towards Sport for All, now we explore the benefits of Sport for All for the Fair Play movement.
I find it remarkable indeed that the United Nations declared the year 2001 as the year of volunteers - and since then keeps voluntary action a major goal of their policies.
Why do I mention this here? Because in Sport for All we do have one of the largest numbers of people that need services in their leisure and the largest number of people who give these services.
It has been estimated that the number of sport participants has grown above one billion.
This figure may even be underestimated if you count in it -and I think that is fair- the 300 million Chinese who begin the day with Tai Chi. The number of runners and joggers is beyond a hundred million, the number of those who exercise by walking is definitely similarly big. The number of those who play soccer on the lowest level and outside of tournaments is enormous as well: look at the kids who play it on the streets. Volleyball may come close to similar status. The number of persons attending gyms has risen with the presence of such exercise stations in towns, cities and even in the countryside. The bicycle once used for transport and shopping has become a piece of exercise equipment for millions.
Most such physical activities and sports done for leisure pursuits, health, fun, are in the open and so are social activities, they are performed with a partner or in a group. Beside the also existing lone runner, swimmer, strength exerciser there is a majority of social performers.
The social performers are the target group for the idea of Fair Play. A target group of hundreds of millions of younger and older citizens.
And yet there are differences to the customary competitive and elite sport.
The pressure to be first is much smaller. When I participated in my first 12 km popular run I was No. 152. Not bad when the total number of runners was 5000. But why should I be tempted to try everything to cheat, use unfair chances? When I am exercising in a crowd of 60 aerobic participants: how could I be unfair to those around me? It’s something else in a soccer or hockey game but in the general context of Sport for All the violation of fair conduct is less probable than in a media influenced, status promoting, money involving tournament.
Fairness in the Sport for All context can mean something else, namely being fair to the physical capacity of a person and not asking too much, neither physical nor social. Fairness here can also mean to be alike in sport and not demonstrate superiority in wealth and status. Dressed in sport attire can help to overcome the rank that directs our public life.
Translate fairness into the circumstances of Sport for All. Make fairness a principle for the role that volunteers play in other peoples’ sport life.
The growth of participation in many sports went together with the recruiting of volunteers who help to organize, teach, coach, administrate sport courses and events. In the German Sport Confederation we count one volunteer among five members of sport clubs. These are two million persons that have been elected into certain functions and another two million that are assisting regularly or from time to time.
Their number today is four times as high as a generation ago.
In Europe’s sport clubs we recognize a similar dimension of volunteers and their increase with growing sport participation. It has been estimated that the number of volunteers in European sport is beyond twenty million women and men.
Volunteers play a major role in the life of those to whom they give their services. They coach them, advise them, encourage them, have open ears even for personal problems. And in their services they can be directed by the spirit of being fair to the person and the program. Whether in higher functions or just as helpers, their open-minded person-oriented attitude can and should be directed by the goal of a fair relationship among each other.
Sport for All offers you a major clientele for Fair Play. A huge number of participants and volunteers.
But the vision of bringing Fair Play to the people in Sport for All goes beyond these two aspects.
Let us recall:
• In our traditional understanding the attitude of Fair Play is enacted between two or more opponents in a competitive position.
• In Sport for All competitive situations play a smaller role and this role is not additionally reinforced by the selection process and by the monetary and status benefit availability as in elite sport.
• Other motivations than victory play a role: enjoyment, health aspects, togetherness, active living.
• In Sport for All we have less competition and more conviviality. Less selection and more integration.
The development of Sport for All challenges us to translate the message of Fair Play according to the conditions of Sport for All.
Where can Fair play come into life in Sport for All?
This question brings us back to the act of fairness in its basic form: two people are interacting. Two people are in a situation in which one is momentarily in a stronger position than the other and has the freedom of will to enact his or her superiority their own advantage or to the equal chance of the other person.
Now in the case of persons participating in Sport for All such a situation in many cases-as I hope to have explained successfully-is not the same as in competitive sport. It is not like Jan Ullrich waiting after Lance Armstrong fell.
It is more often that one person needs fairness in the form of understanding, assistance, adaption of the sportive test so that it fits her or his capacity.
Whereas in competitive sport the persons interacting are nearly always of the same class in their sportive capacity and in their motives for performance, in Sport for All situations the people playing and exercising with each other differ more in their capacity and in their motives.
As the basic idea of Sport for All is to invite everybody it must shape its program in a form that avoids dropout and frustration because of defeat. Sport for All is a philosophy of inclusion not of selection.
