Justifications of Aggressive Behavior in Contact and Semicontact Sports

by 1

School of Health, Physical Education, and Leisure Services University of Northern

Iowa The present study exa ines the extent to which athletes in selected contact and se icontact sports report a!ree ent or disa!ree ent with the use of intentional acts of a!!ression durin! co petition" Ei!hty#five %thietic %!!ression Inventory#Short &or ale athletes responded to the $rede eier and the 'intah Huddleston %!!ression

(ustification Inventory" )verall results revealed no si!nificant differences *etween su*+ects, use of hostile and instru ental a!!ression in sport and *etween the hostile and instru ental +ustifications provided for such *ehavior" -esults indicated that contact# sport participants disa!ree ore with the use of instru ental a!!ression than se icontact#sport participants"

Other aspects
There are a number of differing views one can take on the inherent value of sports. Of course, there is the common argument that sports are a vital part of society an important step in the process of socialization. After all, sports can teach participants some useful lessons. Playing sports allows an athlete to discover the importance of teamwork, the spirit of competition, and the factor of self esteem. !et, there are other arguments that point out the more negative aspects of sports. These tend to focus on how sports can induce aggressive or violent behavior, by both the players and the spectators. An e"ample of such brutality would include riots and#or conflicts that have ensued following a sporting event. Thus, to better understand these and other societal perceptions of sports, a clear definition of aggression is in order. $ssentially, there are two popular philosophies of aggression in sports% the instinct &or catharsis' theory and the frustration aggression hypothesis. The two theories primarily differ in their definition of aggression. Aside from these theories, and for our purposes, aggression can be defined as (angry violent behavior with intent to hurt a person or cause damage to property) &*rankl +'. ,ome important considerations follow from this basic definition. *irst, it assumes that aggression is an act, rather than a state of being. -t also supposes that aggression is intentional, where the intent is to in.ure. The e"planation includes both physical and emotional harm &for a person'. *inally, in this definition, deliberate harm to property is also considered to be an aggressive act. /learly, an alternative interpretation of aggression will presume some assumptions other than these. The first popular theory, termed instinct or catharsis, differs from the previous definition in its treatment of aggression. The instinct theory is based on the infamous works of ,igmund *reud, who argued that aggression is (an inborn drive similar to se" or hunger) &*rankl 0'. Thus, according to *reud, aggression comprises an important part of what makes us human. The word catharsis is actually 1reek, and essentially means (to cleanse) &*rankl 0'. Thus, the instinct and#or cathartic theory maintains that aggression, as a natural instinct, should be e"pressed. -ts proponents, therefore, support the release of such inborn aggression in a controlled environment, i.e. a football game. 2onrad 3orenz, who later e"tended *reud4s original hypothesis, even posited that discharging instinctual aggression in positive societal conte"ts &such as sporting events' satisfies a basic human need. The frustration aggression &*A' hypothesis, developed by five theorists in +565, also disagrees with the more conventional definition of aggression. The *A hypothesis argues that aggression is simply a generic response to frustration &hence the theory4s name'. The theory4s premise focuses on the cyclic nature of frustration and aggression. -n this respect, frustration leads to some e"pression of aggression, while acts of aggression are the direct result of frustration.

-n instinct theory, aggression is viewed as the conse7uence of biological instincts8 in the frustration aggression hypothesis, on the other hand, aggression is believed to result from instigation. A current interpretation of the *A model asserts that once an individual acts out his#her aggression, he#she is more likely to act out aggression in the future. ,o, if an athlete4s aggressive behavior is ignored &or, more dangerously, rewarded', that athlete is more inclined to repeat the conduct in a like situation. -n the end, it is undeniable that aggression is somehow related to sports. The definitive nature of this relationship, however, has yet to be determined. 9hether aggression is an innate emotion or a simple reaction to provocation, its mere e"istence will continue to affect our perceptions of sports and their apparent value to society.

