This Module covers the following topics;
1. I think a better conceptual definition of gamesmanship and sportsmanship can be offered here by acknowledging the existing divergent opinions on what does and does not constitute these two critical terms in sport integrity. The definition offered and by extension, the questions and explanations given are flawed because gamesmanship is not principally wrong as it does not necessarily go against the rules of sport but may be construed to go contrary to the spirit of the rules. I understand that some scholars argue that doping constitutes gamesmanship, a notion which, I am afraid, I have to disagree with respectfully. In her article, Leslie Howe offers a more nuanced definition of gamesmanship. She defines it as the attempt to gain competitive advantage either by an artful manipulation of the rules that does not actually violate them or by the psychological manipulation or unsettling of the opponent (or sometimes the officials), whether this be by intimidation, nondisclosure of information, outright deception, or the first alternative (instrumental use of the rules). So in principle gamesmanship can not be strictly prohibited because such actions do not directly infringe on the rules.
2. WADC identifies parents as persons in the athlete support personnel group.
3. Though the question three touches on integrity, it would have been better framed as a sportsmanship question since it touches mostly on social convention aspect of sportsmanship. That said, I respectfully differ with the assumption that fakery is a sign of lack of integrity and non-fakery a sign of integrity. It circles back to how gamesmanship is defined.
4. Question six. Accept defeat but encourage players to win at all costs during the next match is a plausible way forward. At all cost does not necessarily mean outside that rules of sport, which means gamesmanship antics such as quick restarts and strategic fouling can be applied in football, for example.
5. The framing of question eight leads to a paradoxical answer. That said, all the answers provided are an outright infringement on the existing rules and the rules provide a sanction mechanism for such infractions. In my opinion, they do not constitute acts of gamesmanship.
Generally, this module is a very informative and well-thought idea. However, to do justice to this all-important topic of sports integrity and ethics, there is need for an in-depth understanding of how certain acts (doping, age cheating, etc.) threaten the integrity (fabric) of sport. Maybe a good approach would be describing what constitutes playing and not playing the game and firmly grounding it on Pierre de Coubertin’s ideal of sport.
Very good and objective course
Amazing course. I have learned a lot! Now, I do believe I am in a position to guide athletes who will need some of my advice on matters to do with sportsmanship and integrity.
I would like to repeat module 4 quiz