Journal Title: Journal of the Philosophy of Sport
Section Title: Articles
Author Head: Kreider
Running Head: Prayers for Assistance
Contact Information: A.J. Kreider - Miami-Dade College, Homestead, FL. 33030. akreider@mdc.edu
jr>
<
t>
s
<
>
lrh
<
>
rh
<
>
fn
<
Prayers for Assistance As Unsporting Behavior
t>
c
<
Anthony J. Kreider
>
n
a
<
Introduction
>
a
<
Anyone with even the most passing interest in sports (in the U.S.) will be familiar with the “pre-game”
prayer. Such prayers occur at virtually every sporting level (in both amateur and professional ranks). They
may be private (silent) or decidedly public (over a loudspeaker). They can be plural (among a group of
players) or individual. And, of course, they can be about a range of issues. Inevitably, the subjects of
some such prayers turn towards the outcome of the athletic endeavor about to be undertaken (game,
match, race, etc.). To the extent that pre-game prayers ask for God’s assistance1 in bringing about a
desired outcome, such prayers are a kind of unsporting behavior, and thus they should be discouraged.
The kinds of prayer in question are those like the following: ‘God, please give me the strength to do
this’, ‘God, if it be your will, let us win this game’, and so on. 2 Many of those having found themselves in a
pressure-packed sporting environment have no doubt found it difficult to avoid the rather straightforward
‘God, please help me make this shot!’ prayer, which is occasionally accompanied by some promise for
compensation (like, ‘I’ll never ask for anything else’, ‘I promise I’ll be a good person’, or even, ‘I’ll go to
church this week’). These prayers ask for God to causally intervene in the world in a way that helps to
bring about a desired outcome. (They ask, in effect, for miracles.)
>
tx
<
>
tx
<
The Problem
>
a
<
Such prayers are nearly universally tolerated and sometimes even recommended. The ancient Greeks,
for instance, seemed to accept them (and divine assistance generally) as a legitimate part of sport.
Homer’s account of Odysseus’ praying to Athena for help in winning a race is indicative of this. When
Ajax complains that he lost because Athena made him slip on some cow dung, his protests are met with
laughter (3: p. 438). Rather more recently, films such as Chariots of Fire and Hoosiers seemingly give
voice (unwittingly perhaps) to the view that religious devotion can and ought to be rewarded by success in
sport, and that such success can be facilitated via prayer.
However, Ajax was right to complain. This kind of behavior (prayer for assistance) is unsporting—the
reason being that it involves asking for assistance from a non-participating party, for the advantage of
some participant(s) over others. Since all sports (and games generally) have explicit or implicit rules that
delimit those who are considered participants in the sport in question (and the extent of that participation),
assistance from non-participants favoring one participant over others is unfair. 3 A participant’s asking for
such assistance indicates a willingness to seek an unfair advantage over her fellow participants. In short,
such participants are attempting to cheat—and this is paradigmatic of unsporting behavior.
>
tx
<
>
tx
<
On ‘Unsporting’, ‘Cheating’, and Nonparticipant Assistance
>
a
<
Given the last sentence, perhaps some clarification is in order concerning the concepts of unsporting
behavior and cheating. I will not endeavor to come up with an entirely satisfactory definition of ‘cheating’.
There are several discussions of cheating in the literature, and these invariably point out the difficulties in
giving such a definition.4 I do think it rather uncontroversial that a necessary condition for cheating is the
violation of the explicit (and perhaps implicit) rules of the game (sport, etc.) in order to gain a competitive
advantage.
>
tx
<
W hile this may not be a sufficient condition, it does capture, in part, what is wrong with non-participant
assistance. Participants in sporting events are to be judged on their efforts and abilities, not those of nonparticipants. This is why there are rules forbidding or limiting non-participant assistance in sports. To seek
out and to receive such assistance is to violate the rules of the game. In Feezell’s terms (1), the cheater is
seeking to ‘alter the conditions of competitive equality’. She seeks an unfair advantage.
