The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > 'Dad! I did my first specky!' > Comments

'Dad! I did my first specky!' : Comments

By Dennis Hemphill, published 15/7/2010

What defines an activity as a sport? Is playing virtual sport a sport?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All
If you are playing sport on the field as part of a team within a match, then you are playing sport. If you are playing a computer game about sport then you are playing a computer game. If you are watching a game of sport as a spectator, you are not playing on the field you are watching it. But if you are watching the game and you are immersed in it and part of this game includes that there are spectators, then you are part of the game in this sense. Your involvement as a spectator in this context means that you are playing the game in your role as a spectator, perhaps? If you are playing a computer game about sport and you are immersed in its reality then you are playing sport through a computer game. You are a spectator and a player all at one time. My 11 year old son plays outdoor soccer and has good tactical and physical soccer skills. He also sometimes plays a soccer computer game. He has excellent computer games hand-controller dexterity so he is good at this game too. He plays two kinds of soccer. One kind is where he gets dirty, wet and muddy, exercises his young body and has plenty of social interaction after the game. The other is where he gets to lie on the lounge room floor out of uniform, without a time restriction, without the discomfort of playing in winter weather, and with drinks and snacks within easy reach. I prefer him to play outdoors soccer because it's healthy for him to exercise. I know that part of me doesn't want to accept that playing soccer on a computer game is sport. As a parent I tend to worry about the amount of time my child spends at his computer in general. I suspect that this parental concern colours my view on this topic. However, I cannot deny that my son is playing sport in both kinds of games – because both are about soccer. I’ll ask my son the soccer player, what he thinks.
Posted by dotto, Thursday, 15 July 2010 11:36:13 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dotto,

If your son is not physically moving and using his body he is not playing sport...he is sitting in fonrt of a computer playing a computer game...and that is not sport. It is pretty simple in my opinion...don't kid yourself.

I am not necessarily saying that computer games are bad, because I think that, in moderation, they teach various skills including hand-eye coordination, some strategic thinking, and problem solving, but they remove the player from immediate contact with an opponent. There is something stimulating in hearing and seeing your opponent, looking into his/her eyes, and actually using sporting equipment; it makes the competition real and consequences of mistakes may not just include losing, you also have an opponent who looks you in the eye and this makes the mental game far more acute than if you are on a keyboard in front of a screen. Also, turning a computer off is no substitute for sitting down after a game and socialising with your own team and your opponents. Spotr is meant to be tactile not remote.

Sport is a combintation of physical strength and/or endurance, mental alertness and toughness,physical coordination, and a competetive spirit. Without the physical strength or endurance an activity is not sport...ie Darts, Snooker, Pool, computer games, and Wii games.
Posted by Phil Matimein, Thursday, 15 July 2010 12:01:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Phil, when an athlete visualises sports practice it activates a physiological response that mimics actually physically doing the sports action. The neuromuscular patterning that the athlete uses is alerted and activated, and while he/she may be only doing this with their mind, do not be fooled – the body is connected to this process. In fact this is the body-mind at work. So, if my son plays soccer and this knowledge has already been programmed into his body-mind, then when he plays a computer game about soccer, do not be deceived Phil he will be there in that game. His heart rate will be elevated, his eyes will be fixed on his opponent, his sympathetic nervous system will be switched on and his endocrine system will be sending out adrenaline. It’s called “Being There” in the game and playing it to win like any other athlete. Having said this, I would much prefer that he played sport outside in a way that he can engage in it in all the ways you have described and I won’t kid myself about this. But that's what I want and I'm not the one playing soccer am I? I think your description of exercise is far more beneficial than my description as a form of healthy exercise. However, I still believe that they are both about playing sport.
Posted by dotto, Thursday, 15 July 2010 3:27:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Take your point Dotto,

But I must disagree...whereas I have used the mental preparation appraoch, though visualisation successfully and 100% agree that the neaural pathways are imporved by this process - which can imporve performance, it cannot prepare you for the actual event itself, which is the combination of physical and mental skills. Visualising in your head is one thing, playing on a computer does not do the same thing, becasue you are not seeing your own body move and controlling it, you are seeing another figure on the screen. It is a false arguement, in my view. Also, he may visualise in his mind, but unless he uses those skills in reality he will lose the connections when the computer game is replaced by another pursuit.

Also, a missed tackle in soccer causes a goal...no real consequence on a computer, but 10 sets of eyes on you from your team-mates in a real game. Get a tackle wrong and you could injure yourself or your opponent - this doesn't happen on a computer and therefore, in my opinion, your son is not learning about sport on his computer, and is certainly not playing sport.
Posted by Phil Matimein, Thursday, 15 July 2010 3:41:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks Dotto and Phil for your thoughtful comments.

Dotto has reluctantly agreed that the computer version of soccer is sport. Like Dotto, I think that there are a number of fitness and social benefits from participation in the on-field soccer match that are lacking in the computer soccer counterpart. But I think Dotto’s main point is that the computer version of a sport is simply a different sport, with its own type of mind-body engagement and skill set.

