Fair Play in Sport: How Important is Maintaining an Ethos that Values Sportsmanship

1
Cardiff University
Philosophy
How important is ‘fair play’ in a competitive
setting?
SE4385 Dissertation
00AC647 - 0921153
13th May 2013
Dissertation presented in partial fulfilment of the regulations for the degree of BA in
Philosophy

2
Abstract
The purpose of this dissertation is firstly to investigate what qualifies as fair and
unfair play in a competitive setting. In doing so, I will analyze sport as a working
morality, in which an ethos of a particular sport or competition is key in determining
how one should judge what is fair and how important fair play is. Finally, I examine
the relationship a high-profile sportsperson has with spectators on a global scale and
question how much of an influence their actions have as a guiding force. In
establishing sport as a moral laboratory through which children develop their own
moral compass, I suggest that it is of vital importance that an ethos promoting fair
play in sport is recommended throughout society.
In elucidating my argument, I use two examples from the world of sport that
demonstrate a disregard for fair play in contrasting ways. Beginning with the Lance
Armstrong doping scandal, I examine how the ‘formal’ rules of a competition can be
undermined by the ethos of the sport. I then look to the ethos of the Olympic games,
and why four women’s badminton teams were disqualified for failing to maintain a
code of ‘informal’ fair play by not competing with the required ‘sporting spirit’ in the
London 2012 Olympics. Despite the best efforts to control fair play in competition
with the appliance of Ronald Dworkin’s interpretive theory of law, I conclude that in
order to ensure sport is carried out with an ethos that values fair play, there must be a
shared responsibility amongst everyone involved. This responsibility, I hold, is
essential, with sport an integral part of our culture, which can function as a powerful
tool for education.

3
Introduction
‘Some people believe football is a matter of life and death. I am very disappointed
with that attitude. I can assure you it is much, much more important than that’1. Since
the great Bill Shankly made this remark in 1981, the commercialization and increased
professionalism of football have catapulted Shankly’s sport into a spectacle with such
a large variation of interests riding upon it, so as to make it one of the most intense
and pressured contests in the modern world. Sport in general has had such a large
influx of money in the 21st century especially, that it is no wonder that the sentiments
of Pierre de Coubertin (founder of the modern Olympic games), that: ‘The most
important thing…is not to win but to take part’2, is far-fetched in a world where sport
is a business. Wray Vamplew notes that, ‘there would seem to be some correlation
between the rewards sought from a sport and the degree of corruption within it’3. It is
clear then, that money acts as a catalyst for corruption in sport. Professional
sportspersons have never been under so much pressure to succeed, and at an elite
level, a determination to win is a vital condition towards becoming the best. This
relentless determination can, at times, result in a competitor breaking the rules in an
attempt to gain an advantage over their opponents. This is perhaps an inevitable
consequence of a high-pressured situation, but it is important to evaluate how
damaging unfair play is, if at all. In most instances an officiator can spot and rectify
an act of cheating, but should some onus be on the competitors to upkeep a degree of
professionalism and respect to their sport? We must also consider the influence of
major sporting ‘stars’, who should perhaps have a moral responsibility towards
children who idolise and copy them. In a competitive environment a certain level of
gamesmanship is unavoidable, but there are varying degrees of unfair play, and it is
important to assess the repercussions they may bring and attempt to eradicate, or at
least minimise, the number of instances in which they are truly harmful.
1 Bill Shankly, in: Taking sport seriously, Emerald Group Publishing Ltd., by Andy Adcroft, Jon
Teckman, (2009), Vol. 47 Iss: 1, pp.5 – 13.
2 Pierre de Coubertin, Modafinil in sports: ethical considerations, Johnson MedicalSchool, by K R
Kaufman, (2004), p. 3.
3 Wray Vamplew, Pay Up And Play the Game – Professional sport in Britain 1875-1914,Cambridge
University Press,(1988), p.265.

4
Sigmund Loland denounces competitors who use unfair methods in order to
try to gain an advantage. Following John Rawls and his ‘Theory of Justice’4, Loland
adopts a contractualist approach to competition, which holds that with an intentional
violation of the rules, ‘The ‘contract to compete’, in which participants voluntarily
restrict their liberty in order to compete in a setting of mutual trust, is broken’5.
Loland does not believe the rules of a game should have to be enforced by the
officiators. By entering a competition with a fixed set of rules, there is a responsibility
to ensure that the rules are respected so that the game is fair, which will in turn
guarantee that the best player or team ultimately wins. He claims that, ‘Cheaters
search for an exclusive advantage that depends on others’ adherence to the rules.
Cheaters are “free riders” benefitting from the cooperation of others without doing
their fair share’6. It is unfair then, if certain competitors are gaining an advantage by
breaking the rules, whereas their counterparts are disadvantaged due to their
adherence to the rules. Short of eradicating all forms of unfair play, we may find a
preferable working solution to this problem, with the assertion that because all
competitors play unfairly at certain points, everyone benefits from cheating
eventually. Claudio Tamburrini insists that, ‘There is so to speak a fluent ‘rotation’ in
playing dirty among the players. This, in my view, erases any unfair advantage
cheaters might get and neutralizes the free-rider argument’7. It might be true that
competitors apply unfair practice at some point in competition, but do we really want
to encourage this behaviour? What if a sportsperson really did feel a strong moral
obligation to adhere to the rules; should we overlook their good intentions with the
assumption that everyone should be breaking the rules to ensure it is a level playing
field on balance? The problem remains though, that whilst there is no omniscient
presence to officiate play and make sure no rules are broken, we must accept that
4 Rawls Theory of Justice states:‘when a number of persons engage in a mutually advantageous
cooperative venture according to rules and thus restrict their liberty in ways necessary to yield
advantages forall, those who have submitted to these restrictions have a right to a similar acquiescence
on the part of those who have benefited from their submission’ (John Rawls, A Theory of Justice,
Belknap Press, (1999), p.96).
5 Sigmund Loland, Justice and game advantages in sporting games, in: Values in Sport: Elitism,
nationalism,genderequality and the scientific manufacture of winners, Klawer Academic Publishers,
ed. Tännsjö Torbjörn & Claudio Tamburrini, (2000), p. 161.
6 Sigmund Loland, Fairness in Sport:An Ideal and its Consequences, in: Performance-Enhancing
Technologiesin Sports: Ethical,Conceptual & Scientific Issues, The John Hopkins University Press,
ed. Thomas H. Murray et al., (2009). p.117.
7 Claudio Tamburrini, The Hand of God?, in: The Hand of God: Essays in the Philosophy of Sports,
The University of Gothenburg Press, (2000), p.139.