If giving an account of cheating is difficult, giving an account of sporting and unsporting behavior is more
so.5 However, I do think it relatively uncontroversial that (for the most part) cheating is a kind of
unsporting behavior (though not all unsporting behavior is cheating). And, if cheating is unsporting, then
attempting to cheat (or attempting to do that which is cheating) is unsporting as well. A cheater, or
someone disposed to cheat, is not interested in fair participation in sporting activities.
The views of cheating and unsporting conduct discussed (all too briefly) above are incomplete and
vague; however, they should suffice to ground the claim that prayers for divine assistance are unsporting.
There are, I think, paradigmatic and uncontroversial examples of unsporting behavior (as attempts at
cheating). If it can be shown that prayers for assistance are relevantly like these cases, then prayers for
assistance are equally unsporting. I believe this can be so shown.
>
tx
<
>
tx
<
>
tx
<
Prayers for Assistance As Unsporting
>
a
<
It can be seen that prayers for assistance are unsporting by examining cases of other, similar kinds of
unfair (though non–divine directed) requests for assistance. A cyclist who attempted to gain an advantage
over her rival by asking her manager to shoot out the rival’s rear tire with a BB gun would be attempting to
cheat. A similar cyclist who suggested that his coach should push him up a steep incline at an
unobserved location on the course would be attempting to cheat as well.
Requests for divine assistance differ from these kinds of cases only in the individual of whom the
assistance is asked, and this difference is not an important moral difference. Requests for God to help
one make it up a hill (say, by God granting one additional strength, or by God causing a stiff breeze to be
at one’s back, or whatever) are as much attempts at cheating as the above. Similarly, asking God to
intervene in a manner that interferes with one’s opponent’s efforts (say, by causing the lead rider to have
a flat tire) is also attempting to cheat.
Prayers for assistance are typically more like the former case than the latter, though to suggest that no
one has prayed for misfortune to befall his competitors is naïvely optimistic. (What is it, I wonder, that
players—heads bowed, hands held—are asking for as the opposing team lines up for a game winning
field goal, or penalty kick?) In all cases, though, the cyclists seek to gain an advantage by eliciting the
assistance of a non-participant—assistance that is prohibited by the rules of the race (at least, the rules of
any cycling race with which I’m familiar). Thus, the advantage sought is an unfair advantage. It should be
obvious, I think, that though the methods of such non-participant assistance may vary from sport to sport
(or game to game), all sports have rules prohibiting such assistance.6
A point that needs to be emphasized here is that the unsporting conduct resides in the request for unfair
assistance, independent of any assistance actually having been received. That is, the causal efficacy of
the solicitation for assistance is beside the point, at least concerning its unsporting nature. If the cycling
governing body in the above case discovered that a cyclist tried, but failed, to fix a race outcome by
having a coach provide assistance in an unwatched part of a course (or worse, that the rider paid
someone to shoot out the tire of a competitor), it would no doubt take disciplinary action against the
rider—merely because the rider made the attempt. Whether the solicitation of assistance actually
succeeded in bringing about the desired advantage does not make the solicitation any less unsporting.
That a behavior counts as a kind of cheating will depend, in part, on whether the behavior is successful.
But attempted, yet failed, cheating still counts as unsporting behavior. An athlete discovered attempting to
purchase banned performance-enhancing substances engages in unsporting behavior, even if the sale
(and thus the use) of the drugs never comes to fruition. Such an athlete would face certain punishment,
and justly so. What matters is that the behavior would constitute cheating, if successful. It is this which
makes the behavior unsporting.
Further, even if the method of assistance requested has very little chance of actually providing a
significant benefit, it may be unsporting. Suppose for instance, a cyclist offered to bribe a race steward
that he knew to be very evenhanded. Even though it might be very unlikely that the bribe offer would
result in an advantage on the cyclist’s behalf, the bribe attempt is surely unsporting. Or, suppose that a
>
tx
<
>
tx
<
>
tx
<
>
tx
<
>
tx
<
cyclist sent a letter to the race headquarters a week before its start, addressed to the ‘Head Timer’—the
letter containing an amount of cash in exchange for preferential treatment. That a head timer does not
exist (and thus that ‘head timer’ does not refer) does not make the attempt any less unsporting.