Fairness in Sport for All therefore deals with conditions and situations where the stronger of the two involved persons acts so that the other one can perform for his or her benefit and personal progress.
Where do we find such constellations between persons in Sport for All? Let me name the most frequently found:
• Sport trainer and sport beginner
• Younger and older persons
• Experienced and inexperienced participants
• Long-time members and newcomers
• Men and women
• Capacitated and handicapped
• Nationals and migrants
• But also of course we have in Sport for All competitive situations between similarly abled persons.
When we are looking into such examples of a fair deal between humans differing in their capacity we understand how parallel such sport situations in fairness are to typical life situations in our contemporary society.
I see four areas.
First with regard to performance
Be fair to what people are able to do
Second with regard to integration
Be fair to people that are different
Third with regard to social interaction
Be fair to respond to people’s motives
Fourth with regard to community building
Be fair and be an active part of the world around you
Sport for All offers possibilities of social cohesion. Beyond more exercise it offers chains and obligations of helping each other in understanding, learning, interacting on and beyond the sports ground.Sport for All can contribute to creating community.
If Fair Play can be ethics of the elite, a code among the best - here it becomes ethics for everybody, a code of basic human likeness in all difference.
This makes Sport for All an excellent contributor to dealing through fairness with major challenges of today:
• living in a multicultural and multilingual society: being fair to those who are different
• living with more and more elderly persons: being fair with the elder generation
• living with handicapped people: being fair to the differently abled
• acquiring a more active and healthy lifestyle: being fair to your body
• protecting our environment: being fair to our natural resources
• overcoming loneliness and boredom: being fair to an enjoyable life.
The question of Fair Play and Sport for All leads beyond the sport facility into the midst of daily life.
Thank you for listening to the requests and offers of Sport for All.
There is no standstill in the development of sport. And as there is no standstill there is hope for fairness in sport and fairness in life.
Athlete’s act of Fair Play: Moral Choice
Prof.Dr. Vladimir Rodichenko
Russian Olympic Committee
The present paper is a fragment of the long-term study on the system of sports competitions, in particular ethical and legal aspects of sports activities and Fair Play principles.
They say that the theory of the phenomenon of Fair Play has already taken shape as the whole. But in our opinion these are only some of its fragments:
• studies of phenomenological character, mostly based on the sociological material;
• studies of organizational and methodological character;
• manifestos, declarations, resolutions adopted by various organizations and expressing their position on the moment of the adoption of these documents.
I believe that exactly the absence of a complete and conclusive theory of Fair Play leads to the indisputably existing skepticism about its principles.
Different approaches to the development of such a theory can exist. In my opinion we should start from the answer to the question: how the world sports community conceives the Fair Play principles?
We supposed that we should look for one of the answers in the awards made by the International Fair Play Committee for real Fair Play acts. In short we should go from the practice formed during many years to the theory. You see that the description of a real act exactly contains the views on a principle that was implemented in this act. Just this principle is considered to be essential both by the organization submitting the candidature and the International Committee. It is clear that other acts that could be referred to the Fair Play principles were made. However we considered it important to use the aforementioned decisions characterized as experts’ views in this study.
We made a classification of concrete acts made by athletes and coaches on the basis of four common manifestations of Fair Play formulated by us. For these acts the International Committee awarded 155 prizes and diplomas for the period from 1964-2001. Let me give the results in diminishing order.
1. To help a rival or other person being in danger or difficulties in an ordinary competitive situation, often under the threat of losing own’s position in competitions. The first international award dated 1964 is referred to this category. During the bobsleigh competitions at the Olympic Winter Games a favourite, an Italian Eugenoi Monti, found out that a part of the bob of his rival Briton Tony Nash was broken. He took the necessary part off his bob and transferred it to Nash who won the gold medal. 69 acts, or 43.5 %, are referred to this category.
2. To correct a mistake made by a judge in favour of the rival. The typical example from the awards of 1997 is a Diploma to the Russian fencer Stanislav Pozdnpyakov. In the World Cup final in which the rival of Pozdnyakov was leading the judge umpired a shot to Pozdnyakov by mistake. But after the fight was resumed Pozdnyakov with no resistance let the rival score against him and thus restored the justice. 42 acts, or 27.1 %, are referred to this category.
3. To refuse to use the arisen advantage which was not the result of his/her own successful actions during competition. At the European Championships in 1971 a Swiss Meta Antenen was leading in the long jump. Her main rival a German Ingrid Mikler-Becker was called for a relay-race. Antenen asked the judges to prolong the break and as a result of it let the rival get the title. 25 acts, or 16.1%, are referred to this category.
