Following sports

[juliet]

I started thinking about this yesterday evening, when nou said that she doesn't enjoy watching sport of any variety, and that she doesn't find herself caring about who wins or whatever (which is of course an entirely reasonable position :-) ).

For the most part I would tend to agree with her. However, there are about 3 sport-type things that I enjoy watching:
- athletics (more the running stuff than the field stuff)
- cycling
- cricket
And I have also been known to watch rowing on occasion (although the last time I did this it was primarily a Pimms/riverbank-based endeavour).

I think all three are for different reasons. Athletics is a fondness inherited from my father, who would invariably watch it on the TV, & even took us to Crystal Palace for a couple of meetings when I was a kid. It's also clearly such bloody hard work, which I find impressive. Cycling is very recent & is entirely down to the fact that I understand what it is that they're doing. Riding 200k in a day is something I have a very good feeling for, although I do it about 2.5 times slower than the TdF guys (& actually stop for my meals). I know what it took for Robbie McEwan to come back like that in the first stage, and I find it enormously impressive. Cricket is dogrando's fault ;) & is the only team sport I've ever been remotely interested in. Test cricket is interesting and strategic and complicated - I think that's what appeals there.

The other thing is about caring who wins. In both athletics and cycling, I don't think I do, much, care who wins. I'm more interested in how it is they're getting there. I wasn't shouting at the TV as Mr McEwan put on the aforementioned sprint because of who it was; I was shouting because it was amazingly impressive. If watching athletics I will tend to be rooting for the UK person, but I don't mind much. I certainly don't suffer in the way that dogrando does if (when...) England lose at cricket, although I am vaguely pleased when we win.

I am not sure how unusual this position is - isn't a major part of the point of sporting endeavours supposed to be about caring who wins? Opinions welcome!

Comments

[mstevens.livejournal.com]

I don't like watching sport in any way at all, so I think I agree with nou.

The only side of sport I can even consider finding interesting is actually doing it, and even that's often a stretch.

My family were all very into their football.

[arkady.livejournal.com]

I watch equestrian sports because I love watching horses in motion. I watch figure skating because I love the grace of the skaters. I watch gymnastics for a similar reason.

In all three cases, I don't care who wins; I love the beauty of the spectacle.

[juliet]

I think that may be it - the spectacle. In my case a different sort of spectacle from yours (I like the exciting-type spectacle rather than the grace/beauty ones, in sport), but that's what I enjoy.

[tla]

I am more or less with you on the cycling and the cricket -- the latter is something I picked up from my co-workers at the Temple of Capitalism. I do also like watching football occasionally, because I used to play it when I was a kid (and in the US we don't have all those associations with footballers gone wild.)

I don't think it's all that uncommon (especially, my uninformed gut tells me, among women) to care more about the beauty of the spectacle than the actual person / team that wins. I don't really get my ego bound up into anyone, so if someone else is better, good on them. That said, I do tend to pick someone at the outset who I can pin some mild hopes on, because it is kind of fun to go through the ups and downs with one side or the other. (e.g. England in cricket.)

[marnameow.livejournal.com]

I used to really love car racing - F1 in particular - and still am a bit interested in it. But there was a patch when I knew oodles about it. I liked it because it was complicated. You have yr actual driving around the track, and that bit's okey, but you also have yr weather making a (sometimes big) difference, and yr tyre options, and fuelling, and inter and intra team politics, as well as the politics of the whole thing, and sponsorship and engine deals, and the computer and gadgetry geekery and all manner of things like that. And the more you know the more interesting it is. I loved watching the races, but I loved the in-between bits more, mostly. (The crashes would make me feel a bit ill - they were the bit I liked least.) I had complicated driver and team ranking things happening in my head, and favoured the indie teams. Now there are no indie teams. It's not so much fun.

I like ice-hockey, but that's for the juxtaposition between gracefulness and violence, and because of late night channel 5 insomniac reasons. I barely follow it.