Again, what counts against these attempted bribes is not that bribes are often successful. It is rather
that the attempted bribes would, if successful, bring about unfair advantages. This would be so even if
there was no evidence that bribery was efficacious. What is important is that those who use them believe
and desire that the bribes so succeed and, if they do, will confer unfair advantages.7
So it is with prayer. The parallel with prayer requests should be clear. Even if God does not exist or if it
is exceedingly unlikely that such prayers be answered, requests for the assistance of such a being would
still be unsporting.8 The point is that the unsporting nature of prayers for divine assistance does not
depend either on such prayers bringing assistance or on it being likely that such prayers bring assistance.
What matters is that what is requested would constitute an unfair advantage if received—in this case,
non-participant assistance. The seeking of the unfair advantage is sufficient to make the behavior
unsporting.
It is also important to note that whether the requesting party is aware that what he is asking for is an
unfair advantage is beside the point, at least concerning the request’s being unsporting. A weightlifter’s
ignorance of rules prohibiting steroid use would not mean her use of steroids was not unsporting. Such
ignorance may play a role in determining the severity of punishment (or even if there should be a
punishment at all). But, surely, any results achieved under the use of steroids would be disallowed, no
matter how the weightlifter viewed the use of steroids.9 Similarly, that those making prayers for divine
assistance do not view their prayers as the seeking of an unfair advantage does not detract from the
unsporting nature of those requests. Implicit in this claim is that the participants in sporting events (or any
competition) are responsible for knowing what constitutes fair play. Surely a weightlifter should know that
it would be unfair to ask her coach to help her lift a particular weight. She should also know it would be
unfair for her to ask God to do the same. While there can be no doubt ‘attempting to cheat’ and
‘attempting to do that which is (or would be, if successful) cheating’ may involve different intents and thus
different moral values, both ought to be discouraged.
>
tx
<
>
tx
<
>
tx
<
Similar Unsporting Prayers
>
a
<
The claim about the unsporting nature of prayers for God’s assistance also applies to the (frequently
more public) prayers of thanks after a victory. If it would be unsporting to receive non-participant
assistance from someone in a competition, one should certainly not thank that someone for giving them
an unfair advantage. If anything, if the participant genuinely believed that they had received divine
assistance, they should be ashamed that it had been made to look as if they had accomplished this feat
on their own merits, and they should immediately renounce their victory. To thankfully accept (what is
believed to be) God’s assistance is to show a tacit belief in the appropriateness of such assistance. This
is unsporting and ought to be discouraged.
A further application can be made concerning third party requests for assistance on the behalf of
participants. At least as often as participants pray for God’s assistance in winning, third parties such as
family and friends pray on their behalf. It should be clear that this ought to be discouraged. For, if it would
be unsporting for a participant to seek non-participant assistance, it would be unsporting for a third party
to seek it on their behalf.10 I would hope that athletes would be embarrassed to discover that a family
member had attempted to ‘fix’ a race (sport, game) for their benefit.
>
tx
<
>
tx
<
Can Prayers for Assistance Be Defended?