Introduction
The use of the word :aggression: is somewhat confusing. The term aggression is employed to describe angry violent behavior with intent to hurt a person or cause damage to property. :Aggressive: behavior is also used to depict a strong and somewhat adventurous effort. Thus an aggressive sales person or athlete, for e"ample, may be perceived as obno"ious or violent by some and as motivated and hard working by others. ;aron &+5<<, p. +0, cited in /o", +55=, p. 0>>' offers the following definition for aggression% :Aggression is any form of behavior directed toward the goal of harming or in.uring another living being who is motivated to avoid such treatment.: Thus% Aggression is an act not a cognitive state Aggression is not accidental, it is an intentional act to harm Aggressive acts involve both bodily and psychological harm Aggressive acts involve only living beings8 harm to ob.ects does not count as aggression The receiver of aggression does not want to get hurt

;redemeier &+5?6' defined aggressive behavior in sport as% :The intentional initiation of violent and or in.urious behavior. @Aiolent@ means any physical, verbal or nonverbal offense, while @in.urious behaviors@ stand for any harmful intentions or actions.: Thus% An accidental foul or in.ury inflicted on another athlete resulting from inferior skills, will not be considered as aggression. An intentional foul, although not resulting in any harm or in.ury, is considered as sport aggression. ;redemeier@s &+5?6' definition isn@t clear about &a' whether harm to ob.ects counts as aggression or &b' whether acts performed in a sadistic masochistic relationship may be viewed as aggressive...

The Frustration-Aggression (F-A) Hypothesis A drive based model of aggression was originally proposed by Bollard, Bobb, Ciller, Cowrer, and ,ears &+565'. The * A model posits that aggression is a universal reaction to frustration. -nitially the * A hypothesis predicted that% incidents of frustration lead to some e"pression of aggression, and acts of aggression result from some form of frustration

The * A model differs from -nstinct theory in that aggression may be the result of instigators other than biological instincts. A more recent view of the * A hypothesis suggests that the magnitude of the e"pressed aggression is dependent on% the amplitude of the frustration the individual@s threshold for frustration the amount of frustrating incidents, and

the magnitude of the anticipated retaliation to one@s e"pressed aggression &*or e"ample, consider a :yellow: or :red: card for rough play or an altercation between two or more players during a soccer match. The :yellow: card acts as a warning and the :red: card signals the e.ection of the offender from the current, and in some cases future games. Dow, compare foul behavior in sport to foul conduct in every day life situations where the penalty may be decided in a court of law based on criminal assault charges. -n which of the above described environments would you e"pect to observe more restraintE The soccer field, or the side walk behind the soccer field@s standsE A crucial 7uestion in the * A hypothesis researcher@s mind is whether it is a biologically driven e"pression or is it a learned oneE ;ased on the view that all behavior is a by product of various degrees of natural and environmental influences on the living organism, ;erkowiz reformulated the initial * A hypothesis. Thus, frustration does not automatically invoke aggression. Deither does e"posure to aggressive models always lead to e"pressed aggression. -nstead, ;erkowitz postulated that frustration acts as a :readying mechanism: for an aggressive reaction. *rustration, and more frustration, gradually augment one@s likelihood to display an aggressive response. ;erkowiz does not entirely dismiss the acute cathartic effect of e"pressed aggression. An aggressive reaction to a real or perceived provocation does, according to ;erkowiz, result in a temporary feeling of relief. To describe the urge for a feeling of satisfaction following vented aggression, ;erkowiz coined the term :completion tendency.: /ontinuous reinforcement of one@s completion tendency will lead to a learned e"pectation to :complete: each * A cycle. This, however, is a vicious cycle8 each completion cycle leads to a future e"pectation of the ability to vent one@s frustrations. Thus, acute displays of aggression and a following relative calm lead to long term recurring incidents of gradually escalating :completion: needs. ;erkowitz@s conclusion that biological instincts and learning are closely intertwined is crucial to the derivation of solutions to the problematic infiltration of aggressive behaviors into all levels of sport participation and competition. !oung athletes promptly learn that they can get away with certain foul behaviors that they would otherwise find 7uite difficult to .ustify in an every day, off the field situation. -n some cases small, and in other cases significant modifications to the e"isting rules would gradually inculcate newly learned, more restrained reactions to incidents of on field &erroneous calls by contest officials, fouls, etc...' frustration provoked aggression. ;erkowitz@s distinction between :legitimate: &no fault' and :illegitimate &at fault' aggression is an important dichotomy to a better understanding of aggression in the sport conte"t. Fitting in football, choking in .udo, and#or punching in bo"ing are all e"amples of legitimate, within the rules acts of aggression in sports. !et, despite the physical and aggressive nature of sports, such as bo"ing and football, neither sport@s rules would tolerate choking. On the other hand, the rules of .udo or wrestling allow a variety of aggressive acts, such as, pinning down, throwing, choking etc... but do not permit hitting or punching. ,occer players legally engage in rough shoulder to shoulder contact but risk a warning or e.ection for pulling on another player@s shirt or pants. The :threshold of tolerance: toward aggressive acts that fall within the twilight zone of the continuum between :legitimate: &no fault' and :illegitimate &at fault' aggression is an area that re7uires close and careful inspection. 9hen, or under what circumstances, for e"ample, may a hit in football be regarded as :legitimate: force and at what point, if any, it may be construed as :too much: and thus represent :illegitimate: force. - find the constant apparent abuse of the thin, and invariably clear line between :legitimate: and :illegitimate: aggression by athletes very frustrating. Cost competitors are serious students of their game or sport. They are trained to push the limit, reach new heights further raising the bar on the :legitimate: to :illegitimate: force continuum not e"cluded. Two concrete e"amples of soccer rules that create fertile grounds for stretching the :threshold of tolerance: are the shoulder check and the slide tackle. Gedefining the slide tackle in soccer as an illegal game strategy may not eliminate it from occurring in the