5
there will be competitors looking to exploit this fact. Loland concedes: ‘The
possibilities for, implementation of fairness ideals and procedures look rather grim’8.
Should we then, follow Tamburrini in devaluing the importance of fair play in a
competitive setting? He claims that, ‘there is no reason to assume a priori that keeping
the rules of a game necessarily has a quality-enhancing effect’9. Maybe we are stuck
in an antiquated mindset of gentlemanly conduct and should accept the state of sport
today, where competitors should be doing whatever they can to win. By taking into
consideration the added pressure commercialization has bought to sport, we must also
consider the influence competitors have on a worldwide scale. It is crucial to establish
what is acceptably part of the game and what really is morally blameworthy in a
competitive setting, both for the competitive spirit of elite athletes and for society
who use sport as moral laboratory in guiding their actions.
‘Fair play’ is a contested term and it is important to clarify the ways in which I wish
to use it as a concept for the rest of this dissertation. Following Loland, I would like to
divide ‘fair play’ into two categories: ‘Formal’ fair play and ‘Informal’ fair play.
Loland explains the division:
‘Formal fair play demands adherence to the rules and prescribes what is
considered morally right and just. Informal fair play refers to mutual
respect between the parties engaged and to the ideal attitudes and virtues
with which they ought to compete’10
.
This is a key distinction, as with informal fair play, you are not necessarily cheating,
but as Tamburrini explains, one is going ‘beyond the requirements of fair play, as it
demands more than simply abiding by a rule code’11. By separating fair play into two
categories, we can begin to examine the severity of an unfair action committed by a
competitor. Formalism, as William Morgan and Klaus Meier describes it, is where
‘the various derivative notions of a game are to be defined exclusively in terms of its
8 Loland, Fairness, p.123.
9 Tamburrini, Hand Of God, p.139.
10 Sigmund Loland, Fair Play in Sport:A Moral Norm System, Routledge, (2001), p.14.
11 Tamburrini, Hand of God, p.134.

6
formal rules’12. Fair play, by this understanding, should only be evaluated according
to whether the written rules of the game have been upheld. Fred D’Agostino disputes
this assertion, claiming that every competition develops a certain ethos, which alters
the way in which competitors and officials conduct themselves. D’Agostino explains:
‘The ethos of a game distinguishes between behavior that is permissible, behavior
that is impermissible but acceptable, and behavior that is
unacceptable…According to this nonformalist account of games, only such
unacceptable behavior is not game-behavior’13.
As I will move on to discuss, a format in which competitors and officiators have the
power to interpret formal rules according to the accepted ethos of a particular
competition, follows the work of the philosopher of law, Ronald Dworkin, who
championed an interpretive system of law. Unacceptable behavior in sport is not
necessarily exclusively characteristic of an infringement of either formal or informal
aspects of the game. The ethos of a sport tends to be inline with the formal rules of the
game and it is therefore informal fair play that is often more problematic, however,
there are many instances in which formalism fails to conform to a developing ethos
and this deviation between rule-makers and competitors provides sport with its
biggest problem in regards to fair play.
To compromise the standards of formal fair play, one would have to directly infringe
upon the set of rules governing the competition they have entered. To illustrate this, I
will move on to use the example of Lance Armstrong, who, by doping systematically
for a number of years, broke a cycling rule against the use of performance-enhancing
substances. Informal fair play is entirely concerned with what Stephen Potter coined
as ‘gamesmanship’14. Gamesmanship, unlike sportsmanship, is the application of
methods that are often legal, but they may nevertheless have an adverse effect on your
opponent, or go contrary to the ‘sporting spirit’ of the game. It is: ‘Pushing the rules
to the limit without getting caught, using whatever dubious methods possible to
12 William Morgan and Klaus Meier, Philosophical Inquiry in Sport, Human Kinetics Publishers,
(1998), p.50.
13 Fred D’Agostino, The Ethos of Games, in: Philosophical Inquiry Sport, 2nd ed. Human Kinetics.
Champaign, IL, ed. Morgan and Meier, eds. (1995), p.47.
14 Stephen Potter, The Theory and Practice of Gamesmanship or The Art of Winning Games Without
Actually Cheating, Rupert Hart-David, London, (1947), p.15.

7
achieve the desired end’15. Informal fair play, with the exception of professional
fouls16, does not contravene any rules that competitors agreed to abide by upon
entering the given competition. I will move on to examine an example of a lack of
informal fair play with the women’s badminton doubles teams of the London 2012
Olympics. Four teams were disqualified for not keeping with the Olympic spirit and
expected ethos of the games, by attempting to lose matches in order to gain a ranking
advantage moving into the next round. It is an interesting case for many reasons, not
least because the competitors were applying gamesmanship in order to lose rather
than to win. If we fail to view informal fair play as an integral part of modern day
sport, then are we justified in denouncing competitors who seek a competitive
advantage by directly infringing upon a rule and not respecting formal fair play?
Perhaps all examples of unfair play add to the excitement and competitive spirit of the
game and it is up to the officiators to enforce punishments accordingly, whilst no
moral obligation should be placed upon the competitor. As I shall demonstrate
though, we must be very careful in assigning too much freedom to sportspersons with
regards to fair play, as it can have a powerful effect across society and especially
upon children who learn from and mimic their sporting heroes.
Formal fair play and the Lance Armstrong doping scandal
Robert Simon notes, ‘As one view has it, “It’s only cheating if you get caught” ’17.
When entering a competition, participants agree to a set of rules that should be
respected and adhered to. It is a contentious issue whether, as Loland would argue,
‘Voluntary participation in sport…demands obligations of the players’18. Or on the
other hand, the responsibility of ensuring the rules are abided by, rest solely with an
officiator, who has the power to punish a competitor accordingly if a rule is broken. It
15 Angela Lumpkin, Sharon Stoll & Jennifer Beller, Sport ethics: Applications for fair play, Mosby,
(1994) p.92.
16 Warren Fraleigh says a good (or professional) foul ‘occurs when a participant knowingly violates a
rule to achieve what would otherwise be difficult to achieve, but violates the rules so as to expect and
willingly accept the penalty’. Here then, is an example of the employment of gamesmanship with an
open rule violation. It goes contrary to most examples of informal fair play that are attempted with the
aim of avoiding punishment. (Warren Fraleigh, Why the Good Foul is not Good, ed. William Morgan
& Klaus Meier, Philosophical Inquiry in Sport,Human Kinetic Publishers, Champaign, IL, (1995), 2nd
ed. p.186).
17 Robert Simon, Fair Play: The Ethicsof Sport, 2nd ed., Westview Press, (2004), p.42.
18 Loland, Moral Norm, p.96.