>
a
<
It may be claimed, in defense of some requests for divine assistance, that some of those asking for
assistance do not so ask because of some benefit for themselves, but rather for the benefit of God’s
glory, or some other worthy goal. Surely there may be benefits realized through a certain sporting
outcome that far outweigh any negatives associated with cheating. For instance, some that make such
prayers consider their performance on the field of play as a witness to God’s greatness—that their
success shows the extent of his love and power such that others will come to the appropriate religious
beliefs. Even if this is the goal of many who ask for God’s assistance (and it cannot be seriously argued
that this is at the heart of most such requests), it misses the point. If, for instance, an athlete believed that
it was good that many would come to believe in and worship God as a result of her success, why not pray
>
tx
<
for that result itself, rather than praying for God’s assistance in the sporting success that may lead to the
desired result (since it is the conversion of non-believers, in this case, and not the success on the playing
field that is the ultimate goal)? Praying for the benefit to come ‘through’ their victory indicates the
presence of a self-interested motive. Such prayers, then, should reasonably be viewed as requests for
assistance for those doing the praying, and are thus unsporting.11
It might also be claimed, I suppose, that we ought not to be questioning God’s decisions to confer
special favor on certain individuals (should they ask for it). After all, many religions take it as a very basic
tenet that God favors certain groups over others. And anyway, one might take the view that, since God
knows of (or is the source of) moral correctness, God would only grant such a request if it were morally
permissible. However, besides that fact that this begs several questions still open for debate (as to
whether such a being exists, whether divine command theory is correct, and so on), it is the mere asking
for assistance that matters here. Surely, no sincere believer ought to ask God to help them do what in
most circumstances would be considered cheating (on a test, in a game, etc.), as there is a prima facie
reason for thinking that cheating is wrong.12 To consider a parallel case, it would not be appropriate for an
athlete to pray for the deaths of her competitors (so she might win herself) on the off chance that this
would be God’s will. Such a person should be abhorrent to believers and non-believers alike.
Another attempt at defending the prayer for assistance might argue that such prayers are not
unsporting, because any advantage they might confer is an advantage that is open to all. Since all the
participants can pray for God’s assistance, that one person does hardly constitutes an attempt to seek an
unfair advantage. That one person just happens to be the one to avail herself of the (opportunity for the)
assistance. After all, that some participants choose not to use a particularly successful training method is
not a reason for thinking that those who do use such methods are gaining an unfair advantage. And, even
if the other participants are ignorant of such a training method, that is not enough reason to consider the
use of the method unfair—or so the argument goes.
There are a couple of things that can be said in response here. First, the mere fact that an avenue of
assistance is open to all, in principle, does not qualify that assistance (or requests for it) as being fair.
That each runner in a marathon could have requested of the local Mafia Don that he fix the race on his
behalf hardly excuses such fixing and thus the request for it.13 All such requests would be unsporting, as
they are requests for non-participant assistance.14 Second, for all intents and purposes, sporting events
are zero sum games, one participant being the winner and the rest non-winners. Were all the marathon
runners to ask for God’s assistance in their winning, at most one could receive such assistance. 15 In such
a case, the outcome of the race hangs on only one circumstance: who had received God’s assistance.
The assistance of an omnipotent being, by its very nature, can trump any preparation or natural ability of
the other competitors. The event, then, becomes not about endurance and speed, but rather about who
can find herself in God’s good graces. This would fundamentally alter the nature of the competition. This
is, I think, perhaps the most egregious aspect of requests for God’s assistance, in that they seek (perhaps
unintentionally) to make irrelevant all other factors generally considered relevant to the sport in question.
Winning is placed above all else. In essence, the only competition involved is a competition for God’s
favor.16
As often happens in sports, some athletes come across a drug, training method, or piece of equipment
that offers so fundamental an advantage that the sport’s governing body must address the issue of
whether such an advantage is unsporting.17 Blood-doping and anabolic steroid use are two prominent
examples. Factors in decisions on such issues may include health and availability concerns. A further
factor does, and should, include questions concerning whether the advantage fundamentally changes the
very nature of the competition.18 It should be obvious that the assistance of an omnipotent being would
dwarf in its magnitude the assistance gained by performance enhancing drugs or blood doping. Surely, if
the use of those can be rightly thought of as unsporting because they would fundamentally change the
nature of the sport, then the receipt of God’s assistance should be thought of as that much more
unsporting. And, if the receipt of God’s assistance would be unsporting, the request for that assistance
would be unsporting as well.19
>
tx
<
>
tx
<
>
tx
<
>
tx
<
Other Prayers for Help
>
a
<
So, prayers that seek God’s assistance in bringing about certain outcomes to sporting events are, in
fact, unsporting. The unfairness of such requests is not limited to sporting contexts. Prayers to do well on
>
tx
<
tests, or at a game of poker, in a job interview, or more troublingly in an election 20 are similar in that they
are requests for unfair advantages.21 What, though, should be said about similar, though importantly
different, prayers concerning requests to ‘do one’s best’? These are not so clearly requests for unfair
advantages. In many sporting contexts, one is allowed to elicit assistance in achieving to the best of one’s
ability.22 This is what coaches and trainers are for, after all. In some cases coaches and trainers are
allowed to continue their assistance, even during the course of the event (though only in a limited
manner). To the extent that non-participants can set the groundwork for an athlete’s highest possible
achievement, prayers to that effect are not requests for unfair advantages (though advantages they may
be, just as some coaches provide an advantage to their protégés). However an important feature in this is
that performing to the best of one’s ability is a function of the participant’s individual effort. It is the
individual’s effort that must be made, and not the effort of a non-participant on their behalf. In fact, it is this
feature that makes non-participant assistance generally unfair—it substitutes non-participant effort and
ability for participant effort and ability. Requests for assistance in giving the effort are, I think, sporting.