game, but it may definitely help reduce e"cessively aggressive defensive play. A positive side effect resulting from such a change in game rules may be an added advantage to the offensive players. A less vulnerable attacker may be able to score more often a sorely needed feature in the present game. GUILT AS THE "HIN E! "E#HANIS"" F$! H$STILE AGG!ESSI$N 1enuine feelings of guilt may inhibit the recurrence of violent behavior. Fowever, within the conte"t of the :game frame: athletes often do not e"perience genuine feelings of guilt. *eelings of alienation between rival teams contribute to a dehumanization of the opponent. The degree to which opponents are treated as ob.ects or obstacles to be overcome, rather than a human being who@s role is to help elevate the level of the game, appears to be related to the degree of contact in the particular sport. *or e"ample, professional football players, bo"ers, basketball players, ice hockey players, soccer players, etc... e"pect various levels of physical contact in their game. -n.uries that result from the use of e"cessive force in any of these sports are so prevalent that athletes e"pect to get hurt and hold the position that their opponents e"pect the same. The general attitude displayed by athletes in heavy contact sports is captured in the following cliche% :-f you can@t take the heat, get out of the kitchen.: -f you@re not ready to get hurt, go look for another game. ,ince violent in.urious conduct is so :natural: to the game process, it is perceived as an unavoidable part of the game, and as such is regarded by many as a legitimate game strategy &intimidation roughing up the 7uarterback is as a game strategy in football or shaking up the forward as a game strategy in soccer'. The use of e"cessive force and intimidation tactics are especially disturbing when rationalized and legitimized in youth sports. All involved in a typical youth soccer league in Dorth America are still fairly fresh students of this game. Thus, errors in .udgement by players, coaches, referees and parents are 7uite common. This reality creates fertile grounds for the brewing of * A generated responses. ;rushing aside inappropriate outbursts by players, coaches or parent toward the referee as incidents of the :heat of the moment,: for e"ample, may lead to later more fre7uent and serious incidents. Bealing with instances of verbal or physical aggression in a constructive manner will pave the way for a safer and more pleasant league e"perience to all involved.

Sreesanth fined
Agence France-%resse & u'ai

India sea *owler Shantha.u aran Sreesanth has *een fined /0 per cent of his atch fee after *ein! found !uilty of two I11 code of conduct *reaches durin! his side2s first Test atch a!ainst South %frica" Sreesanth was found !uilty of the offences after a hearin! conducted *y atch referee -oshan 'ahana a followin! the co pletion of India2s 13/#run win at (ohannes*ur!2s 4anderers stadiu which finished on 'onday" He was found to have acted contrary to the spirit of the !a e and also violated the rules on shirt lo!os" Sreesanth was ruled to have shown unsportin! *ehaviour when, after dis issin! Hashi % la in South %frica2s second innin!s, he ran towards the *ats an" The char!e was *rou!ht *y on#field u pires 'ar. $enson and 5aryl Harper and third u pire 6arl Hurter and Sreesanth pleaded !uilty" The other char!e was a *reach of I11 lo!o policy" That policy states that all !ar ents worn under the playin! shirt in a Test atch ust the selves *e plain white and this was so ethin! that was also referred to in the atch referee2s pre#series eetin!" Sreesanth however wore a *lac. !ar ent under his shirt while *attin! and then later in the day, after this had *een pointed out, althou!h he too. to the field in a white !ar ent under his playin! shirt, it displayed a co ercial lo!o" $oth hearin!s were attended *y the three u pires entioned a*ove as well as Sreesanth, India captain -ahul 5ravid and India tea ana!er 1hetan 5esai"