4. To refuse to use the advantage which is granted by the competitions’ rules or his own (intentional or unintentional) wrong actions. Such acts are well known in this audience, I just tell you that there are 19 acts, or 12.3%.
It is natural that the afore described acts are supported by an incomparably act area of observing the humanistic principles of competitive activities, particularly a principle of equal chances and opportunity. The stimulation of this area is typical of the Fair play awards in team games mostly aimed at awarding the minimum breaking of the rules connected to rudeness and violence.
Thus we could note three types of ethical principles of sport:
• demanding a concrete act;
• determining the ethics of a sport;
• finally, the principles referred to another category of sport’s subjects, namely fans, for instance overcoming an objective contradiction between the admissible national, ethnic and club biased and actual social trend towards tolerance, opposition to violence and xenophobia.
And now let me compare the given statistics of the Fair Play acts and the frequently quoted Fair Play principles. And there and then we will reveal a wealth of contradictions.
First contradiction. 53.5% or almost half of the awarded acts are referred to giving help to a rival. But we will not be able to find such a notion as “help to a rival” among the frequently quoted principles. Respect for a rival is quoted frequently. But respect, mostly passive and help that is always active, is far from being the same thing.
The second contradiction is between such a frequently proclaimed imperative as respect for a judge’s decision and the fact that more than a quarter, 27.1%, of awards were given for actions revising and correcting decisions taken by the judges.
Third contradiction. Another frequently declared Fair Play imperative is respect for the rules. But the overwhelming majority of the awards if not all 155 ones practically in no way are connected with the observation or non-observation of the rules of the competition.
One can see other contradictions in the widespread notions about Fair Play principles but these three oblige us to search for a possibility to reconcile them.
Searching for this possibility I noted that on the whole many people agreed long ago that an athlete participating in a sport competition is present both in playing and real lives. During a sport competition an athlete mostly takes the rules of this competition as a game. But the whole complex of circumstances in which he stays does not limit this area of an athlete’s actions.
This is why I am suggesting an appoach that could be called a conception of three areas of an athlete’s conduct:
• first area-playing, or socio-modelling activities; it is regulated by the rules of the competitions and has the specific character of a particular sport;
• second area in which an athlete stays as a person is the area of observation of moral and ethical principles of human community in the real, not playing, circumstances;
• the third area of an athlete’s actions as well as the second refers not to the playing but to the real activities and social conduct.
This area is doping abuse and other types of fraud and/or cheating in sport.
The first area, which is the area of a play is quite known. Let us consider an athlete’s conduct or misconduct in two others.
Second area. Exceeding the limits of the sports code and moving to the area of moral and ethical principles of human society an athlete meets with ethical imperatives common to all mankind. For example, an obviously wrong decision by a judge in his favor drastically transfers an athlete from the playing activities into real life and puts him in front of the real, not playing, moral and ethical choice. And moral and ethical convictions of a public person, not playing one, are being tested in these circumstances. For example, a moral ban on the arisen possibilitiy to use a judge’s mistake or rival’s injury comes into force. Or this ban does not come into force if such ethical choice did not become or did not yet become a moral imperative of a concrete athlete as a person.
Finally let me consider the third area of an athlete’s conduct, namely doping and other kinds of cheating.
Stories concerning doping abuse by athletes are frequently considered in connection with Fair Play. I take another point of view. Though outwardly doping abuse lays in the field which is connected with the non-observation of constitutional rules of the international sports associations it inevitably should be transferred to the field of common law. And the field of common law is the area of responsibilitiy of the bodies protecting law and public order. My point of view is the following: modern, mostly professional, sport is a game only by form. Essentially it is real activities whose aim is not so much getting pleasure from a process of playing as the way to earn money.
This is why doping abuse is not a simple breaking of the rules of the game. This is why we need not only ethical and economic but also legal mechanisms to provide purity of the sport product and protection of the athlete as its producer. For me, doping abuse means appropriation of somebody else’s property by fraud. I mean property which belongs to a real winner. Hence basing on the criminal laws of many countries this is a fraud i.e. a criminal offence. On the face of it this action is accomplished on the playing field, in reality it is accomplished in the area protected by law. And this area is subjected not to the sports organizations and not even to a structure close to sport, namely the World Anti-Doping Agency, but to the bodies protecting law and public order. And this is why a fight against doping must be included into the whole system of public activities aimed at the protection of law and order. An athlete must know since childhood that doping abuse is not a delinquency but a crime that will be proved not in the federation but in court with a penalty of several years in prison. So little by little a clear notion will be formed in mass consciousness that a person using doping for the purpose of fraud is not an infringer of sport rules but a criminal. And not internal sport rules (disqualification) or moral and ethical mechanisms (public censure) must be applied to him, but legal measures elaborated over thousands of years.