Asking the home crowd to cheer one on seems appropriate enough (as would the assistance itself). If the
requests for assistance are requests to somehow provide the effort (or to make the effort unnecessary),
then the request is unsporting.
In a related vein, it bears mentioning that there may be psychological benefits to be had from prayers for
assistance. For instance, an athlete might feel more relaxed (or, alternatively, “psyched up”) if she feels
that ‘God is on her side’. If the objects of the prayers are these kinds of benefits, then the analysis
provided above does not apply. The above critique applies to sincere prayers for assistance. And, it is the
fact that the prayers are about such assistance that makes them unsporting. That they have other,
perhaps beneficial side effects is not at issue here.
>
tx
<
Some Conclusions
>
a
<
If the foregoing has been correct, what should be done to discourage such behavior? Whether
participants should be severely penalized for making requests for divine assistance will depend in part on
how likely it is that they would actually receive it. The fact that governing bodies like the NCAA and IOC
do not legislate against such prayers indicates either that they are not aware that the behavior is
unsporting or that they feel there is no need, since such requests will go unanswered and thus not affect
the outcome of competitions (either because God does not exist or he does not grant such requests). As
suggested earlier, though, even if it is unlikely that such prayers will have an affect on outcomes, they are
unsporting. And, since organizations like the NCAA and IOC openly claim to place significant emphasis
on sportsmanship, they (and like organizations at all levels of sport) ought to openly discourage divine
assistance prayers as a matter of policy.
It will no doubt be pointed out that the detection and enforcement difficulties of such a policy are
significant. In fact, one would seemingly never be able to eliminate prayers for assistance of the private
sort. However, the lack of an adequate detection mechanism does not entail that the practice ought not to
be discouraged. The fact that the detection of the presence of some performance-enhancing drugs is
difficult does not give reason for thinking that their use ought to be permitted or that policies discouraging
them are without merit. I see no reason to view the discouragement of prayers for assistance any
differently.
Of course, explaining to those inclined to make such prayers that they are, perhaps unwittingly, seeking
an unfair advantage would be a good start. This might even be sufficient to largely limit the practice,
especially since those inclined to ask God for assistance (sincerely) are likely also to be inclined to view
cheating as wrong. And, again, the extent to which prayers for assistance in fact constitute a sporting
“problem” (in the way other forms of cheating constitute a sporting problem) will depend on how
frequently they are successful. That question is thankfully beyond the scope of this paper.
It bears mentioning that this discussion is not an indictment of prayer generally, or even of prayer in
sporting contexts. Clearly many prayers concerning sporting activities embody the very nature of
sportsmanship. For instance, prayers for the avoidance of injury are entirely sporting (so long as the
request is for the safety of all participants). It is the prayer for unfair assistance that is unsporting and
ought to be discouraged, just as all attempts at cheating, even unsuccessful ones, ought to be
discouraged.
