I've been trying to figure out if there is an objective way to determine what makes one sport superior to another sport. Here are the criteria I've come up with. Call it my philosophy of sports.
1. The game should be played continually, with few stops in the action. Futbol (or "soccer" to you Norte Americanos) and hockey score well here, basketball moderately well, and football and baseball not well at well.
2. The game should focus on human skill and athleticism, not who can buy the best equipment. So, competitive swimming, which seems very dependent on suits and pools, scores low here. Golf too. NASCAR is beyond poor. Anything with steroid problems is bad.
3. You should be able to play pick-up versions of the sport the replicate the real thing. That is to say, the sport should be simple and uncluttered with equipment, refereeing, or other infrastructure. Futbol and basketball score well here, baseball moderately well, and football and hockey quite poorly.
4. Related to 3, officiating should be unintrusive and relatively objective. I'm not sure about the objectivity part since all sports have subjective refereeing. But in futbol and hockey you rarely see the officials. In football the officiating is moderately intrusive, while basketball (fouls) and baseball (balls v. strikes) score poorly, with referees being a huge part of the game.
5. You should not be able to gain advantage in the sport by getting caught officially breaking the rules. This really bugs me, and it is basketball's great bugaboo. Nothing bothers me more than when someone gets beat off the dribble and then intentionally fouls to stop the layup. Weak, weak, weak. Sports should never allow this. Basketball should make fouls much more costly. In no other sport is breaking the rules so rewarded.
6. Competitive elements of the sport need to be manifest within the official rules. This is hockey's big bugaboo. Half of the competitive spirit is manifest outside of the game itself -- in fighting. In a good sport, this doesn't happen and that spirit is expressed within the game itself.
7. The game should create moments of real beauty. This is a subjective call, but nothing is more beautiful than basketball, manifesting beauty in power, speed, and style. Hockey is too fast for the human eye, so it is the loser. Baseball and football have moments, but they are rare. Granted, your mileage may vary here.
8. Players should be asked to do everything the sport involves. The more player specialization, the worse the sport; if you play a sport, you should really play it all. Basketball scores very well here, futbol moderately well (goalies), while baseball (particularly with the DH) and football score miserably. I can't underscore how bad football fails this test, with offensive, defensive, and special team specialist, each further subdivided by positions that do vastly different things.
So, in the end, futbol is the great winner here, followed by basketball, hockey, and baseball. Football is the great loser. This is odd since I really like to watch football. What am I missing?
4 comments:
I think one thing that makes football more entertaining are excitement highs, or more generally, the range and frequency of change in pace or excitement. Baseball is a pretty steady slow pace, Hockey is a pretty steady fast pace, neither of which are as entertaining. Soccer (futbol) is relatively slow paced, with only one or two exciting or celebratory moments. Football is a constant up and down in pace and excitement; each new play is a chance for a huge run or pass and a score that could change the game, and it actually happens many times in the game. This not only keeps individual attention better, but it makes it more enjoyable to watch and celebrate with other people. Basketball does well with pacing too, but big plays are not nearly as well rewarded, so excitement is lacking until the end of the game. Baseball rewards well, but the big moments are not nearly as impressive.
I'm attempting to join you in relative objectivity here, since I personally enjoy watching baseball, especially when I'm emotionally invested in a team.
Fun thought experiment, though :)
Well put Bryan, although I disagree with your eval of #5 in regards to basketball. I think fouls are very costly in basketball. The player fouled gets to shoot two free throws, when a team has received 7 fouls they get to shoot no matter what the foul, and players often foul out of the game. Too many fouls often cost teams the game.
Now pickup games are a completely different story...I hope I am not guilty too often of fouling you when you beat me off the dribble. :)
Kyle
I can’t help but noticed that you’ve overlooked the crème-de-la-crème of competitive sports: marathon running. ☺ Seriously, it stacks up pretty well according to your criteria. 1. Marathon runners never stop. 2. All you need is shoes. It’s all about the athleticism. 3. Nearly everyone (who is in running shape) can walk out his or her door and replicate a distance run. 4. Marathon runners rarely ever need officials. In fact, they are usually only present at the beginning and end of the race and sometimes in front of the lead runner. 5. If caught breaking the rules (taking a short cut, using drugs, etc.), you are flat out disqualified. Game over for you. 6. I’m not entirely sure how to answer this one. I suppose the official rules are all about running fast and not hurting others along the way, thus well aligned with the competitive spirit of the sport itself. 7. Power, speed, style? Have you ever seen Paula Radcliffe or other famous marathon runners? Strong, fast, smooth. 8. Every competitive marathon runner engages in every aspect of marathon running—a strong (but restrained) start, pacing, hill climbing, passing competitors, a strong finish.
All of this justification just in time for the Boston Marathon next week. Perhaps the 30,000+ runners and 1.5 million spectators should add some weight to my case?
Football is boring. I heard that in a 4 hour game, there is really only about 15 min of action. So it is really just a bunch of fat men standing around the lawn. I guess it's the cheerleaders that keep it interesting? I also do not like how weak the players can be. Yes, tackling can be hard but they have padding, get over it.
Now take Rugby. Just as hard (if not harder and more violent than football) but without the padding. Those are some tough men. The action is more action than football as well, at least from what I have seen, it's hard to find a game on TV, especially without cable.
Speaking of violence, I am a huge fan of MMA. However, this didn't happen all at once. When I first started watching it, I was thinking, "This is nothing like Rocky, how boring." But the more I learned about it, the more of a chess game it became. Since studying MMA myself, I now know the holds, locks, take downs etc, so to see skilled fighter fight is very exciting, and even seeing the inexperienced fight is entertaining. They give everything they have.
Also speaking of violent and fast paced sports, Hurling is amazing. It's an Irish sport that Ruston and I got into when we saw it in Ireland. Someone told us, "Hurling is faster than soccer and more violent than hockey." I still don't understand the rules yet, but it is very fun to watch.
Baseball. I love that sport. Yes, I see how it is boring, not much happens a lot of the time, so I am trying to figure out how it fits in your rules. I like watching the pitcher, the way he watches the bases and tries to fake the runners out. I like watching the batter, seeing his body able to close in on the ball, start too swing, but then hold up on everything if necessary, all with in like half a second. According to USA Today, the hardest thing to do in sport is hitting a 90 mph baseball. I also like watching the fielders, they know where the ball is going to go just by how the batter is standing. I also like baseball for the fan/player interactions at a game. How fun to tease the opposing team and have them play back to the crowd. I know that's not part of the sport itself, but it is part of the experience of going to a game.
Speaking of part of the experience, fights in hockey is part of the experience. What's the thing people say? I went to a fight and a hockey game broke out? Something like that.
Now let's talk about soccer. I don't like watching it. It is boring. However, I love playing it. But the thing I want to talk about here is your rule #5. The off sides rule. This rule is comparable to your basketball foul. It is what we did on our team all the time. We kept the lines so close that anytime the ball went over us (the defense), the opposing team would be called off sides and it was out ball again. It worked great for us but it is one reason Ruston does not like watching it. He says it takes away half of the action but not letting the other team have a 'fast break.'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=noOHdTQd6H8
Tennis. You didn't talk about this sport at all. I don't know anything about tennis and have never really watched it so I have nothing to say about this. What are your thoughts on it?
NASCAR. Is that a sport? People drive around and around and around and around and around.... I drive around all the time. Nothing too hard there. Yes I understand the stress they are in and the heat and the danger, but I went through all that doing delivories in a car that had no AC. Anywho, moving on
Other sports that don't require any physical activity, like fishing and shooting. While I enjoy shooting a lot, and it takes skill, I don't know if that is much of a sport either.
So how my physical activity do you think is required for a sport?
Ok, I didn't mean to say this much. I just started typing out loud I guess.
Post a Comment