Phil’s main point seems to be that computer sport lacks the physicality and direct contact with opponents to be called sport. In his words: Sport is a combination of physical strength and/or endurance, mental alertness and toughness, physical coordination, and a competitive spirit. Without the physical strength or endurance an activity is not sport...ie Darts, Snooker, Pool, computer games, and Wii games.

Clearly, there is some degree of strength,endurance, etc. in each of these activities, including computer sport, that is relevant to the process and outcome. The dilemma now seems to be about what degree of physicality is necessary for an activity can be called sport or not.

But where do we draw the line? If it is only a matter of degree, then wherever we draw the line will be arbitrary. This gets to my other point in the essay: that where we draw the line will often be wrapped up in our habits, interests and prejudices. For example, it might be easy for someone who has played years of high-contact rugby to dismiss darts as ‘real’ sport. And even moreso for computer sport.

Maybe it would be useful to think of the physicality of sport as lying on a continuum between the most direct and immediate (e.g., boxing) to the most indirect and mediated (e.g., computer sport). Soccer would be closer to boxing, and darts would be closer to computer sport. Hmm, now this is got me wondering where horse or motor car racing would sit on this continuum.
Posted by DHemphill, Friday, 16 July 2010 11:29:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Dennis, my interpretation of sport is when the human body is moving as many parts of their body as possible, fully circulating the bloodstream and using a variety of muscles and bones keeping them active for long periods minus repetitive strain in addition to burning up fat and toning muscles throughout the body.

I rate computer games as a hobby not a sport.

Best of wishes.
Posted by we are unique, Sunday, 18 July 2010 12:48:16 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dennis,
You’re being ridiculous to seriously suggest computer games are sport. At best it is a hobby, but that is being generous.

The problem with those types of computer games are that the skills required are not particularly specialised or refined. People learn to apply the techniques required by the computer programmer to master their creation. If anything, we should be awarding prizes for computer design.

The day they go to the trouble of declaring a Playstation player world champion, then I might take you seriously, but still most wouldn’t.

I am not prejudiced against indoor sports or require a sport to be physically exerting. I have played all types. I’ve played cricket and footy competitively. I’ve also done the same with volleyball, snooker (American pool), and chess.

In footy, my kicking was suspect, so I always played backline. I never kicked a goal. My 50 game career highlight was that I once took a specky – a real one. It was a memorable feeling.

I’ve acquired a certain level at chess. Chess requires training, technique, tactics and skills of concentration. In Russia the sport even involves drugs like caffeine to provoke or prolong alertness, but these are allowed. The world champion, whether it be Anand or Kasparov, is respected around the world as a true champion sportsperson, as much as say, a Formula One driver.
Posted by Dan S de Merengue, Monday, 19 July 2010 12:38:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear 'we are unique' and Dan S,

Please see the following:

http://www.fifa.com/interactiveworldcup/index.html

Cheers.
Posted by DHemphill, Monday, 19 July 2010 8:05:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Rewind ... I guess Dan missed your sports (topology) continuum theory Dennis.
Posted by dotto, Tuesday, 20 July 2010 9:56:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The continuum idea could also apply to the degree of institutionalisation of a sport. Consider a play - work continuum. Depending on the context, the activity could be considered play (amateur, recreational, hobby) or it could be considered work (professional,business-like). For example, backyard cricket with the family on Christmas Day (with all the rule-bending that goes on to make it fun for everyone) is cricket-as-play, while the Boxing Day cricket test is cricket-as-work.

Similarly, on my account of computer football as a different type of sport, but sport nonetheless, there would be computer football that would be play in one context, but professional work in another.
Posted by DHemphill, Tuesday, 20 July 2010 10:17:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So ... a contextual sports continuum theory? This is a good game
Posted by dotto, Tuesday, 20 July 2010 10:43:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dan S.

Pardon me, but chess is not sport. A mentally challenging game, but not a sport...sport requires physical endurance, movement and coordination as well as a tough mentality. Chess provides only half of the equation.
Posted by Phil Matimein, Tuesday, 20 July 2010 5:12:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I googled Wikipedia. "Chess is a recognized sport by the International Olympic Committee[3] with FIDE being the recognized International Sports Federation for chess since June 1999." However ... "The prospects of chess becoming an Olympic sporting event at some future date remain unclear. The naming of FIDE's team championship as the "Chess Olympiad" is of historical origin and implies no connection between this event and the Olympic Games." And there's more ... "For the 1924 Olympics an attempt was made to include chess in the Olympic Games but this failed because of problems with distinguishing between amateur and professional players.[1] While the 1924 Summer Olympics was taking place in Paris, the 1st unofficial Chess Olympiad also took place in Paris. FIDE was formed on Sunday, July 20, 1924, the closing day of the 1st unofficial Chess Olympiad.[2]

FIDE organised the first Official Olympiad in 1927 which took place in London.[1] The Olympiads were occasionally held annually and at irregular intervals until World War II; since 1950 they have been held regularly every two years.[1]

It seems much speck-ulation has already occurred about whether it is or is not a sport, that is to say, should it be included as a sport - as one of the 'real' sports or should it not?
Posted by dotto, Tuesday, 20 July 2010 10:11:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Phil M,
What about snooker? Is Melbourne’s own world champion, Neil Robertson, not a sportsman? He well might appear in the motorcade for honoured sportsmen before the Grand Final this year.

