The Star. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 1913. MORAL EFFECT OF ATHLETICS

Star (Christchurch), Issue 10923, 12 November 1913, Page 4

The Star. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 1913. MORAL EFFECT OF ATHLETICS

The various controversies which are occurring in England over tho question of British representation at the Olympic Games bn.ro led to a serious dis-

cission of tho part played by athletics in tho national life. Tho ethical value of athletics has bean debated keenly, one writer having stated that tho practice of athletics has not only a physical, it has also a moral effect. The moral effect is a little difficult to define, but it comes under tho general designation of a sense of fair play, a sporting instinct, a readiness to give and tako, a love of the game itself apart from the question as to who wins. Now, as a ruero matter of experience, this particular spirit has been associated with the amateur, not with tho professional athlete. The amateur loves the keenness of the contest; he takes all his risks with philosophic indifference; he applauds with all his heart, an excellence superior to his own; he freely confesses at the end of the struggle that the best man lias won, whether it be himself or his rival. Apparently, this is a mental attitude which is the result of long years' experience and effort. For it is of much wider range than the mere issue of the conflict; it guides the course of conduct all through. Our true amateur athlete never seeks to hare an undue advantage over the man with whom he is contending. He believes in fair play. He does not care so much for the formulated laws and conditions a-s he does for that fine spirit of emulation which treats his rival as a brother, a« a man engaged in a friendly tussle with himself. Perhaps the best amateur,spirit in England is shown in boat-racing, and here there have been\several recorded incidents which prove how superior equity may bo to law. There is nothing of tho " win, tie or wrangle" which has disf/gured some international struggles; there is rather tho give and take of a proud rivalry which loves the game better than its results. If we survey some of the incidents which have occurred—not necessarily in Olympic games, but in other isolated trials between different nationalities—it will be found that they have not all been examples of friendly brotherhood, but have rather proved occasions of bitterness and ill-feeling. That is perhaps why some of us so dislike the idea of professionalism in our sports; it is animated by a different spirit from that which has hitherto belonged to our race. If a good many of our countrymen have looked askance at tho project of training men in selected bodies during the course of two years to the utmost verge of perfection it is because, in their inmost hearts, they are afraid of this spirit/of professionalism—afraid that it may, do some secret damage to what has hitherto been our national love of fair play. They may be right, or theymay be wrong; at all events, it is conceivable that national welfare, in the highest and truest sense of the term, may not be so dependent on professional athletic excellence as our American critics seem to think.