>
tx
<
>
tx
<
>
tx
<
>
tx
<
Bibliography
>
a
<
1. Feezell, R. “On the Wrongness of Cheating and Why Cheaters Can’t Play the Game.” Journal of the Philosophy of
Sport. XV:57-68, 1988.
2. Feezell, R. “Sportsmanship.” In: Philosophic Inquiry in Sport, Morgan, W.J., and Meier, K.V. (Eds.). Champaign, IL:
Human Kinetics, 1988, pp. 152-160.
3. Homer. “The Iliad, Book XXIII.” In: The Complete Works of Homer, Lang, Leaf, and Meyers (Trans.). New York:
The Modern Library, 1950, pp. 437-438.
4. Leaman, O. “Cheating and Fair Play in Sport.” In: Philosophic Inquiry in Sport, Morgan, W.J., and Meier, K.V.
(Eds.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1988, pp. 193-198.
5. Lehman, C. “Can Cheaters Play the Game?” In: Philosophic Inquiry in Sport, Morgan, W.J., and Meier, K.V. (Eds.).
Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1988, pp. 283-287.
6. Pearson, K. “Deception, Sportsmanship, and Ethics.” In: Philosophic Inquiry in Sport, Morgan, W.J., and Meier,
K.V. (Eds.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1988, pp. 183-184.
7. Simon, R. “Good Competition and Drug-Enhanced Performance.” In: Philosophic Inquiry in Sport, Morgan, W.J.,
and Meier, K.V. (Eds.). Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics, 1988, pp. 209-214.
f>
re
<
f>
re
<
f>
re
<
q
a
f>
re
<
f>
re
<
f>
re
<
a
f>
re
<
f>
re
<
f>
re
<
Notes
>
a
<
1By
‘God’ here, I simply mean any sort of supernatural being—not necessarily that of the Judeo-Christian tradition.
2The ‘let’ here is misleading in that it seems to suggest (incorrectly) a request for mere passivity on God’s part.
3There are a couple of assumptions at work here, namely that the rules of the game are equitable, that the
participants in the game have adequate knowledge of the rules (or that they have a responsibility to know them), and
that their participation is voluntary.
4See (1), (4), and (5) for three such examples.
5See (2) and (6) for two discussions of sportsmanship.
6Some sports do not forbid all non-participant assistance, only certain types. But, even if such assistance is
sometimes allowed (as in spectators finding a golfer’s wayward ball or helping up a fallen rider), it is always limited. It
is not necessary that God’s assistance in particular be ruled out explicitly. As far as I am aware, no sport rules out the
assistance of particular individuals.
7To claim that the success of a type of action (and knowledge of it) is what makes attempts at those actions morally
reproachable is, I think, a mistake. Consider an estranged wife who, in order to claim the insurance money, seeks to
have her husband killed by having a curse put on him by some local shaman. Surely her behavior is morally
reproachable, merely because she makes the attempt at what amounts to murder. That (let’s assume) the placing of
curses never works does not lessen the wrongness of the intent, though it may weaken the motivation to punish her.
There is, to be sure, a strong Kantian flavor to what is being presented here, though it seems consonant with virtue
ethics as well. The above woman has, seemingly, a defect in character. This is also likely true of those disposed to
unsporting behavior.
8Interestingly, whether a participant is sanctioned for unsporting conduct is often a factor in the likelihood of their
receiving some benefit. A basketball player who carried some crystals in her pocket because she believed they made
her shooting infallible would most likely be simply ridiculed. If it were found out that they actually worked, they would
no doubt be banned as giving an unfair advantage (and for changing the nature of the sport—more on this later).
Those who continued to use them would then be sanctioned for seeking such an advantage. Concerning prayer, this
seems to suggest that those who pray for divine assistance should only be punished if there were reason to believe
that the prayer would be successful. But, the behavior is unsporting nonetheless. While it is doubtful that there are a
significant number of athletes that use crystals to aid their success, there is little doubt that other talismans like lucky
sweaters, socks, and the like are “used” in such a manner.
9Similarly, that a student does not realize that plagiarism is not acceptable does not justify grading that student’s
plagiarized paper as though it was his work.