8
has even been argued that we may, at times, have a moral duty to cheat19. If we allow
competitors free reign to try to manipulate, cheat and deceive officials, who are
burdened with the full responsibility of implementing the rules, there will inevitably
be instances in which a contravening of the rules will go unnoticed. An unpunished
handball in football may not matter in the grand scheme of things, it may even add to
the excitement of a game, where pundits and spectators thrive on the controversy it
brings. Instances of match-fixing however, are truly detrimental to competitive nature
of sport. The whole ethos of a competitive spirit, which makes the sport the spectacle
that it is, is compromised. These are both examples of breaking the rules and the
contrasting consequences of either example illustrates the varying degrees upon
which a disrespect of formal fair play can have in a competitive setting.
From ‘hero-to-zero’, Lance Armstrong dominated the sport of cycling –
winning the Tour de France a record-breaking seven consecutive years in a row from
1999-2005, as well as picking up a bronze medal at the Sydney 2000 Olympics. These
triumphs all came after he had overcome testicular cancer in 1997 and founded the
Livestrong Foundation, which would go on to make millions for cancer patients, for
which Armstrong would be cast further into heroic territory. He was heralded as a
living legend and one of America’s all-time sporting greats. Cycling and Armstrong
were synonymous and with the collapse of one reputation, an entire sport was
endangered of being undermined. In October 2012, the U.S. anti-doping agency
claimed that Armstrong was part of ‘the most sophisticated, professionalized and
successful doping programme that sport has ever seen’20. Armstrong was stripped of
his seven Tour de France titles and his Olympic medal and his reputation as the best
cyclist of all time was ruined beyond repair. Cycling had lost its ‘pin-up’ hero of the
sport. Armstrong had been a linchpin for the image of cycling, where his story of ups-
and-downs, strain-and-struggle, made for the perfect face of such a tough endurance
sport. A sophisticated programme of systematic doping over a number of years had
entirely undermined the formal fair play code and Armstrong’s sport was confronted
19 Hugh Upton suggestswe may have a moral duty to cheat in team sports that ‘involve obligations to
the othermembers of our team’ (Hugh Upton, Can There Be a Moral Duty to Cheat in Sport?, in:
Sport, Ethicsand Philosophy, Vol.5, No.2, (2011), p.165).
20 Travis T. Tygart, Statement From USADA CEO Travis T. Tygart Regarding The U.S. Postal Service
Pro Cycling Team Doping Conspiracy,found at: http://cyclinginvestigation.usada.org/ (Oct 2012).

9
with a level of corruption that, for once, could not be underplayed21. The doping
scandal became public interest and the integrity of cycling as a sport and profession
became unstable.
It should be clear then, that such a disregard for formal fair play and a
manipulation of the failure of regulating authorities to ensure the rules are adhered to,
has been catastrophic for cycling in the case of Armstrong. Regardless of whether
more should have been done to prevent a doping regime over such a long length of
time, most people would still be inclined to administer a large amount of blame on
Armstrong for not competing fairly. However, the subsequent revelations detailing
how widespread doping is in cycling, brings up an interesting philosophical point. If
everyone is cheating, then there is a shared ethos amongst professional cyclists that
doping is the done thing and Armstrong ‘is in all likelihood just the best, most
talented’ cheat, competing in a sport where ‘breaking the rules is the only viable way
to compete’22. We might be assigning Armstrong an excuse straight out of a
playground here (‘I only did it because he did’), but the reality of the situation is that
if Armstrong hadn’t used performance-enhancing substances to reach the top, we
would probably simply be speaking of another corrupt cyclist who had manipulated
the system in this way. Tamburrini claims that, ‘In elite sports, we may have arrived
at a situation in which we often celebrate not the most excellent, but the most sly
athlete, the one who dopes and gets away with it’23. Indeed, Armstrong himself used
this point in his infamous interview with Oprah Winfrey. He told her that he had
‘looked up the definition of cheat’ and it means ‘to gain an advantage on a rival or
21 Doping scandals have provided cycling with a corrupt image for years, with cycling authorities
appearing very lenient in their stance.The Festina doping scandal of 1998, in which a bag full of
doping products was discovered by customs officers at a French-Belgian crossing ended in criminal
convictions and the set-up of the World Anti Doping Agency,but subsequent accusations by Festina
team members of a widespread doping network in cycling were largely ignored (Justin Davis, Ten
Years Later, Festina Doping Affair Still Not Forgotten,found at: http://www.bicycle.net/2008/ten-
years-later-festina-doping-affair-still-not-forgotten, (July 2008)). Even more recently than the
Armstrong scandal, a Spanish doctor,Eufemiano Fuentes,has been accused of ‘running one of the
world’s largest sporting doping rings’. 211 bags of frozen blood and plasma were ceased in a raid, but a
Spanish court order to destroy them, rather than test them to see whether they implicate otherathletes
has sparked suggestions ofa cover-up (Matt Slater, Anti-Doping group to appeal against Ruling,BBC,
found at http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/22359051, (April 2013)).
22 Evan Selinger, ‘But Everybody’s Doing It!’ Lance Armstrong and the Philosophy of Making Bad
Decisions, found at: http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/08/but-everybodys-doing-it-
lance-armstrong-and-the-philosophy-of-making-bad-decisions/261669/, (Aug 2012).
23 Claudio Tamburrini, What’s wrong with doping?, in: Values in Sport: Elitism, nationalism,gender
equality and the scientific manufacture of winners, Klawer Academic Publishers, ed. Tännsjö Torbjörn
& Claudio Tamburrini, (2000), p.201.