I am sort of liking cricket now, because of a mixture of it being complicated and Pete getting geeky about it. I think the latter led to me discovering the former.

[i-ludicrous.livejournal.com]

Did the indie teams spend too much time staring at their shoes?

[juliet]

Complication is definitely an interesting thing. (The cycling is pretty complicated, as well, on similar lines.)

Pete is a cricket-pusher. Damn him.

[(Anonymous)]

I was thinking about this the other day when we were at Wimbledon - what it is that makes watching sports enjoyable or boring as rationally it seems to me like a slightly weird way to spend your time. On the whole I find watching sports dull, but once every few years, there will be some sporting event that I randomly really get into, even though I may have previously had no interest in that sport whatsoever.

I have really enjoyed the small amount of live sport that I've been to watch - I've loved Wimbledon the couple of times that I've been and when Jon took me to one of the England-West Indies 20-20 matches the other week, I enjoyed it although we were lucky to get a match that was reasonably exciting (and I did have Jon to explain things to me, though he failed to explain why people wave bits of cards with 4 or 6 on them to my complete satisfaction).

[boyofbadgers.livejournal.com]

4 = the batsman has just hit the ball all the way to the boundary of the field, and therefore scored 4 runs.
6 = the same, except the ball did not touch the ground on the way to the boundary, which is worth 6 runs.

[beingjdc.livejournal.com]

I solve the problem of not caring who wins by gambling. Even if it's only a few quid it tends to be a reasonable encouragement :)

[juliet]

I do not gamble! At all. (unless you count being in possession of a fixed-rate mortgage as gambling, of course, which in a way it is blah blah economics blah.)

The thing is, I don't *mind* not caring who wins; I like it for other reasons. Actually, caring too much who wins would make it Stressful & thus unpleasant, I think.

[beingjdc.livejournal.com]

Yes, having a fixed-rate mortgage is gambling, as is having a variable rate mortgage. In fact, as is buying an asset at all. I have premium bonds too, I must be a compulsive gambler, but it's OK, my P&L says I'm good at it. Oh, insurance too, that's a form of gambling.

[katstevens.livejournal.com]

I enjoy watching sports and rooting for the British interest/the underdog (usually the same!) but it can be very frustrating.

Sports I enjoy watching: tennis (usually v fast paced/exciting esp on grass courts & I know enough about it to follow properly), cricket (relaxing yet entertaining), ice skating,= & gymnastics (for the same reason I like watching ballet). I have paid money to watch tennis live on several occasions and it was absolutely wonderful - such a great atmosphere even at non-Wimbledon events. I am absolutely rubbish at tennis though :-)

Sports I don't really enjoy watching anymore but used to very much: football (I can appreciate good tactics/good shots on goal etc but most of it is so DULL these days!), swimming (I shout at the telly then get awful dreams about it), F1 (just lost interest completely after rub 2003/4 seasons & constant rule changes).

[juliet]

I rather like ice skating. Pretty! Gymnastics I like less mostly because I look at the things they are doing to their backs & cannot get past going "YOU WILL CRIPPLE YOURSELF IN LATER LIFE!" at the telly. The blokes aren't so bad for this.

[lnr]

I'm not big on watching sport. Snooker is wonderfully relaxing and great to chill out to before bedtime. I've always loved ice skating (but ice dance is better than figure skating). I can happily watch a bit of athletics or tennis. And lately I've been enjoying football because Mike is into it so much.

I don't get devastated if someone I'm supporting loses, and can often change my mind about who I want to win halfway through something. I think it's easier to support one side in a team match, or an individual event like a single tennis match, than it is to pick someone to support out of the many many people taking part in the tour de france for example. With things like tennis I only tend to have someone I really want to win overall if I've enjoyed watching them doing well in earlier rounds.

[sbp.livejournal.com]

All sport = rub, but then I am not a competitive person. Can't they just negotiate the result and then go for a cup of tea or something? Take turns at winning? Not worry about whether it's a better time or whatever?

