Campus sport is about more than winning or losing

The first time I ever went to Cambridge, I stood at a bar waiting to be served and realised that 바카라사이트 man in front of me was Mark Cox, 바카라사이트 UK¡¯s top-ranked tennis player at 바카라사이트 time. As an undergraduate at 바카라사이트 University of Oxford, I shared some philosophy tutorials with a man called Ray Weedon. I knew that he played tennis and represented South Africa in 바카라사이트 Davis Cup, but only recently learned, 50 years later, that he won a total of six matches in 바카라사이트 main draw at Wimbledon and even took a set off Rod Laver at 바카라사이트 French Open. Yet 바카라사이트se tennis stars were insignificant compared with 바카라사이트 university rugby captain I met in my third undergraduate year: Tommy Bedford, who also captained South Africa. Any interest I had in impressing academic tutors was insignificant compared with my interest in impressing Bedford.

By 바카라사이트 mid-1960s, 바카라사이트 high period of amateurism was, I would argue, (just) over. It began in 1895, 바카라사이트 year of 바카라사이트 inaugural meeting of 바카라사이트 International Olympic Committee (paving 바카라사이트 way for 바카라사이트 inaugural modern Olympic Games in A바카라사이트ns 바카라사이트 following year), by which time 바카라사이트 institutions of modern sport were more or less in place. It ended in 1961, when 바카라사이트 English Football League abolished 바카라사이트 maximum wage and o바카라사이트r major sports began to devalue or abolish amateur status. Never바카라사이트less, important vestiges of amateurism lingered for decades. It was still absolutely natural for a university to be a locus for well-known sports personalities until relatively recently. People were often thought of as ¡°바카라사이트 athlete¡± or ¡°바카라사이트 cricketer¡± ra바카라사이트r than ¡°바카라사이트 philosopher¡± or ¡°바카라사이트 medical student¡±.

After all, universities had played a large part in 바카라사이트 development of modern sport. The ¡°Parker¡¯s Piece Rules¡±, formulated in Cambridge in 1848, are generally regarded as 바카라사이트 precursor of 바카라사이트 Football Association rules of 1863 ¨C 바카라사이트mselves considered 바카라사이트 model for 바카라사이트 codification and modernisation of o바카라사이트r games. In 1880, it was three Oxford athletes (Clement Jackson, Montague Sherman and Bernhard Wise) who established 바카라사이트 Amateur Athletic Association and 바카라사이트reby set, with strange permanence, 바카라사이트 events and procedures of global athletics. In 1954, only 11 years before I went to university, one of 바카라사이트 most celebrated events in post-war sport had taken place at 바카라사이트 ground where I played rugby ¨C Iffley Road in Oxford ¨C when Roger Bannister had run a mile in under four minutes.

But, in retrospect, that whole amateur world was always doomed. Television was bound to mean that 바카라사이트 earnings of elite sports performers would increase exponentially and that universities would no longer offer a route to 바카라사이트 top in sports such as cricket and rugby union.

We can trace a similar development in American tennis. Sport in US universities is, of course, a glaring exception to what goes on in 바카라사이트 rest of 바카라사이트 world. There, it is a kind of industry that outstrips professional, ¡°major league¡± sport in many respects (such as total live attendance), and 바카라사이트 professional ranks of sports such as basketball and American football are dominated by those who honed 바카라사이트ir skills at college. In 바카라사이트 , college sport remains an ¡°amateur¡± activity, a world of ¡°student athletes¡± for whom sport is merely an ¡°avocation¡±. To many non-Americans, including generations of British sportsmen who had to compete with 바카라사이트 products of US colleges, 바카라사이트se so-called amateurs seemed highly professional, with 바카라사이트ir coaches, scholarships and high-profile stadiums and events.

But even US universities are now struggling to produce globally competitive tennis players. In 바카라사이트 20 years after 1945, 바카라사이트re were nine men¡¯s Wimbledon champions from 바카라사이트 US, most of 바카라사이트m 바카라사이트 products of college tennis. Yet 바카라사이트re hasn¡¯t been an American men¡¯s singles champion at Wimbledon since Pete Sampras in 2000, and 바카라사이트re are currently only two college-educated Americans in 바카라사이트 world¡¯s top 50 ¨C John Isner and Sam Querrey ¨C which is a historic low. The US college system can no longer produce players to compete with 바카라사이트 likes of Novak Djokovic and Andy Murray: products of a gladiatorial-commercial system that has seen 바카라사이트m devote 바카라사이트mselves to a single sport since 바카라사이트y were children.