10
foe’. He carries on, ‘I didn’t view it that way. I viewed it as a level playing field’24. It
is an interesting use of terminology, with the level playing field having been
employed for many years as a term of fairness and gentlemanly conduct, alongside
other phrases such as ‘it’s just not cricket’, ‘good sport’ and of course, ‘fair play’.
Armstrong is suggesting that the rules governing cycling are, for better or for worse,
at odds with the ethos of the sport and he was merely doing what everyone else was
by incorporating the use of performance-enhancing substances into his training
regime.
We arrive then at a standoff between athletes, who ‘like other professionals,
will always try to better themselves and their achievements’25, and regulatory
authorities who are limited in their efforts to monitor direct rule-infringements and
successfully encourage competitors to train and participate with respect to formal fair
play. If the ethos of a sport has shifted to a point that there exists a rule in particular
that has been so heavily compromised that one is at a disadvantage if they choose not
to break the rule themselves, then it would be unfair not to consider abandoning that
rule altogether. If, as Armstrong claims, doping is common practice in cycling, then
there may be cyclists with the potential to become the best, but have adopted a
conflicting ethos, choose not to dope, and are consequently thwarted by their moral
conscience and respect for formal fair play. Tamburrini suggests: ‘Eliminating the ban
on doping might allow currently rule-abiding athletes to do something about their
disadvantage without fear of being disqualified from further competition’26. Unless
we can guarantee that competitors are entering a ‘level playing field’ if they have
chosen not to use performance-enhancing substances as part of their training regime,
we must either give up the rule prohibiting doping, or accept that the best cheat is the
most likely to win.
Angela Schneider and Robert Butcher point out that ‘sport is socially
constructed and there is no obvious reason why it could not be constructed to include
doping’27. They claim that, ‘doping is banned because it is cheating, and it is cheating
24 Lance Armstrong in interview with Oprah Winfrey, available at http://balls.ie/cycling/the-full-lance-
armstrong-and-oprah-winfrey-interview-parts-1-and-2/, (Jan 2013).
25 Tamburrini, doping,p.215.
26 Ibid, p.208.
27 Angela Schneider & Robert Butcher, A philosophical overview ofthe arguments on banning doping
in sport, in: Values in Sport:Elitism, nationalism,gender equality and the scientific manufacture of
winners, Klawer Academic Publishers, ed. Tännsjö Torbjörn & Claudio Tamburrini, (2000), p.196.

11
because banned’28. Rules in sport are entirely contingent, so is there anything
preventing the legalization of doping if it is inline with the shared ethos amongst
competitors? There is nothing intrinsically built into a sporting contest to warrant the
omittance of doping and many forms of doping are not illegal outside of sport.
Thomas Murray highlights the resulting confusion: ‘If it’s wrong for athletes to use
performance-enhancing drugs, there must be something about sport that makes it
so’29. Even within sport there seems to be a level of contradiction: we allow drugs for
therapy, but not for enhancement, even though ‘the tools biomedical research creates
to treat disease are completely indifferent to the fluid and sometimes disputed
boundary between therapy and enhancement’30. So we must ask why competition
assumes this inconsistent morality. Many have suggested that such an intense and
lengthy period of doping is damaging for the athlete and we would do well to realize
that their sporting life is only a small part of their life as a whole, so more should be
done to protect them (Schneider, Simon, Loland). Against this claim, it might be
argued that banning doping ‘would be a form of paternalism if it was done in order to
protect the athlete’31. Tamburrini gives the interesting analogy for a sportsperson who
wants to dope, to a war correspondent who wishes to put his/herself in danger in order
to receive the best story/picture for their network: ‘Should we prohibit war
correspondents from coming too near the battle line, to avoid submitting other war
correspondents to such a pressure? The suggestion seems to me preposterous’32.
Sport, unlike war, normally operates within a controlled environment where a higher
degree of safety is to be expected, although we may look to the physicality of a sport
such as boxing, which is not banned, but is potentially more dangerous than doping.
Furthermore, with many doping methods being legal outside of sport, it is
questionable whether they are dangerous enough to warrant their exclusion from sport
on this basis alone. If the argument instead is that it is unfair on other athletes if one
chooses to dope, then there is a simple solution: legalize doping and the playing field
is once again level. David Fraser asks, ‘Is it gutless to hide behind the Law or does it
take guts to use the letter of the Law, knowing that in ‘standing up for your rights’,
28 Schneider & Butcher, banning doping,p.186.
29 Thomas Murray, SportsEnhancement in From Birth to Death and Bench to Clinic, (2008), Ch.33,
p.154.
30 Ibid, p.154.
32 Tamburrini, doping,p.204-5.

12
you will be roundly condemned for doing so?’33. Armstrong stood up to the written
codes of formal fair play to embrace what he believed to be common practice across
his sport and is roundly condemned for doing so. He interpreted the law (following
Dworkin, who I shall move on to discuss) and manipulated it to a point that he felt
was more indicative of the ethos of the sport, when perhaps the law should have been
rewritten in such a way that anticipated the potential interpretation and application of
it.
Imagine then, a world where doping in sport has been legalized. The
rulebook has been rewritten and competitors once again operate on a level playing
field, where formal fair play is adhered to by all. Armstrong may have been just as
successful (especially if doping was common practice already), or perhaps we would
have a new hero, a cyclist who did not dope before, but with the addition of
performance-enhancing substances in his training regime, he was able to perform at a
level much higher than he had previously managed to reach. It is not out of the
question to imagine someone new to the sport of cycling, who reacts so well to a
systematic programme of doping, that they reach the top of the sport and are crowned
as the best cyclist in the world. This is where I believe there lays a problem. As Simon
points out, even ‘if all athletes use drugs, they might not react to them equally’. And
so, ‘outcomes would be determined not by the relevant qualities of the athletes
themselves but rather by the natural capacity of their bodies to react to the drug of
choice’34. As Schneider and Butcher suggested, the rules of sport are contingent, but
if there is no element of meritocracy or achievement in competition, then we arrive at
what Murray describes as an ‘arms race’35, where it is the best drug, rather than the
best, or most dedicated athlete who triumphs. Loland assesses the situation well:
‘Given the choice between two practices where the main difference is that
one practice implies unnecessary health risks and represents a larger threat
to the potential of athletes as moral agents than the other, the choice should
33 David Fraser, It’s Not Cricket:Underarm Bowling,Legality & the Meaning of Life, in: Cricket and
the Law: The Man in White is Always Right, Routledge, (2005), p.129.
34 Robert Simon, in: Philosophical Inquiry in Sport, Human Kinetics Publishers, ed. William Morgan
and Klaus Meier, (1998), p.213.
35 Murray, Enhancement,p.156.