England can pretend but hard men dont boast

,imon ;arnes

This week, - spoke to Hohn 9oodcock, /ricket /orrespondent of this parish +5IJ ??, and received the first words of sense - have heard on the sub.ect of .ellybeans% (They should be forced to play their ne"t game in short trousers.) Absolutely. The whole business is childish beyond description. The taunting of an opponent by leaving sweets on the pitch is pathetic. -t destroys a spectator4s pleasure in the game. -t certainly made me switch my allegiance to -ndia. thought $ngland deserved what they got. And - don4t think - was alone in that. And yet the $ngland cricket team defend such idiocy. Core, they take pride in it. The whole business of taunting, putting off, insulting all the things that go under the name of sledging has become a battleground in which ugliness and inanity struggle for supremacy. The stump microphone picked up a classic piece of sledging wit during that second Test between $ngland and -ndia. (-4m driving a Porsche /arrera8 what4s your carE) Thus the e"7uisite 9ildean wit of the modern $ngland cricketer is laid bare. -t is, of course, the sort of remark you would e"pect from a Porsche driver, a Porsche being the naffest car ever manufactured. ;ut is it a suitable remark to make to a man from a Third 9orld nation who is a guest in your countryE The combination of vulgarity and insensitivity is mind numbing. ;ut the thing that really gets to me is that $ngland cricketers seriously believe that sledging makes them better players. They prink and preen because they say bad things to people when they cannot fight back. Fard men, ehE (-t comes with the territory,) Catt Prior, the $ngland wicketkeeper, said. (-t4s international cricket, it4s a hard game. 9e all want to win, we4re all playing to win, so you4re going to have banter.) Prior is simply telling the world% (-4m well 4ard.) As a point of information, people who need to tell the world that they are well 4ard are not, in fact, 4ard at all. They are .ust mouthy gits. Geal hard man don4t need to tell you. The $ngland cricket team are suffering from confusion. The players believe to a man that behaving like an arsehole makes you a better cricketer. The fact is that it doesn4t. -t only makes you an arsehole. Peter Coores, the $ngland head coach and team director, has talked up his belief that his team should be more aggressive. That is interpreted by all perhaps even intended by him as charter to drop all reasonable standards of behaviour, as if serious sport can only ever take place in an atmosphere of festering playground antipathy. This is not only untrue, it is not what we spectators want. One of the many great things about the Ashes series of 0==I was the respect between the players. The ultimate image of the series was Andrew *lintoff4s moment of commiseration with ;rett 3ee after $ngland4s narrow win at $dgbaston in the second Test. 9e liked that that4s how we want cricket played. ,o what is Coores4s response to the present outbreak of nonsenseE (There is an issue about whether the stump mike should be so loud.) Do there is not, there is an issue about whether the $ngland players should make such prats of themselves.

