School sports: playing to win

[Atomic Academic]

School sports provide children the opportunity to excel at activities outside the traditional classroom environment. Photo: PHOTOLIBRARY.COM

"It's the taking part that counts." Who were my parents trying to kid? As far as I was concerned, it was all about the winning.


Sports day, aged nine, delivered to me one of the proudest moments of my life to date. It was the day I won a hat-trick; beating off my somewhat indifferent competitors to take home three medals; making the walk to the podium not once, not twice, but three times and printing my name into the sports day record books – one of which still stands to this day.


I have yet to match this great achievement, especially in a sporting arena. Unfortunately, somewhere between nine and eleven my athletic ability rapidly decreased. In fact, I secretly harbour worries that this achievement will never be matched. It would be a sad thought indeed if my sporting ability peaked aged nine.


School sports provide children the opportunity to excel at activities outside the traditional classroom environment. I don't know if I would go as far as saying that children are naturally competitive, but I would say that, for those that are, competing on the sports field is a great motivator and gives others, who may be less academically able, a chance to shine.


Despite this belief – which judging by a quick, unofficial and probably quite unrepresentative poll of people I know, turns out to be fairly universal – Rugby union has introduced new rules which insist that children's "mini rugby" teams can no longer play to win.


Excuse me for being a little slow, but what are they playing to do then? I'm in agreement with retired head teacher, Mr McGovern, who responded to the announcement by saying: "Rugby is a competitive sport by definition, otherwise it isn't rugby, it is just exercise."

The changes to rugby union, which are being introduced by Surrey Rugby for those in the six to 11 age group, also add that teams must be "mixed ability" and must be weakened if they are winning too easily.

I'm all for fairly matching competitive teams by ability in a school setting; it's never fun for the team being trounced or for those doing the trouncing, if the teams are mismatched; although I assume that those doing the trouncing get slightly more pleasure out of the game. However, if one team eventually pulls ahead, why should they be penalised for this?

What's the alternative? That when young Ben/Amy makes a break for the try line, they deliberately slow their speed because James is struggling to keep up? What would be the point in running for the try line anyway, if there's nothing to be gained from it? Let's just say that points are awarded, who cares anyway, they don't mean anything, so why bother running? I can't help but imagine a decidedly polite transaction; "No, I insist, you take the ball, I've already had more than enough time with it today."

Standing at the runway, preparing for the long jump, I remember distinctly the desire to win. However, I was also fully aware of the fact, as my peers were as well, that winning was no guarantee. Losing may smart for a while, but surely losing on a small scale in early life, as clichéd as it sounds, may prepare you for the fact that you are never going to win every competitive pursuit in later life.

Steve Grainger, the RFU's development director, said: "It's a fine line – when you allow the experience to be driven by what the adults want rather than what the kids want."

I can't believe that it's only pushy parents that drive children to get competitive on the sports field. Despite my father's presence at many of my later sporting endeavours, he always represented a dignified figure on the edge of the badminton court; never uttering a word, unlike the 'hysterical parents' who headmaster, Leonard Blom, recently accused of setting 'a bad example on the sports field'.

I appreciated his presence, but his absence wouldn't have made a difference to my performance or motivation.

In 2012, David Cameron made a promise to introduce competitive team sports to all primary schools, when it emerged that almost 2,000 did not offer this in any form. It would be a sad situation indeed if sporting competition disappeared in schools. I'm sure it won't, despite the fact that some schools opt for the non-competitive sports day.

School sport is never wholly about winning and losing; but we shouldn't pretend that both of these aspects aren't important motivators for some children and should play a part in school life.

First published by:

TAG has permission to republish educational articles, accredited by: NLA media access. (UK)

Creative Commons for Educational Purposes

 

[Th e Reason]

Sports are competitive by nature. A sport is a game and a game, by definition, needs a winner and a loser. Competing to win is what a sport is all about so, without that aspect, what do have? Exercise.

 

[cookiesandcreamshake]

I used to run track, play basketball, softball and football (soccer) during my school years and boy, did I love the competition. I was an average student so being above average in the field gave me great motivation. I loved every moment of it. It was the only thing I looked forward to when it came to school. It gave me the opportunity to do something I was actually good at. My coach always use to tell me that it isn't always about winning but how you play the game.

 

[dannyboy]

I used to run track, play basketball, softball and football (soccer) during my school years and boy, did I love the competition. I was an average student so being above average in the field gave me great motivation. I loved every moment of it. It was the only thing I looked forward to when it came to school. It gave me the opportunity to do something I was actually good at. My coach always use to tell me that it isn't always about winning but how you play the game.

Yeah it is about the mentality you have when you play the game. You have to play your heart out and lay it all on the line, win lose or draw.

 

[CeliVega]

"It isn't always about winning, but how you play the game"
I couldn't agree more! I believe it's essential to educate children on sportsmanship and that sports isn't just about winning. It should be something fun that both competing sides can enjoy, put their skills to the test, or just simply having a good time.

 

[angelicagapit]

My coach always use to tell me that it isn't always about winning but how you play the game.

I definitely agree with you, but still, it doesn't hurt to want to win.

A game is a game, someone should win, the other should lose. The main goal of the game is to win, and a plus is to have fun. To make things more ethical, both the winner and the loser should show good sportsmanship and not let out jealousy against the other.

 

[wander_n_wonder]

I think sports build the competitiveness in people, and there is nothing wrong about that. It's good that at a young age, you get to learn that you need to exert a lot of effort and hard work in order for you to achieve something.