13
be clear. As is the situation today, we ought to support the ban on the
substances and techniques on the doping list’36
.
Elite sportspersons push themselves to their absolute limit, but it is the maximizing of
their human capacity to perform that we should be interested in, not synthetic
supplements. Michael Sandel warns that, ‘as the role of the enhancement increases,
our admiration for the achievement fades. Or rather, our admiration for the
achievement shifts from the player to his pharmacist’37. One could argue that it is
contradictory to condemn one method of training (doping), when of course there are
numerous ways in which a competitor seeks to gain an advantage, Simon asks: Are
the advantages any different from those conferred by the legal use of technologically
advanced equipment?’38. He answers this point himself, stating: ‘Capacity to benefit
from training techniques seem part of what makes one a superior athlete in a way that
capacity to benefit from a drug does not’39. His line of reasoning relies on an intuition
and appears inconsistent at first, but I am inclined to agree with him. Training
methods are an external option for athletes, which involve no instant gratification, or
preferable manipulation of the body internally. Doping eliminates an element of effort
and achievement from the sport and whilst a regimented diet, with certain nutritional
supplements will inevitably be employed, there is no reason for such significantly
altering chemicals to be allowed. Effort is not the only factor in elite sport, as Sandel
argues: ‘striving is not the point of sports; excellence is’40. But I would argue, that
sports in which doping is in major use, are the ones where effort is the fundamental
basis for success. Sports with a higher skill requirement such as ball and racket sports
have still been subject to doping scandals and the effects drugs can have on one’s
ability (alongside increased effort) should not be underestimated41. Natural talent is an
36 Loland, Moral Norm, p.83.
37 Michael Sandel, Bionic Athletes, in: The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the age of genetic
engineering, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, (2007), p.208.
38 Simon, Fair Play, p.4.
39 Robert Simon, in: Philosophical Inquiry in Sport, Human Kinetics Publishers, ed. William Morgan
and Klaus Meier, (1998), p.213.
40 Sandel, Bionic Athletes, p.209.
41 The baseball player, Barry Bonds, who holds the all-time Major League Baseball home run record
with 762, remains a figure of controversy surrounding his supposed use ofperformance-enhancing
substances.In a sport where technical ability is key in striking a ball correctly, it has been suggested
that Bonds capitalized on a lack of mandatory testing in the sport at the time, by using drugs that
exaggerated his natural talents (Elijah Abramson, Why Lance Armstrong & Barry Bonds saved their

14
inevitability that goes against the image of sporting achievement and sports of a high
technical ability often go against a meritocratic ideal, where the genes one inherits are
crucial to success. Drugs that enhance one’s ability do further damage to the image of
sport as achievement, but the real problem for doping is with sports that are, to a large
extent, meritocratic. When effort is the fundamental requirement for achievement in a
sport, a drug that discredits this condition should be strictly prohibited.
A constantly changing ethos in competition entails that standards of formal
fair play in any sport should evolve with new technologies and progressive thinking.
With the example of doping in cycling, we find a conflict of interests between the
ethos and the rules of the sport, but in this instance it is the ethos that needs to change.
It is important to constantly question what conditions of formal fair play competitors
should realistically adhere to and if a rule is thought to be obsolete or detrimental to
the game, there is a valid claim to remove it as a guiding principle of fair play.
However, we should not adjust our stance on what is fair and ‘redraw the line’ simply
because one competitor has not adhered to the rules properly. Sandel ponders how we
can recognize the need for a working morality, whilst respecting fundamental aspects
of competitive sport:
‘How can we distinguish changes that improve from those that
corrupt?...The answer depends on the nature of the sport, and on whether
the new technology highlights or obscures the talents and skills that
distinguish the best players’42
.
Armstrong compromised his sport in the most devious and deceitful of manners. He
coerced teammates into cheating with him; made millions with a bestselling
autobiography and lied under oath in court. His claims that he was only doing what
everyone else is, is no excuse, but it should be a lesson for the regulating authorities
that if they are serious about ensuring the future of cycling as a respectable sport,
divorced from corruption, then there should be a better process regarding drug testing.
Schneider and Butcher suggest that, ‘The demand that athletes be prepared to submit
to urine (or blood) testing at any time is a serious breach of their civil and human
sports, found at: http://www.basesandbaskets.com/2013/01/why-lance-armstrong-and-barry-
bonds.html bases and baskets,(2013)).
42 Sandel, Bionic Athletes, p.211.

15
rights’43 and Gunnar Brievik agrees with them, saying that he does ‘not support
testing in the preparation period’44 and that, ‘Today’s sport is too laden with tradition
and suffers from a lack of creativity’45. I reject the assertion that drug testing is a
serious breach of a person’s civil and human rights as, following Loland’s
contractualism to a certain extent, I believe that elite athletes take on a responsibility
upon entering competition to respect the formal rules of fair play and by agreeing to
be systematically tested for drugs is an entirely reasonable demand. The creativity
Brievik speaks of is perhaps tending towards a spectacle of ‘bionic athletes’, which
may be the way forward as spectator’s demands grow increasingly bizarre. However,
it is essential that our human agency is maintained in competition where the spectator
is not the prime beneficiary. To accurately analyze the best a human can be in
competition with respect to virtues of achievement, pride and endeavor; we must find
a happy balance of sport as a progressive working morality and formal fair play as a
respected practice going forward.
Informal fair play and contravening the Olympic spirit
When competing at an elite level, sportspersons enter a relationship with their
competitor, the officials, the spectators, and if it is a team sport, their teammates. It is
a contentious issue, how much of a moral duty, if any, a competitor has towards each
category of person involved in their respective sport. Informal fair play relies on there
at least being some sense of duty amongst sportspersons to upkeep the ‘sporting
spirit’, and compete with respect to the sport, which sometimes means adhering to an
‘unwritten’ set of rules, which again, are representative of a shared ethos amongst
those involved in the sport. While one has a duty to themselves as an elite and
professional athlete to do their best to win; Loland argues that you also have a duty to
your competitor to aim for a fair game; Hugh Upton suggests we may have a duty to
our teammates in the shared pursuit of victory; and many have cited a moral duty
towards spectators and especially children, who idolize their sporting heroes. These
duties, in varying degrees, go above and beyond a specified code of formal fair play.
44 Gunnar Brievik, Against Chance: A causal theory of winning in sport, in: Values in Sport: Elitism,
nationalism,genderequality and the scientific manufacture of winners, Klawer Academic Publishers,
ed. Tännsjö Torbjörn & Claudio Tamburrini, (2000), p.149.
45 Ibid, p.154.

