Opinions / Sport Potato
recent Opinions/Sport Potato
by Tim Miller | 2:54 am, 20/09/2010
There has always been talk that American sports are over-hyped and too glitzy. Sports such as rugby and cricket are the sports of gentlemen and true sports fans love the sport for what it is, not for the cheerleaders at halftime. It is easy for the bright lights of American sports to blind the actual competition, but that doesn’t mean the athleticism on show is not world-class.
by Tim Miller | 2:53 am, 23/08/2010
We all know that the hard sports like rugby are played by jocks, and that those who wish they were jocks play football. What do those at the bottom of the food chain, the nerds, play?
by Tim Miller | 11:46 pm, 22/08/2010
While watching grown men wrestle each other over an oval shaped ball, has it ever occurred to you to ask: what is the point? When examined closely, modern professional sport seems to have little point to it at all.
by Tim Miller | 2:12 am, 09/08/2010
Muttiah Muralitharan has become the first cricketer to reach 800 test wickets, taking his final and 800th wicket with the last test delivery he will ever make. That’s about as dramatic as it can get.
by Tim Miller | 1:24 am, 26/07/2010
With the World Cup come and gone, many of you football lovers out there will be looking for your next fix of the beautiful game. Look no further than the 19 September, when the Homeless Football World cup kicks off in Rio de Janeiro.
Sport Potato - 16
by Tim Miller | 3:26 am 20/07/2010
It’s that time of the year again, when the Tour de France hits our television screens and the evening news. Of course everyone is impressed by both the athleticism of the riders and the lovely French countryside, but the major talking point will undoubtedly come back to drugs and doping.
The funny thing is that with all the talk of scandals over the past few years, the same thing has been happening since the tour started in 1903, when riders would use a little bit of ether to get them through the distance – or they would just ride blind drunk to mask the pain of riding 3600kilometres.
Many modern sporting events have had ugly drug stains smeared across them, but what is so wrong with taking drugs to help you perform better? At a fundamental level you can see where the opposition to drugs comes from, sport after all is about the human body and what it can be trained to do, and the use of drug takes out the purity in sport. But modern sportspeople take all sorts of other things that apparently give them the edge over their fellow competitors, so banning drugs seems ridiculous. When certain substances are banned, of course it’s not right that someone would use them while others don’t, that’s called an unfair advantage. If there were no bans on any substances, though, it would be even for everyone, and we as spectators would be in for a treat as athletes became faster and stronger. Now I’m not saying that all athletes should pump in steroids and look like Arnie, but what is fundamentally wrong with performance-enhancing drugs? If you can use technology to make your shoes or Speedos better why are you not able to do the same with your body? The main reason is sponsorship – it is money from big name companies that helps keep professional sport and sportsmen afloat, and no company is going to want to be associated with an athlete that is full of growth hormones. Imagine McDonalds sponsoring Hamish Carter if he was casually injecting himself daily with steroids; it just wouldn’t happen. Not even Purina One would want a piece of him. That is why Lance Armstrong is so keen to keep his name clean: he understands that without his sponsors he wouldn’t be able to live like he does, which includes things like his charity, livestrong. Imagine how many people would be pissed to find out those little yellow bracelets were just a sham.