10Perhaps ‘unsporting’ is the wrong word here. As the third parties are not participating in the competition, one
wonders if they can be either sporting or unsporting. In any event, they would be seeking an unfair advantage for the
person for whom they were praying—and thus their behavior is reproachable.
11Some may view sport as a form of worship itself. This is fine, but if the worship requires a sincere appeal for God’s
assistance, it may still be unsporting. If the other participants do not view the sporting endeavor as primarily a form of
worship, then it seems unfair to those individuals to allow assistance (and thus requests for it) on behalf of some and
not others.
12I trust this is not a claim that needs arguing for.
13I owe this example to Mike Veber.
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
14An
exception might be in those cases where such requests are considered part of the sport. The Greeks, for
example, seemed to take this view (3: p. 431). I cannot imagine this being particularly desirable, however. What is the
point of competition if the outcomes are decided so capriciously?
15I am excluding the cases where every participant ties for the win (and prayers to that effect as well). Besides the
fact that it is difficult to imagine the situation in which every participant in the NYC Marathon ties for first place, such a
circumstance would make a mockery of the event.
16While it is no doubt difficult to say exactly what the goal of a sport is or even sport generally (in addition to winning),
I’m confident that being in God’s good graces is not it. Again, I suppose the ancient Greeks might object.
17Or, at least the appearance of such an advantage. Consider the controversy surrounding Greg LeMond’s ‘triathlon’
handle bars in the Tour de France, or fuss made over the ‘winged keel’ of the victorious Australian America’s Cup
vessel. The ‘spirit’ of the rules is usually addressed in such cases.
18See (7) and also (1) for excellent discussions of this point. In further support of the view that conditions that ‘change
the nature of the sport’ are unsporting, it would be helpful to consider cases wherein implicit rules are made explicit,
on these grounds. For example, it can be reasonably argued that the University of North Carolina’s ‘4 corners’
offense ushered in the shot clock era in college basketball. This offense involved a team, upon getting a bit of a lead,
spreading out the players on the court. They would then proceed to pass the ball back and forth, refusing to take a
shot. Opposing teams thus had to take excessive risks to steal the ball, or they had to foul the North Carolina players.
This style of offense can be, and was, reasonably viewed as unsporting in that an ‘unwritten rule’ of basketball is that
teams attempt to make a shot within a reasonable period of time.
19Since the actual efficacy of the type of effort for assistance is irrelevant, the analysis supplied here can be applied to
other, seemingly harmless efforts at “supernatural” assistance (assistance that would fundamentally change the
nature of the sport in question). I have in mind the (seemingly ubiquitous) “use” of lucky socks, sweaters, and the like.
Again, while it seems unnecessary to punish those who sincerely use such objects for the gaining of an advantage
(see note 8), there seems little doubt that if it were discovered these did confer some advantage, they would be
banned as providing an unfair advantage. Thus, to seek out their use is to engage in unsporting behavior, and thus
their use ought to be discouraged.
20As Kurt Smith has pointed out to me in conversation, the same analysis given here applies to requests for God’s
assistance in bringing about desired election results. Such efforts are, in fact, attempts at rigging an election. There
can be little doubt that such requests are made (and that those that make such requests exhort others to do the
same), often publicly so. One can only hope that those making such requests fail to realize the nature of their actions.
21It may very well be the case that these are similar because tests, job application procedures, poker, and sporting
events are all activities wherein participants ‘compete’ for a prize.
22However, this is obviously limited as well. In the same way asking one’s trainer for access to anabolic steroids may
be viewed as seeking an unfair advantage, so asking God to grant one some special physical abilities would be unfair
as well.
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
>
n
e
<
Acknowledgments
>
b
<
I would like to thank the reviewers and editors of The Journal of the Philosophy of Sport, as well as Eivind
Balsvic, Jeremy Morris, Len Olsen, Kurt Smith, and especially Mike Veber for their assistance in writing
this paper.
>
k
c
a
<
>
d
n
e
<