16
They entail not just being a good competitor, but a good sportsperson. Informal fair
play is not a necessary condition for a competitor to employ when competing in their
given sport, but this does not mean it lacks importance. It is naturally praiseworthy to
applaud examples of informal fair play, but what is really interesting is whether we
can attribute blame to a lack of these voluntary ideals, when one does not conform to
an ethos shared amongst their fellow competitors.
The London 2012 Olympics witnessed a very interesting case with regards to
fair play in sport. A new ‘round-robin phase’ had been introduced into the women’s
doubles badminton tournament prior to the game. It had the effect of providing certain
competitors with an incentive to lose their last match in order to avoid the second
seeded Chinese pairing of Zhao Yunlei and Tian Qing (who had previously suffered a
shock defeat to a Danish duo) in the next round. Two matches became a complete
farce, with competitors purposely serving into the net, hitting shots long and at times
not even attempting to hit a return. All four pairs were subsequently charged by the
Badminton World Federation and disqualified from the Olympics for ‘not using one’s
best efforts to win a match’ and ‘conducting oneself in a manner that is clearly
abusive or detrimental to the sport’46. Four teams, including the number one ranked
women’s pair, Wang Xiaoli and Yu Yang, had been punished for not adhering to a
code of informal fair play, which is indicative of an Olympic spirit, that has held true
to a competitive ethos that continues to honor a conduct of fair play, within a modern
sporting world corrupted by money. They had not directly broken any rules, but had
undermined their sport and gone against the ideal nature of the games that Coubertin
had outlined. What makes this case particularly interesting, is how the rules gave
competitors an incentive to employ gamesmanship, not in an attempt to overcome
their opponents, but to gain an advantage by losing. Yu Yang, one half of the top
ranked Chinese pairing, retired from Badminton shortly after being disqualified and
voiced her anger at the situation: ‘My dreams have been destroyed by your imperfect
system’47. The shamed competitors were punished for doing what was in their best
interests to succeed in the competition, without directly infringing upon any rules.
Clearly then, a code of informal fair play is taken very seriously in the Olympics,
46 Thomas Lund (BWF Secretary General), BWF’s Commitment to Sport Integrity Saluted, found at:
http://www.bwfbadminton.org/news_item.aspx?id=71915, (2013).
47 Yu Yang, in: Tania Branigan, China’s Yu Yang quits badminton after Olympic match-fixing
disqualification,The Guardian,at: http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/aug/02/china-yu-yang-quits-
badminton-olympics,(Aug 2012).

17
where it is perhaps the only arena for which this virtuous ideal is still respected with
the aim of maintaining a respectable ethos. It is important to question here, whether it
is the competitors who should be assigned blame for not respecting the spirit in which
the games should be held, or the regulating authorities, who failed to develop a
structure in which competitors would always have an incentive to win.
Ronald Dworkin was a proponent of an interpretive system of law, in which
one should recognise ‘implicit standards between and beneath the explicit ones’48. He
believed that moral ideals would be better served if we did not abide so strictly to a
regimented set of laws and instead used our best judgment with respect to the law as
well as a framework of historical understanding. As we have seen, D’Agostino
applies this sentiment to competition in sport, claiming that there is ‘an unofficial
system of conventions which determines how the official rules of the game will be
applied in various concrete circumstances’49. These perspectives indicate the
importance of informal fair play in a competitive setting, where the upholding of laws
and formal fair play are not adequate as a respectable basis for sport at the highest
level. On this understanding, officiators must have the power to interpret the rules of a
game in a certain way. Officials would have the power to bend the rules and punish a
competitor if they thought an action had been detrimental to the game, or conversely
they could choose not to punish a competitor who has broken a rule if the ethos of the
game dictates that it should be ignored50. I would argue though, that an interpretive
system of law in sport could only compensate for certain acts of informal unfair play,
where a law has been approached but not formally broken. If we wish to maintain a
code of gentlemanly conduct, it must be on competitors to utilize their sporting nous
to act in a manner appropriate for the pursuit of safeguarding an ethos of the game
that allows competitors to flourish, without fear of being unfairly compromised.
The disqualified women’s badminton teams had carried out an act of
‘spoiling’, a term Graham McFee uses which, ‘while not contrary to the rules of a
game/sport, is nonetheless not how one ought to play it’51. Should we be so strong in
the assertion that it is wrong to play in this manner; should we not expect athletes at
48 Ronald Dworkin, Law’s Empire, Harvard University Press,(1988), p.217.
49 D’Agostino, Ethos, p.47.
50 A good example of this can be seen with basketball, where a formal rule of ‘no-contact’is ignored
to a degree by players and officiators who allow play to continue.
51 Graham McFee, Spoling:An Indirect Reflection of Sport’s Moral Imperative, found in: The Ethics of
Sports, A Reader, Routledge, by Mike McNamee, (2010), p.145.