Hasan Kasap, PhD
Marmara University,
School of PE&Sport
Turkey
Human beings are society-based creatures. They need each other from the day they are born. A child has a need for his mother, family and friends. Family needs society. Furthermore nations need each other to survive. We, all, are aware of this reality but often we fail to deal with each other in a ‘fair’ manner. Even though a human is a part of a society, actually individual life style constructs the frame of all social and global relationships.
Many of our characteristics stem from our genes. We learn our living styles from those who exist in our environment. What we learn in general in turn influences our relations with and preferences for others. When we look at the differences and life style preferences,we know that our life styles are the end results of our culture. Culture cannot be transferred by our genes. It is a total result of our learning experiences. Global culture consists of mutual values of many ethnic cultures, plus it contains additional values such as a respecting cultural differences of others. All of these values can enable individuals to live positively and peacefully as a part of society.
Our environment influences our living habits. First we show a reaction to an outside influence in a natural way, and then we react as others who surround us. Because of this learning process our natural and personal behaviors, at the end, become collective reactions. In this transformation, the first and most influential factor is family. Then we react like those individuals who touch our lives such as our teacher or coach. Over time, with the influences those individuals and events that affect our lives other than our family, we become ourselves.
Contemporary information technology, which influences individuals, has widened the environmental scope. Nowadays, children and young people can easily find themselves as a part of the global environment. They see paradoxes which are near or far from them. They are influenced and affected by them and they have problems in showing their personal reactions. As their environment grows, they have troubles in selecting the common and positive values that surround them, thus their need for advisors increases. Even though the barriers among nations are being lifted, still every society has its ethical rights. These rights are usually considered as moral values of that society. Therefore, evaluations and discussions about these rights naturally create problems. In this case, anyone who is required to make a decision finds himself/herself either having to respect or to deny these rights.
It is almost impossible to live a balanced life in a world where the life of a human being is affected by extremely strong and conflicting values. An individual wonders if families, teachers, advocates and respectable people of society will be able to come to terms with each other. This way, having a universal ‘fair life style’, which is made up of global common values, at the end results in making the world a better place to live.
Is it possible to develop a fair life style?
When the law structure of societies is examined, it is evident that they are structured to protect the justifiable living conditions of the individuals. All of the principles and teachings of the existing religions are constructed to improve the together, are constructed by society to become more justifiable and fair. Considering all of these facts, why do we have so many problems of living fairly in a society?
According to how individuals foresee and accept the living standards and principles in a society we can think of living standards in two dimensions. First one? Those rules which are developing outside the individual and society which everyone sees and accepts as ‘somebody else’s rules’. We can call these ‘outside rules’. Second set of rules is rules which an individual accepts as his own rules. We can call these ‘inside rules’. Outside rules are directed by others. Therefore we think that those rules should be accepted and obeyed by others. Also others should control them. As a result we think that ‘outside rules’ are practised and fair living standards are in existence in a society is a problem of those who supervise these rules. If there is a supervisor who controls these rules then the rules will be practised and obeyed. If there are no referee to officiate a sport contest then there are a contest. Because everyone thinks that the rules belong to the referees. If there are no traffic police then there are no traffic rules. Because everyone thinks that traffic rules belong to the traffic police.
Inside rules are those which direct an individual’s desires, wishes, joys make up the individual rules of life. If individuals enjoy and accept a game’s rules or enjoy and accept traffic rules then they make these rules part of their lives and they obey them.
Then these ‘outside rules’ become ‘inside rules’. If an individual accepts all these rules; then they all transform and become their ‘inside rules’. Of course the question is ‘how this transformation will take place?’ or ‘how human beings will adopt to life’s fair rules?’ and ‘how a just and fair world will be established?’ Another question may be; how an individual’s personal preferences in shaping his living style can become directed towards fair and justifiable living standards.
When we look at the human beings, we realize that individuals make very unique and difficult habits part of their lives when an individual inhales his/her first cigarette or for the first time drinks alcohol he seems to never forget that experience. Can anyone foresee a person lean over a pile of trash and inhale the smoke out of a trash pile? But today we see so many people who made these habits part of their lives. This shows us what we can all adopt ourselves. Remember the pain in our fingers when we are learning writing skills for first time even in our lives. The timeless act of drawing lines on our first notebook. But today we accept this act as a Value. A champion lifts tons of weights during practices just to live the feeling of victory for a few seconds.