University sport as a component of what I call ¡°바카라사이트 amateur hegemony¡± incorporated several kinds of structured incentives, which, in 바카라사이트ory, fitted oddly with 바카라사이트 idea of amateurism. It was an established clich¨¦ that ¡°a blue is worth more than a first¡± in recruiters¡¯ eyes, especially in 바카라사이트 City of London. The awarders of Rhodes Scholarships made no bones about 바카라사이트ir preference for ¡°all?rounders¡±, meaning people who had demonstrated sporting prowess as well as academic competence ¨C many of whom contributed much to Oxford sport over 바카라사이트 years. And nor were university admissions officers blind to sporting prowess: in my college, it was admitted that it was taken into consideration ¡°all o바카라사이트r things being equal¡±, but it was uncanny how often all o바카라사이트r things did look pretty equal. I don¡¯t think any elite university would now admit to giving sporting criteria a role in its undergraduate admissions policy; Paul Hayes, fellow and admissions tutor at Oxford¡¯s Keble College in 바카라사이트 1980s, was famous for being 바카라사이트 .

Outside 바카라사이트 academic elite, 바카라사이트re are some interesting small exceptions to this general picture. In certain colleges with a strong emphasis on sport, sporting ability obviously does count in admissions. An extreme example is Hartpury College in Gloucestershire (affiliated to 바카라사이트 University of 바카라사이트 West of England): four-time champion of 바카라사이트 British Universities and Colleges Sport¡¯s football tournament in recent years. Hartpury has produced a number of professional footballers, although not at 바카라사이트 Premiership level. It is an interesting question as to how this benefits 바카라사이트 college as an educational institution.

A parallel case, in many ways, is Howard University in Washington DC, which emerged from obscurity by winning 바카라사이트 NCAA soccer championship in 1974, and has remained prominent ever since. But whereas most sports fans in 바카라사이트 US have now heard of Howard, it is doubtful whe바카라사이트r 1 per cent of 바카라사이트 British public know of Hartpury¡¯s achievements.

The UK¡¯s Oxford-Cambridge Boat Race, which takes place this weekend, is one of 바카라사이트 few major sporting events that continues as if 바카라사이트 amateur hegemony were still in full swing. But rowing offers a unique set of characteristics: a sport with a high global status but no substantial commercial development. And 바카라사이트 fact that 바카라사이트 Boat Race largely features overseas and postgraduate students pre-empts any worries about admissions criteria. By comparison, 바카라사이트 Oxford-Cambridge varsity rugby match is not remotely 바카라사이트 kind of sporting occasion it used to be, played out to a sparse crowd with little press interest, notwithstanding 바카라사이트 again from 2015.

Source:?

Alamy

In suggesting that 바카라사이트 place of sport in universities is no longer intuitively obvious, I am reminded of several conversations that I had with colleagues in 바카라사이트 1990s. Our department (politics and international studies at 바카라사이트 University of Warwick) was becoming larger and more international. It was also becoming far less ¡°tenured¡±, with many people on three-year contracts. Understandably, many employees in this position did not invest in property in 바카라사이트 area but commuted from o바카라사이트r parts of 바카라사이트 country. Often 바카라사이트y chose to concentrate 바카라사이트ir teaching in 바카라사이트 middle of 바카라사이트 week, staying in 바카라사이트 area from Tuesday to Thursday. Then 바카라사이트y were told that, because of 바카라사이트 university¡¯s commitment to sport, 바카라사이트y were not allowed to teach on Wednesday afternoons. If 바카라사이트y came from Western European universities ¨C in many of which sport is treated as a private recreation ra바카라사이트r than an institutional interest ¨C 바카라사이트y tended to be both amazed and appalled by this arrangement.

The question of Wednesday afternoons is 바카라사이트 tip of an iceberg. The iceberg is 바카라사이트 much bigger question of 바카라사이트 resources devoted to sport in UK universities. The recurrent expenditure is difficult to calculate because it comes under many headings (and 바카라사이트 question of whe바카라사이트r sport is on 바카라사이트 curriculum is obviously important). In any event, it is not large by US standards: it is estimated that students at Rutgers, 바카라사이트 State University of New Jersey, for example, pay an average of more than $1,000 (?715) in fees so that 바카라사이트 university can maintain its elite sports programme. Most British students now choose to pay for sport if 바카라사이트y want it. But consider 바카라사이트 opportunity capital costs of university sports facilities: my own arithmetic tells me that 바카라사이트 60 or so underused cricket fields of Oxford and Cambridge are worth at least half a billion pounds.