Stuff like surfing, skateboarding, sailing, sports that make sense for enjoyment I can appreciate. And sports that allow you to wear jeans or do it somewhere really sunny.

But I don't tend to find things impressive either, at the moment. I dunno.

[kake]

[...] I am not a competitive person. Can't they just negotiate the result and then go for a cup of tea or something? Take turns at winning? Not worry about whether it's a better time or whatever?

Yes, I find myself thinking this at times. I much prefer cooperative things to competitive things.

[juliet]

One of the interesting things about cycling is that there are aspects of this. e.g. last night in the TdF David Millar lost the King of the Mountains jersey (worn by the rider who's ahead on climb points on a given day). It was clear that he was going to lose it early on, when he didn't go with the breakaway group. Interviewed afterwards, he said "Well, I knew I was going to lose it tomorrow anyway" (he's not really a climber - the climbs so far have all been little ones) "so I thought I'd share it with [have forgotten name - the guy previously in second]."

Similarly, competing riders will work together e.g. to keep a breakaway group in front of the peleton (& then yesterday after about 200k doing that, they buggered it up in the last 2k or so!). Or teams will work to haul their lead guy to where he needs to be. There is still plenty of competition in patches, granted.

With the exception of cricket, I think I prefer sports where the competitive nature is at least in part against yourself; which is a slightly different sort of thing, somehow. I can't be bothered with sports like football & rugby where the focus is the team.

(Actually, thinking about it, there's a certain amount of individualism in cricket, as well, I guess.)

[fernasto.livejournal.com]

Look at me, commenting on a post and everything...

Basically you like sports that you know something about:

Cycling: knowledge gained from personal experience (especially helps with empathising with protagonists).
Cricket: knowledge gained from Pete's insinuating evangelism.
Athletics: knowledge gained from your dad (although, to be fair there's not all that much to know about people running as fast as they can).

That's what I love about cricket (Test only). You can follow narratives and story arcs which encompass both teams over several days, but all the action is always focussed on only two protagonists at a time, and every individual bit of that action (each delivery) is a setpiece in itself.

Every delivery you can focus on the action and then you get 30 seconds to think about the themes of the game/get a butty/pour some more wine etc.

I don't watch football for the spectacle, although that can be an added bonus. For me football's all about partisanship and, for want of a better word, tribalism. Knowing about tactics etc may help a neutral appreciate a game more, but when I'm at a match I tend to turn off that part of my brain because it gets too depressing when Stalybridge are losing and I think I know how they should be playing.

Cycling: I only watch the Tour de France for the spectacle (mountains, sprints, crashes). But then, I don't know enough about it.
F1: ditto (apart from the mountains, but that would be cool).
Tennis: There is no spectacle in tennis, but I enjoy the human stories and/or the immense skill involved.
Ice skating: ...it's not a sport.

[(Anonymous)]

five main reasons for me to watch:

i) i'll make money out of it (this is the usual reason)
ii) nice backdrop (only applies to a few sports like cycling and occasionally golf)
iii) nice patterns (think of good passing in football, rugby, basketball, etc.)
iv) interesting tactics (agree cricket is good, but american football is surprisingly good on this front too, as is baseball)
v) if i care who wins. i have a football team and a county cricket team i "support" as well as generally wanting english teams to do well when i approve of the sport (i wish all our ice skaters and three day eventers dead!), but most sportsmen are loathsome individuals so i find that any high profile event is going to offer me a less rather more loathsome option to get behind.

today i'll be watching basketball for the money, cycling for the backdrop and the tactics, rugby league for the patterns and the money and the impressive courage on display and baseball for the money (i've watched so much baseball that i'm rather beyond being impressed by the tactics).

for me the financial imperative is by far the greatest. would i really be at home watching under-19 basketball at lunchtime otherwise? nope. i'd have a job like you....