18
an elite level of sport to be single-minded in their pursuit of winning? Tamburrini
even suggests that ‘some violations of the code of good sportspersonship should even
be encouraged, as they enhance the quality of the game’52. The ‘non-contest’ that the
badminton matches became are bad examples of this, but Tamburinni calls attention
to simulation in football:
‘Diving, no doubt, obliges defending players to play in a more cautious
manner. Thus, indirectly, it rewards offensive football styles. Dribbling
skills will flourish, more goals will be scored, all this adding to the
enjoyment of the public’53
.
Normally, the enjoyment of spectators would be a moot point in determining the
responsibility of how sportspersons conduct themselves, as it is a factor external to
the competition. However, Upton points out that the ‘social practice for professional
football is very closely integrated into the game, to the point where it might perhaps
be argued that the relation between teams and fans is intrinsic to this particular form
of the game’54. If we take into account the consequences of a competitor’s action
outside of the game they are currently participating in, then we can begin to see how
crucial it is for elite sportspersons to behave in a manner appropriate to the fact that a
whole world of admirers are watching their every move.
Albert Camus once wrote: ‘I learned all I know about ethics from sports’55.
Throughout history, sport has acted as a moral laboratory to guide our actions and
principles in the external world. Brievik insists that one ‘should try to realise the same
goods, rights and obligations in sports as in other parts of civil society’56. This
Kantian ethics of universalizing moral imperatives highlights the need for elite
sportspersons to accept a degree of responsibility as educators to children who idolize
them. A survey published in April 2013 by the Cricket Foundation charity’s ‘Chance
to Shine’ campaign indicated that 64 per cent of the 1002 eight-to-sixteen year-olds
52 Tamburrini, Hand of God, p.132.
53 Ibid, p.139.
54 Upton, Duty to Cheat, p.20.
55 Albert Camus, in: Sports Ethicsin America: A Bibliography,1970-1990,Greenwood Press, by
Donald Jones & Elaine Daley, (1992), p.20.
56 Brievik, Against Chance,p.154.

19
asked admitted to ‘cheating during school sport’ because of the pressure to win’57.
The chief executive of the Cricket Foundation, Wasim Khan, emphasized the problem
this survey indicates: ‘It is a real concern to us that so many youngsters struggle in
this 'pressure cooker' to win at all costs. We teach children the importance of playing
sport competitively and fairly whilst also respecting the rules and the opposition’58. A
big effort to encourage fair play has subsequently been put in place, with the charity’s
coaches set to deliver assemblies and lessons in good sportsmanship, with sessions
expected to reach around 400,000 children in 4,500 schools. A problem remains
though, that the behaviour of children’s sporting heroes is far more likely to influence
children than what they are told at school. If we follow Camus with his claim that
sport can have a great influence on moral character, then it is vital that we monitor the
behaviour of sportspersons in the spotlight closely. The level of influence
sportspersons actually have is up for debate, but if an ethos of competitive sport
maintains that unfair play is the norm, then there is a problem for educators who
would have to encourage children to cheat if they wish to provide a realistic portrayal
of how to succeed in sport.
If we fail to assign a moral duty for sportspersons to compete in a manner
representative of the Olympic spirit that Pierre de Coubertin once outlined, we may
have to accept that children around the world will grow up with an idea that it is
normal for one to conduct oneself in a egoistic manner, where winning is all that
matters. Upton suggests that education should be adjusted accordingly: ‘in so far as
we think there is a moral duty to cheat, there will also be a moral duty to develop in
young players a disposition to a certain degree of cheating’59. There should not be a
need for educators to contradict children who have seen sportspersons acting unfairly,
with a lack of respect for their opponents. A respect for formal fair play is important,
but it is only with exceptional cases like Armstrong’s that it goes unnoticed by
regulating authorities, and professional fouls are generally accepted as part of a shared
ethos. It is informal fair play that is perhaps a bigger worry, as in most cases
officiators can do nothing about the gamesmanship of competitors who disrespect
57 Wasim Khan, ‘Chance to Shine’ campaign, ‘Pressure cooker’of school sports turning children into
a win-at-all costs generation,survey results can be accessed here:
http://www.chancetoshine.org/news/pressure-cooker-of-school-sports-turning-children-into-a-win-at-
all-costs-generation, (April 2013)
58 Ibid.
59 Upton, Duty to Cheat, p.173.

20
their opponents by employing unsportsmanlike tactics at every available opportunity.
Perhaps the greatest footballer of all time, Pelé, acknowledged the role someone of his
stature should embrace when in competition, saying: ‘Every kid around the world
who plays soccer wants to be Pelé. I have a great responsibility to show them not just
how to be like a soccer player, but how to be like a man’60. Respect to the ‘unwritten’
rules of informal fair play are essential, not just to maintain a sense of credibility for a
given sporting contest, but on a much larger scale, as an example for children who
will find themselves in a competitive setting with whatever path they choose.
Concluding remarks
In recognizing that the rules of any given sport are entirely contingent, it becomes
clear that they are established by competitors, officiators and spectators who all
contribute to developing an ethos for their chosen sport. It is fundamentally important
that all contributing parties involved in the sport reach a clear, satisfactory position
from which conflicting interests will not corrupt or devalue the competition. As is
apparent with Armstrong and the widespread doping scandals in cycling, when the
competitors’ ethos contradicts the formal rules of the game, there lies a major
problem. It is important to note that when this discrepancy does occur, we should not
automatically look to alter the rules. The ethos of a sport may need assessing and with
cycling it is clear that it has developed in an unhealthy manner, where harsher
punishments and more efficient testing procedures over a period of many decades
may have resulted in an ethos, less dependent on the use of performance-enhancing
drugs.
Generally, a greater deal of control concerning fair play is ascertained with
formal fair play and absolute rules, over the informal fair play code, which is more
dependent on competitors, who often disregard an ideal, virtuous ethos, especially
when large amounts of money, or nationalistic pride are riding on a game. Dworkin’s
interpretive system of law allowed us to understand a way in which officiators might
be able to gain a greater deal of control and influence a competition with the aim of
advancing the appropriate ethos. For a competition to be fair, the officiators, even
with a license to interpret the rules accordingly, can only be held accountable to a
60 Edison Arantes do Nascimento (Pelé), SL Flashback:Soccer’s Greatest Genius, CNN, found at:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/centurys_best/news/1999/05/19/siflashback_pele/, (1999).