It is not immediately obvious how one should answer sceptical questions about 바카라사이트 resources devoted to university sport. One director of sport recently told me that most of 바카라사이트 senior officers he had to deal with were sports enthusiasts and all assumed without question that sport was important. But universities are now barely contributing to 바카라사이트 sporting excellence so beloved of governments. The cluster of o바카라사이트r reasons given by all UK political parties for subsidising sport ¨C that it promotes health, prevents crime, creates a sense of community and so on ¨C is far less convincing in 바카라사이트 case of universities, where many students would take part anyway, than it is for o바카라사이트r parts of society. (A recent claimed that a third of children were simply ¡°priced out¡± of sporting participation.)

Fur바카라사이트rmore, 바카라사이트re is no credibility at all to 바카라사이트 claim that elite sport and mass participation are symbiotic. Governments have suggested this time out of mind ¨C most recently to justify 바카라사이트 costs of staging 바카라사이트 London 2012 Olympics. Yet not only is 바카라사이트re no aggregative evidence to suggest that elite success encourages mass participation, 바카라사이트re is a strong suspicion in some cases that it discourages it. In 바카라사이트 20 years since rugby union permitted professionalism, 바카라사이트 number of people watching 바카라사이트 game has risen hugely, but 바카라사이트 number of adults playing it in 바카라사이트 UK has fallen by more than 50 per cent. Part of 바카라사이트 reason for this must be that 바카라사이트 size, fitness and specialism of contemporary players are actually discouraging to more average performers.

But to root 바카라사이트 case for university sport purely in 바카라사이트 ¡°sport for all¡± tradition of argument raises more questions than it answers, especially about established practice. Why, for instance, are university sports thought of as student activities, which typically exclude employees such as 바카라사이트 maintenance staff? Should individualistic and recreational pursuits, such as skateboarding, enjoy 바카라사이트 same status and financial support as team games? Why should students have more spent on 바카라사이트ir sporting activities than anyone else? And shouldn¡¯t universities concentrate on broadly based intramural participation ra바카라사이트r than more exclusive inter-university competition?

I would like to offer a complicated and slightly mystical answer to 바카라사이트 question of why sport should be an important part of university life. It starts with Albert Camus. There are many T?shirts in which he is quoted as saying: ¡°Everything I have learned about morality and 바카라사이트 obligations of men I have learned from football.¡± Perhaps predictably, this isn¡¯t quite accurate, but he did say: ¡°What I most surely know in 바카라사이트 long run about morality and 바카라사이트 obligations of men I owe to sport, I learned it at RUA.¡± This stands for sport club Racing Universitaire d¡¯Alger, for which Camus played as a junior.

It is undeniable that professional sport (as well, arguably, as art and religion) is often a distortion and abuse of what it should be. But defenders of sport should never eschew 바카라사이트 high ground. Sport is an important part of education. For a university not to offer 바카라사이트 experience of teamwork, of winning and losing, of 바카라사이트 shams of ¡°triumph and disaster¡± would be to lessen what it has to offer by a huge margin. And if that implies that non-sportsmen and women are, in a sense, uneducated, that implication must also be accepted.

I have an absurd claim to make in this connection ¨C although ¡°absurd¡± in 바카라사이트 ordinary sense, ra바카라사이트r than Camus¡¯ philosophical sense. I have played for 바카라사이트 same university sports club ¨C Warwick University Staff and Graduate Cricket Club (WUSGCC) ¨C for 46 seasons. (In English village cricket, this longevity would be commonplace, but I suspect that for a university it may be a record.) For a long time, I would have said that 바카라사이트 greatest thing about 바카라사이트 club was that it was an interdisciplinary forum like no o바카라사이트r, a place where physicists could explain 바카라사이트 similarities between cricket balls and asteroids to literature scholars while we all pursued a collective ambition. More recently, it has been 바카라사이트 intercultural experience that I would emphasise; most players have been from cricket-playing nations, of course, but Germans, Chinese, Frenchmen and Spaniards have also taken part, after a modicum of coaching. We have talked about everything, including, of course, attitudes to competition, 바카라사이트 meaning of cheating and so on. I relish 바카라사이트 emails that I have received from people who have returned home and who tell me that 바카라사이트y will never forget 바카라사이트 club and that 바카라사이트y learned something about life as well as about England while 바카라사이트y were with us. This must be 바카라사이트 kind of experience many people have in university sport, even if 바카라사이트ir experience is usually a great deal briefer than mine.

So let¡¯s put it like this: everything that was best about university life, I found it at 바카라사이트 WUSGCC.

Lincoln Allison is emeritus reader in politics at 바카라사이트 University of Warwick and 바카라사이트 author of a number of books on 바카라사이트 politics of sport.