To make a preference to become a champion is only possible?
If an individual wants to adopt a fair living style then family and school are the best sources of permanent values. Children’s pre-school and primary school years are considered natural and egocentrical phases of their lives. During that period, a child sees himself/herself as the center of life. During this period, a child outside supervision. This period is called ‘critical phase’ or ‘permanent’ face, which will last lifelong and be placed under the supervision of the family and primary school. During that period seeds, are spread which will give their fruits in the future. The influences of the heroes in a child’s life are very high at this stage. According to research a child’s mother, teacher sports leaders that he sees as models influence him 58-67 %. A child enjoys living the life style of his family. It acts as his teacher or coach if those important people in his life live in a fair world forget that not words. But behaviors leave permanent life habits in a child’s life. If a coach, rival coach and athletes present good examples the athletes of that coach enjoy practising the similar habits and roll playing.
Can a real world come true really? It may be a utopia. But a world that can be lived more could be set. It can be ideal and aimed to realise this life style. We know that important people of family, teacher and child will be effective. Therefore we can claim that development of fair life philosophy is due to the development of these points.
Development of social fair lifestyle can be providing with cooperating of family and educators. Here the most effective way is to provide family attendance. Families provide opportunity to educators by sending children to them. Because every child is important to each family and also it considers each child as their future. They do not eat; they spend all of their money for their cihldren. Therefore development of their children must be very important for them too. At this point education foundations take the opportunity to educate families. Education must not leave children from their families. Families and educators must work in cooperation. Children must not live paradoxes while adopting just attitude forms. Education foundations and educators are reliable specialists to create these values. They have enough skills to guide families and children for forming true attitudes. Therefore these works must be made with families in a well organised program.
Fair play activities practised in schools must be arranged with families. Family cooperation is important in those works. Even though it is completely organized by the school, experts provide the family organization help. Physical education teachers, program experts and pedagogues could be observers. If a leader of the family were adopted results would be more efficient what can be there in such a fair life program. First it must started with good information, enthusiasm. Then a fair play quiz must be applied, families and children must discuss results. The people who do not attend will be sent letters and documents. The winners will win a prize. The activities will be spread to the whole staff. At this point another approach can be offered as a fair play detective. These detectives can be used to inspect attitudes of children and families. It must not be set upon finding negative life styles and punishment. Setting form must be reliable and consistent. Unless it’s well organised and careful it might not be just.
For social development fair play activities must be provided not only at play dimension but also at life dimension. Games can be only a tool in development of fair life style.
References:
Jersild, Arthur T., Child Psychology, Prentice Hall, inc. Translation: Prof. Dr. Gülseren Günce, Ankara University, Faculty of Education press no: 62 1976.
Glover, Donald A. & Anderson, Leigh A., Character Education, Human Kinetics, Champaign 2003.
European Fair Play Movement, Fair Play Quiz, May 1995.
Johnson, R.&Eaton, J., Coaching Successfully, Dorling Kindersley, N.Y. 2001.
Kalish, S., Your Child’s Fitness Practical Advice for Parents’, American Running and Fitness Association, 1966.
Supplement 2
Fair Play 2004 – Challenges for
Theory and Practice
Opening speech of the 10th European Fair Play Congress, September 22-26, 2004, Vienna.
Prof.Dr.
Otmar WEISS
* Department of Sport Science of the University of Vienna
* Chairman of the Austrian Society for Sociology of Sports
* Board member of the International Sociology of Sports Association
* President of the European Association for Sociology of Sports
* Research: Sport Sociology, Sports and European integration, media sports as a social substitution.
The topic of this congress was chosen in order to discuss the latest ideas and the present situation regarding fair play in sport. The theoretical perspective is important because fair play is a societal value and varies from time to time and from society to society. And this goes hand in hand with the practical realisation of fair play in sport. The norms and rules which are derived from the value fair play can be seen in sport much more clearly than elsewhere. In sport injustice cannot be easily disguised as in the world in general, injustice and unfairness are clearly visible. Therefore the practical perspective – fair play as a challenge for concrete behaviour in sport – is also very important.
Those societal and cultural values, such as fairness, equal opportunity, success, to name a few, that people believe in, are tangibly exemplified in sport. There is hardly any other social area which illustrates the ideals of a society better than sport does – for instance, that success counts, that better performance leads to greater recognition. And the validity of social values and norms is clearly demonstrated to all those whose day to day reality and own way of life are often quite the opposite, for in sport success is achieved simply by performing. Whereas performance in other areas remains invisible to many people, and can often only be appreciated by experts, in sport success is immediately recognisable; it can be understood by one and all. Sport is looked upon as the ideal or even the utopia of a society. The role of fair play within sport is therefore all the more important. After all, fair play first came into being in the context of sport, and was then introduced into other societal areas.