What about golf? I saw John Daly near the top of the British Open leader board last week. I believe Tiger Woods is there or thereabouts as the world’s highest paid sportsperson.

Is physical endurance or exertion really a key? Olympians who run the 100 metre sprint or swim the 50 metre freestyle don’t really use of lot of breath to do so. (I think the latter take only about three or four breaths).

Dennis,
I am still not convinced about Playstation football as a true sport. I caught up with a U-Tube video of the interactive World Cup. They looked like they were having a lot of fun. The video spends a fair amount of its time focusing on bikini clad girls of limited ability playing beach soccer on the sands next to the Barcelona event. Are we sure it wasn’t a PR stunt for promoting the real World Cup and the Playstation product? But congrats to the champ. If he was an Aussie, we would probably give him a tickertape parade.

While you’re here, Dennis, can I ask your opinion on fair play? In previous years at the Football World Cup, they used to emphasise something called ‘Fair Play’ (with little kiddies holding up the Fair Play banners). Have they given that up for a joke and replaced it with ‘Win At All Costs’.

In particular, I’m thinking about the deliberate handball that got Uruguay through to the semi-final; another deliberate handball by Thierry Henry that got France into the World Cup finals; and the aggressive tackles on display in the Final with the referee hesitant to send anyone off.
Posted by Dan S de Merengue, Wednesday, 21 July 2010 2:14:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dan S.

There is no shortage of Fair Play campaigns around sport, but they must compete hard against the ever-increasing emphasis on “winning at all costs”. The emphasis on winning sees huge government investment (see my “Fair Go Olympics” http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=7783) and dubious business practices (see Brett Hutchins’ “Winning at all - costs” http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=10730), both of which raise a number of ethical issues around fairness.

It appears to me that your second point gets to the question of the responsibility for fair play. From an ethical point of view, fair play is a principle for self-regulation. In ideal terms, a sporting contest is fair if there is a level playing field, upon which athletes use acceptable means to determine the outcome of the contest.

Of course, dubious practices abound, which see sport organisations or athletes seek unfair advantages of one type or another. Some club officials and athletes may simply adopt the view that something is wrong “only if you get caught”. As self-regulation breaks down, there are more calls for increased policing, usually through more referees, increased video surveillance and tougher penalties. Fair play thus becomes the responsibility of sport officials, and less a measure of the character of the athletes.

The referee is in the (unenviable) position of interpreting and enforcing rules in concrete circumstances. Awarding a penalty kick, for example, might vary according to the circumstances, even in the same match. The hard tackle that would draw a penalty kick in the first minutes of the match may be let go in the dying moments, especially if the scores are even and a premiership is at stake. Is this fair? Maybe the referee is trading off consistency for an outcome that will be determined by the players and not by his/her decision, which will be contentious in such circumstances?
Posted by DHemphill, Sunday, 25 July 2010 8:53:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Here is a follow-up to the previous post.

I would like to return to computer games for a moment to give you an example of self-regulation. During a furious combat sequence, I overheard the cries of my son and several of his on-line comrades to ban a player for being too good! That is, the player in question was achieving non-stop (double-point) head shots, which is seemingly impossible due to the complexity of the battle scenarios and the speed of movement of game characters. Apparently, hackers can re-program the game so that any (single point) body shot will automatically register as a (double point) head shot, thus giving the shooter an unfair advantage. The gaming community in this instance had a clear sense of acceptable behaviour, judged the behaviour (beyond reasonable doubt or balance of probabilities?) as unacceptable, and meted out its justice.

Backyard or schoolyard variants of sports, where there are no referees, teachers or parents, may have the potential to develop the capacity for self-regulation. Children may bicker and squabble, but they can eventually come up with a set of rules to get on with the game and achieve the benefits they expect to get from it. Left to their own devices, children may soon change the rules or abandon a game altogether if it is not inclusive and fun for everyone. Perhaps this is a model for sport ane ethics education.
Posted by DHemphill, Sunday, 25 July 2010 9:08:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I refer to the adage, rules are made for people who can’t think for themselves. Maybe this could become, rules are made for people who are not allowed to think for themselves. There is a place for rules and regulations and society ensures this. Self-regulation can become lost within these rules and regulations. In backyard sport when there is no adult regulation, children do generally bicker with other children and with this being both a consequence and an advantage of the power structures being more evenly balanced than in an adult regulated sport setting(rather than adult versus child). This bickering is important to children learning how to manage being part of the context of the backyard sports game as it forms part of their social learning. It is within this type of non adult-regulated sports setting that children learn to self-regulate. Left to their own devices, children do sort it out – they modify the rules to be inclusive and fun for the group of players in the game. They also reject unacceptable behaviours and can be quite harsh in their rejection of it, but also very direct and clear about it. They won’t want to play it if it isn’t fun and inclusive. Yes,what a great model for sport and ethics education.
Posted by dotto, Monday, 26 July 2010 10:43:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy