What is the Purpose of Sport?

As I mentioned in my first post, I believe that determining the purpose of elite sport is the critical task that will frame every other debate regarding the ethics of sport. Why do athletes become involved in sport? Why do people watch sport? Why do companies sponsor sport? And why do governments sponsor sport?

Most sporting organisations and governing bodies have mission statements which generally say something vague about their purpose with respect to their sport(s). Rarely, if ever, do they mention what the actual purpose of sport is. An example is the UCI (International Cycling Union), which states a goal of "promoting sporting ethics and fair play" in its mission statement, as well as promoting the sport, etc. This is typical of most international sporting bodies. The IOC's (International Olympic Committee) Olympic Charter goes into a bit more detail:

"Olympism seeks to create a way of life based on the joy found in effort, the educational value of good example and respect for universal fundamental ethical principles."

It goes on to say its intention is:

"to encourage and support the promotion of ethics in sport as well as education of youth
through sport and to dedicate its efforts to ensuring that, in sport, the spirit of fair play
prevails and violence is banned."

Based on this, you would think the Olympics was more about morality than competition, which is not even mentioned. Again we have the term "fair play" being used, without any reference to a specific definition.

It seems to me that it is impossible to operate in a sport's best interests, without actually defining what those interests are, yet that is what many important sporting bodies are trying to do.

I think there is a stark separation between what the general public believe is the purpose of elite sport, and what athletes themselves believe to be the case. In a lot of media coverage, there seems to be an underlying idea that the point of elite athletes is to provide a moral role model for their fans. This can be seen in situations where an athlete is caught using recreational drugs, or getting into a pub brawl, or any other such thing that is completely unremarkable and inconsequential for most people, but can cost an elite athlete their reputation and their job. This emphasis on morality was also seen in the Olympic Charter. But in reality, does elite sport exist to serve a moral purpose? Is this why athletes compete, why spectators watch?

I think it is fair to say that most athletes do not become involved in sport as a means to become a public moral example. As an athlete myself, I became involved in competitive sport primarily because I like playing sport, and in particular, I like cycling. I like the feeling of going fast, of going as hard as I can. I also love competition (this is not the same thing as loving to win). I want to see how good I am compared to other people, and I want to see how much better I can get.

The competitive aspect is, I believe, probably the most significant thing driving athletes into elite competition. Possibly this is mainly true for individual athletes, but I suspect it is true for most team sport athletes too. Most elite athletes I know have either played several different sports at a high level, or are planning to do so after they retire from their initial sport.

Spectators do not watch sport for the moral example set by athletes either. If moral guidance is what people wanted, church attendance would be increasing and sports popularity declining, instead of the other way around. I am not suggesting that morality is not important to sports spectators (or athletes), but rather that it is not the guiding purpose of sport.

There is also an intellectual aspect to most sports that attracts many athletes. There are tactics and strategy. Using the example of mountain biking again, a friend told me that he likes to see how fast he can get, not just as a way to win, but he likes to examine each element of each race, and see where he could make up some time to be faster next time. He likes to be technical about how to get better. What type/ how much training? Where can he reduce weight on his bike? Optimising recovery and nutrition, which races to target, etc. These aspects are all interesting themselves, within the goal of simply getting faster.

The term "competitive" should not be confused with a simple desire to win. It has more to do with wanting to be the best that it is possible for that person to be, and competing with others for some has a lot to do with providing a gauge to measure personal improvement. There are plenty of athletes who know that they are not talented enough to ever be world champion, but they compete nonetheless. Many athletes (myself included) will move up to international competition before being a national champion, simply to see how one really measures up.

I like the performance aspect of sport; the more people are watching the better the feeling. And the performance appeal has a big appeal for spectators and fans. This obviously has an effect on sponsorship too, since a larger audience yields a bigger return.

One more final factor that contributes to the purpose of sport is financial. I am a female cross country mountain biker, which is not exactly a lucrative sport. So for me, financial gain is not a factor (in fact I spend my entire disposable income on my sport). But I know other athletes (in more popular spectator sports such as football) for whom money is the primary reason for practicing sport at an elite level. For some talented individuals, professional sport is simply an easy way to make money.

I would welcome any comments from other athletes, spectators, sponsors, etc if you agree, disagree or have anything to add to my analysis of the purpose of sport. That is if people start reading my blog!