In my presentation you will, I hope, see how fair play is the result of a particular process of civilisation, as Elias says; one which has taken place within modern societies and within sport as carried out in these societies.
In addition I want to outline fair play as a counter-measure to oppose the present prevalence of violence in sport. In order to maintain the true fascination of sport, it is of prime importance to underline the principle that fair play is preferable to victory at any price. The goal can never justify foul means.
Let me start with the following definition of fair play:
It demands firstly uniformity of competition conditions, and equal opportunities for all participants, secondly respect for the opponent as a human being and a partner, and thirdly strict adherence to the rules, and unconditional observance of competition regulations.
This interpretation and appreciation of fair play was not part of sport from the start. Many authors, Weiler, for instance, in 1974, later Guttmann, Elias, and Pilz and Weber, to name a few, have come to the conclusion that there was practically no such thing as fairness as we understand it today in the contests of antiquity. Assistance of one or the other by the gods, mockery of the losers, breaking rules by using trickery and deception – as was usual then – contradicts every item of the definition I have just given of fair play!
This, of course, also applied to the ancient Olympic Games. In pancratium, a mixture of boxing and wrestling, for instance, contestants used any and every part of the body in the fight, hands, feet, elbows, heads, knees and even teeth. They were even allowed to press out their opponents’ eyes, throttle them, dislocate fingers and arms. Naturally, fights as brutally rough as these led to horrific injuries, and often enough ended fatally. On the other hand, sometimes an athlete killed in an Olympic duel would be posthumously declared the victor, because he had fought with particular bravery!
We hear the following description of two boxers, given by Elias in his book of 1976:
“The first struck a blow to the head which his opponent survived. When he lowered his guard, the other man struck him under the ribs with his outstretched fingers, burst through his side with his hard nails, seized his bowels and killed him”.
Based on the standard of values within our modern society physical violence of such dimensions must surely be dismissed as barbarian depravity. It quite clearly offends our social taboos regarding violence. We can only begin to understand such brutal behaviour by looking at the structure, the stage of social development, and the way in which physical force was organised and controlled from a societal point of view in Ancient Greece. The standards of behaviour and sensitivity the Greeks had were very different from ours; they were less civilised. To be at war with one another was perfectly normal for the city states of those days. Genocide was frequently an act of calculation, perpetrated in order to destroy the military power of the rival state. In the time of the Ancient Greeks, and indeed also of the Romans, it was not considered reprehensible, and by no means an atrocity, to massacre the entire male population of a vanquished city, selling the women and children as slaves.
And the standards within the warmongering society of the 13th century were not really that much better, either. Tormenting and killing others was a source of great enjoyment, cruel treatment in no way led to social ostracism. It follows that moral antipathy, feelings of guilt and shame, must have been far less pronounced than they are nowadays. But then such sentiments would have proved to be a great handicap if we consider that the use of physical force, or even violence, was, in a way, vitally necessary. Every able-bodied male had always to be prepared for conflict, fight, or battle, either to defend his family, or where necessary, to support relatives or avenge them. The protection of citizens and of livelihood was not mainly the duty of the state. In those days people depended far more on their own physical power and tenacity in order to survive – unlike the present time when the use of force is widely under the purview of the state. All in all, the extent of physical force and violence was considerably greater in antiquity and in the Middle Ages than it is in our contemporary societies.
These differences, both in outlook and in extent, are the result of the historical change humanity has experienced. This change is termed the “Process of Civilisation” after Elias. Elias sees the course of this process as a compulsion which human beings exert on one another due to growing social involvement and interdependence. Democratisation, industrialisation, urbanisation, transport and communication have created a lever gear of interdependent pressures which have gradually, over the centuries, led to changes in behaviour, until they reached our present standards. Examples of these changes and standards given by Elias are, amongst others, so-called table manners, for instance, the use of cutlery, knives and forks; general behaviour in public wiping your nose on sleeves or handkerchiefs, spitting, cleanliness; the privacy of the bedroom and sexuality. Altogether social change has set a disciplining of human behaviour in motion. That is to say, changes in social and societal structures have led to changes in structures of personality. The human being has learned, in gradual evolutionary steps, to control his impulses and to change compulsion from outside into compulsion from inside himself. A distinct apparatus of self-compulsion has developed in humans, causing an ever higher degree of rational action, which is often intended to continue over a longer term. This meant and means suppressing spontaneous surges of emotion and subduing the instinct to use physical violence.