-t4s not as if it did them any good. Kaheer 2han, the man insulted by means of .ellybeans, responded by taking five second innings wickets as $ngland slithered to defeat, leaving Cichael Aaughan, the home team4s captain, feebly trying to e"plain that, although Kaheer had played awfully well, it wasn4t the .ellybeans that had inspired him. Kaheer took the opposite view. $ngland didn4t look well 4ard, they looked well pathetic. These people are supposed to be playing for $ngland, they are supposed to be representing me. Fow has it come about, then, this belief that bad manners and good cricket are inseparableE Australia, obviously. *or years, $ngland have believed that everything good in cricket is Australian and that the more Australian the $ngland team can be, the more cricket matches they will win. ,o $ngland have copied the boasting and the taunting while failing to produce a ,hane 9arne or a 1lenn Cc1rath. And it4s contentious, - know, but - think 9arne and Cc1rath did more to win cricket matches for Australia than any amount of mental disintegration inspired by ,teve 9augh4s sledging. $ngland may lack the talent of 9arne and Cc1rath, but they can certainly behave in an infantile and boorish fashion, and that4s almost as good, isn4t itE /ricket is a game in which people talk. There4s plenty of opportunity for it, after all. And -4ve played it. As a lapsed wicketkeeper, -4d say the strongest part of my game was the ability to suck my teeth loudly enough for the batsman to hear it +I yards away after the ball had passed the bat. ;anter, seldom terribly edifying, is a part of cricket, on the village green and elsewhere. Do one e"pects cricket to take place in a reverential hush and, amid the general din, no one is sure whether he is trying to encourage the bowler or disturb the batsman. ,o there is a line to be drawn. -4d be inclined to draw it on purely aesthetic grounds% if it4s ugly, childish and pathetic, it4s time for the umpires to step in, as they are empowered to do. As /hristopher Cartin Henkins has pointed out on these pages before, a five run penalty for an illegal attempt to put the batsman off is within the laws of the game. The -// should encourage umpires to take this on. -t would be the direct opposite of what happened in tennis, when Hohn Cc$nroe was making an idiot of himself. Then, tennis umpires let him throw his tantrums because they feared that defaulting him would make too much trouble. The -// needs to grasp the nettle on this one because the players and coaches such as Coores don4t even think they are behaving badly. Do, they think they are being cool, they think they are being Geal Cen. Ce. -4d like to watch an $ngland team who played good, aggressive cricket, rather than merely pretending to do so. /ricket is supposed to be aggressive% the increased aggression in the bowling of Gyan ,idebottom and /hris Tremlett this season has been good, not bad. ;ut these improvements are not dependent on throwing sweeties at batsmen or boasting about what kind of penis substitute you happen to drive. All the cult of sledging does is spoil the game for the spectators, who want to see a good match contested in a forthright, full on, flat out, aggressive, honourable, decent, grown up way. -f we don4t get that, perhaps we will start to look elsewhere for our sporting pleasures. - shall leave the last word to 2ing 3une of Archenland, from The /hronicles of Darnia. Fis impetuous son insults an enemy who is brought before the court in chains. (,hame, /orin. Dever taunt a man, save when he is stronger than you% then as you please.)

Australia have often engaged in a war of words before tough series. Ponting has said that the pressure is right back on India and the return of Sachin Tendulkar, Sourav Ganguly and Rahul ravid !ight work in Australia"s favour as they"ve played against the three !any ti!es. Andrew Sy!onds too felt that there was too !uch celebration after India"s triu!phant return fro! South Africa. #as this a deliberate plan$ %&o, it"s far fro! a plan to get verbal,% said Gilchrist. %There"s been a lot of focus on the fiery nature of the Indian players in that se!i'final and I think they"re going to continue playing that like. And that"s fine( we e)pect that. If you don"t have a bit of fire in the belly as a fast bowler I think you"re already sort of half'knocked as a tea!. It doesn"t !atter what you say, you"ve got to back it up with good cricket.

Sreesanth has to rein in his histrionics

Kerala and India pacer S Sreesanth has given aggression by an Indian cricketer a whole new meaning. He certainly is the most in-your-face fast bowler that this country has produced so far. However, this is not a positive in his case because he tends to focus more on his antics rather than his job that is restricting the flow of runs and picking up wickets. His rather juvenile antics in the second one-dayer against !ustralia in Kochi is just another addition to his list of bringing the game into disrepute over the last couple of months. In "uesday#s match on his home ground, Sreesanth displayed poor sportsmanship on at least three occasions when he gave $rad Haddin an earful after a %$& appeal had been turned down, then the very ne't instant throwing down the stumps at the non-striker#s end and appealing for a run-out against !ndrew Symonds when the ball was dead and not in play, and finally by gesticulating and jeering wildly after he had caught Symonds of his own bowling. In fact, such was the intensity and duration of Sreesanth#s appeal for the (run-out# against Symonds that umpire Suresh Shastri was in a spot of bother until India#s captain )ahendra Singh *honi ordered Sreesanth to get on with the game. In the post-match conference, *honi admitted he initially thought the bowler was joking when he appealed for the run-out before realising that it was a serious appeal. If this was not enough, Sreesanth went ahead and (celebrated# wildly and gave Symonds an earful after dismissing the batsman. "his was not only a show of utter disrespect to the opponent batsman, but it also made a mockery of the code of conduct in place for players. Sreesanth had given a similar sort of (farewell# to )atthew Hayden in two previous matches between India and !ustralia in the first +*I in $angalore and in the "wenty,&orld .up semifinals. "he Kerala bowler was in fact, charged for e'cessive appealing and fined ,/ percent of his match fees by the I.. )atch 0eferee .hris $road after the ",- &orld .up semifinals match.