In sociology, psychological self-control is known as internalisation of standards and is the result of the educative process, or socialisation. Thus the development towards civilised behavioural forms and humanisation can be read from the historical changes in the education and up-bringing of children. For instance, from antiquity until well into the fourth century AD murdering illegitimate children – and indeed, on occasion, legitimate ones, too – was not unusual. De Mause speaks, in his book of 1977, of the stage of infanticide being followed by the stage of abandoning children, which continued on into about the 13th century. During the Middle Ages severe beating and whipping of children were important elements in their education and up-bringing. The adult of those times, himself tormented by asocial, sexual, egoistic, aggressive instincts and urges, saw his forbidden desires in the child and tried to beat his own base instincts out of the youngster. The screams of a child were considered to be maliciousness, which had to be driven out by blows. The stage of socialisation was not reached until the end of the 18th and the beginning of the 19th centuries. The child was no longer to be subjugated by the adult will. Instead it was to be directed along the right path. Indeed, a start was being made at educating the child. Nevertheless, corporal punishment and the creation of feelings of guilt were still widespread. Only quite recently have parents begun to try and answer children’s needs, and to bring them up without using violence. The idea that a child should be looked upon as having a personality of its own is only gradually spreading.
It is essential to know these and related connections if we want to understand why the standards of behaviour and sentiment of Society A are more and those of Society B less civilised, as clearly seen, inter alia, by their different attitudes towards violence in sport. The more brutal a society is, the more brutal sport within it will be. The actors essentially realise in whatever their sport may be the normative, intellectual and cultural examples they have acquired during the process of socialisation. And so, in this way, sport is a manifestation of cultures and society. Compared with today’s, earlier forms of sport were far less organised, less differentiated, by far rougher, more savage, more brutal; they permitted an incomparably greater degree of physical violence, that was socially tolerated and accepted. This can be seen in a comparison of some of the structural characteristics of traditional versus modern sports or games: (GRAPH 1)
In modern societies there is a considerable difference in how marked the suppression of physical violence is, and this depends on the level of development, sort of organisation, social class and structure. Suppression is least advanced in such sports as boxing, ice hockey, wrestling and rugby. Athletes favouring these types of sport generally come from a social environment where physical violence is a legitimate means of looking after their own interests. Boltanski, Dunning, Schlagenhauf and, together with Russo, I myself, to name a few, have remarked upon this in various studies. In the case of boxing the use of violence can itself be the aim of the game, as physical injuries during sports contests do not count as actions to be penalised. This decriminalisation of otherwise criminal offences is one reason why in many cases boxing is regarded by members of the oppressed classes or criminal subcultures as an opportunity to climb up the social ladder. However, there are other sports, too, where the rate of aggression is in line with the normal social behaviour acquired by the athlete. Here I would mention soccer, handball, basketball, as examples. Sport is, and will probably remain, a child of its times and its society, or societal group. And it is impossible to look at any one sport isolated from these factors. That is to say, the extent of direct aggression in the form of physical attack permitted differs from one sport to the other. What a boxer is allowed to do is a lot more than is permitted for a footballer, but he, on the other hand is allowed to be more aggressive than a basketball player. It follows that active engagement in a particular sport is frequently the expression of a specific social development and situation. The different sports are preserved, altered, and shaped by their relations to society. In addition to the class-specific difference in attitude towards physical violence there are other standards for the legitimation of violence which also affect the choice of sport and how it is practised. Age and gender are here the first to come to mind. But really decisive for the choice of sport are the conscious and subconscious relations to one’s own body, the knowledge and consciousness of the body, and this is a product of each player’s personal lifestyle.
Shaped to different levels by cultural and societal influences, sensitivity and tolerance towards violence are echoed particularly in specifically national games and sports. In comparison with European football there is far more physical violence in American football. This must be seen in the light of the individual physical violence which has shaped American history. However, this difference in the degree to which culture has influenced the suppression of physical violence is also very evident when comparing central and north European athletes’ behaviour with that of south Europeans or Latin Americans. The greater tolerance of physical violence in southern cultural areas – look, for instance, at the vendetta, the blood revenge – influences the behaviour of athletes.
But far the most usual form of violence in modern sport is what is known as “instrumental violence”. The enormous societal, economic and political importance of athletic success has led to ever more frequent use of instrumental violence. Intentional fouls combined with unconditional rough play are the order of the day. The perfectly acceptable principle of high performance is being perverted. More and more areas of sport are getting caught up in the perversion of this principle, so that success now justifies the means. Particular forms of instrumental violence are increasingly being introduced into training sessions. In games where personal contact is not allowed, such as in basketball, fouls can often be used to tactical advantage. Any team that is tactically well-advised will use intentional fouls to optimise performance. And, in view of the extreme roughness and brutality of top sport today, anyone not prepared to risk one’s life is fighting a losing battle. Even in women’s sport physical violence is being used increasingly in the interests of winning. So we see that sport has unreservedly taken over the societal mentality of the day, which will only accept success.
“The more a sport is professionalised, the more victory is emphasised as the goal of athletic endeavour, rather than the means by which it is achieved; finally, the more important the economic or other consequences of a victory are, the greater is the likelihood that the rules of the sport will be violated in favour of other interests.”
Various studies, for instance Heinilä’s of 1974, show unequivocally that, with increased age, athletic experience, and strength of performance, fair play is increasingly assessed as a hindrance to athletic success. (GRAPH 2)
Instrumental violence is gaining more and more approval. Fouls and foul play are becoming part of the compulsory programme. And so the idea of success at any price is a factor why it has become almost impossible to imagine normal life in high performance sport without violence. Yet the growing importance of instrumental violence in women’s and in men’s sports is, though it may sound frivolous to put it this way, nothing other than a process of adaptation to the collective societal norms and behavioural standards of the day.
The original development of fair play took place in the England of the 18th and 19th centuries. And here the ideal of the perfect gentleman played an important role. He was of a highly respectable character, of good family and a decent way of life. In the public schools (which, as you know, were exclusive private ones!) the ideal of the gentleman was transferred to sporting contests. Preservation of the equality of an opponent or opposing team, strict adherence to the rules, foregoing any unjustified advantages, and honest and honourable behaviour towards the opponent were intrinsic elements in the educative ideal of fair play in English public schools.
The items in our frame definition have thus all been fulfilled. Processes of democratisation and education in the English public schools made it possible for fair play in sport to develop. Together with the worldwide propagation of English sport the idea of fair play spread, too. The formation and development of fairness, as we have seen, has to do with socialisation and education. The goal can never justify the means, although we have been made to prove it does! Fair play can be interpreted as the moral principle of sport.
But in this year of 2004, it would be wrong to make no mention of some of the world sporting events we have experienced with that certain tingle no one can quite explain – the Olympic Games in Athens. No doubt there will be more said about them later on, but I have a few thoughts on fair play I, myself, find very interesting. The ignominious start with two of the host country’s star athletes being disqualified for possible doping, under rather odd circumstances. Almost immediately they were gone from the sporting sky of stars – sic transit gloria – but, although I have not spoken of it before today, doping is anything but fair play! And it is very important that the IOC takes a strict view of this so that doping is not allowed to spoil the fairness of the Games.
And, closer to home, - it is barely three weeks since a soccer game was played here in Vienna which had caused some nervousness in advance. This, of course, was the match between Austria and England. It was feared there would be quite some rough if not violent play, and any amount of hooliganism. Fortunately the game was very fair – and, as you will remember with relief, it ended in a draw – 2:2. As to the hooliganism, it must be said that in England the authorities did their best to keep the spectators in order by refusing to issue tickets to known troublemakers. Here in Vienna safety measures were also taken, and all went pretty well. But it is a pointer to the fact that spectators can be fair or unfair, and can even influence the fairness of a game to a certain extent by hyping up emotions.
Moral action is the highest stage of development which humans have achieved, for it has little or nothing to do with the instinct; moral and ethical thinking does not allow any unscrupulousness. There is no area of human community exempt from moral assessment and moral consciousness – and no doubt this applies to sport as well and in particular. So there is hope that the dark side of top level sport will soon give way to the bright and sunny side – that the maxim of fair play will prevail again – after all, fair play originated in sport!
But this again depends on the values and structures of the particular society. To think along the same lines as Norbert Elias we could say it depends on how far the civilisation process has progressed in a given society. The more civilised a society is, the higher its moral consciousness and sense of responsibility.
This means, in relation to sport: if the standards of behaviour and sensitivity of, say, Society A are more civilised than those of Society B then A’s sports will be more humane than B’s.
That is to say, sport is not and will not be better than the society it is practised in. We have seen this time and again, and so far there is no reason to believe it will be different in the future. This only sounds pessimistic if we are convinced that society is becoming less moral, less human. But fortunately the opposite development is also possible as has been shown in the example of the process of civilisation: Let us hope that the future will bring us the victory of morals over mammon.
References:
De Mause, L. (Hg.): Hört ihr die Kinder weinen? Eine psychogenetische Geschic