21
certain point. As Loland insists with his contractualist understanding, some onus must
be on the competitors to uphold a level of fair play that is expected within the ethos of
the sport, or else, as Simon suggests: ‘when they cheat they go outside the constitutive
rules that define the game, and therefore do not even play it’61. A balance needs to be
reached, where gamesmanship that is common practice or adds excitement without
being too detrimental to the sport can be accepted, but acts that might damage the
sport should be avoided by all involved.
The commercialization of sport has provided an entirely new consideration
concerning how important fair play is in a competitive setting. The exact level of
susceptibility for children watching their sporting idols in competitive action is a
question that I cannot give a definitive answer to here. However, the ‘Chance to
Shine’ survey I have cited indicates that children feel under such pressure to succeed
whilst playing sport that they are often moved to cheat in the pursuit of victory. If we
want to change children’s conception of what is important in sport, then we will either
need to provide them with an inaccurate portrayal of elite sporting competition, or
change the way in which competitors conduct themselves in the limelight. We come
across competitive settings in all aspects of life. Social inequality throughout Britain
illustrates a competitive setting where the concept of fair play is often lacking with an
unfair distribution of wealth. In war, countries should ‘play fair’ and abide by a code
of mutually assured destruction to avoid nuclear warfare. Education itself is a
competitive setting and if sport can be used as a moral laboratory to develop standards
in a wider social context that shape one’s moral compass, then it is vitally important
that we closely monitor and encourage fair play in sport.
Bibliography
61 Simon, Fair Play, p.19.

22
Brievik, Gunnar, Against Chance: A causal theory of winning in sport, in: Values in
Sport: Elitism, nationalism, gender equality and the scientific manufacture of
winners, Klawer Academic Publishers, ed. Tännsjö Torbjörn & Claudio
Tamburrini, (2000), pp.149-154.
Camus, Albert, in: Sports Ethics in America: A Bibliography, 1970-1990, Greenwood
Press, by Donald Jones & Elaine Daley, (1992).
Coubertin, Pierre de, Modafinil in sports: ethical considerations, Johnson Medical
School, by K R Kaufman, (2004).
D’Agostino, Fred, The Ethos of Games, in: Philosophical Inquiry Sport, 2nd ed.
Human Kinetics. Champaign, IL, ed. Morgan and Meier, eds. (1995).
Fraleigh, Warren, Why the Good Foul is not Good, ed. William Morgan & Klaus
Meier, Philosophical Inquiry in Sport, Human Kinetic Publishers, Champaign,
IL, (1995), 2nd ed.
Fraser, David, It’s Not Cricket: Underarm Bowling, Legality & the Meaning of Life,
in: Cricket and the Law: The Man in White is Always Right, Routledge,
(2005).
Dworkin, Ronald, Law’s Empire, Harvard University Press, (1988).
Loland, Sigmund, Justice and game advantages in sporting games, in: Values in
Sport: Elitism, nationalism, gender equality and the scientific manufacture of
winners, Klawer Academic Publishers, ed. Tännsjö Torbjörn & Claudio
Tamburrini, (2000).
Loland, Sigmund, Fairness in Sport: An Ideal and its Consequences, in:
Performance-Enhancing Technologies in Sports: Ethical, Conceptual &
Scientific Issues, The John Hopkins University Press, ed. Thomas H. Murray
et al., (2009). pp.117-123.
Loland, Sigmund, Fair Play in Sport: A Moral Norm System, Routledge, (2001),
pp.14-96.
Lumpkin, Angela, Stoll, Sharon, & Beller, Jennifer, Sport ethics: Applications for fair
play, Mosby, (1994).
McFee, Graham, Spoling: An Indirect Reflection of Sport’s Moral Imperative, found
in: The Ethics of Sports, A Reader, Routledge, ed. Mike McNamee, (2010).
Morgan, William, & Meier, Klaus, Philosophical Inquiry in Sport, Human Kinetics
Publishers, (1998).

23
Murray, Thomas, Sports Enhancement in From Birth to Death and Bench to Clinic,
(2008), Ch.33, pp.154-6.
Potter, Stephen, The Theory and Practice of Gamesmanship or The Art of Winning
Games Without Actually Cheating, Rupert Hart-David, London, (1947).
Rawls, John, A Theory of Justice, Belknap Press, (1999).
Sandel, Michael, Bionic Athletes, found in: The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the
age of genetic engineering, The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press,
(2007), pp.208-211.
Schneider, Angela, & Butcher, Robert, A philosophical overview of the arguments on
banning doping in sport, found in: Values in Sport: Elitism, nationalism,
gender equality and the scientific manufacture of winners, Klawer Academic
Publishers, ed. Tännsjö Torbjörn & Claudio Tamburrini, (2000), pp.186-196.
Shankly, Bill, in: Taking sport seriously, Emerald Group Publishing Ltd., by Andy
Adcroft, Jon Teckman, (2009), Vol. 47 Iss: 1, pp.5 – 13.
Simon, Robert, Fair Play: The Ethics of Sport, 2nd ed., Westview Press, (2004), pp.4-
42.
Simon, Robert, in: Philosophical Inquiry in Sport, Human Kinetics Publishers, ed.
William Morgan and Klaus Meier, (1998).
Tamburrini, Claudio, The Hand of God?, in: The Hand of God: Essays in the
Philosophy of Sports, The University of Gothenburg Press, (2000), pp.132-
139.
Tamburrini, Claudio, What’s wrong with doping?, in: Values in Sport: Elitism,
nationalism, gender equality and the scientific manufacture of winners,
Klawer Academic Publishers, ed. Tännsjö Torbjörn & Claudio Tamburrini,
(2000), pp.201-215.
Upton, Hugh, Can There Be a Moral Duty to Cheat in Sport?, in: Sport, Ethics and
Philosophy, Vol.5, No.2, (2011), pp.165-173.
Vamplew, Wray, Pay Up And Play the Game – Professional sport in Britain 1875-
1914, Cambridge University Press, (1988).
Internet Sources

24
Abramson, Elijah, Why Lance Armstrong & Barry Bonds saved their sports, found at:
http://www.basesandbaskets.com/2013/01/why-lance-armstrong-and-barry-
bonds.html bases and baskets, (2013).
Armstrong, Lance, in interview with Oprah Winfrey, available at
http://balls.ie/cycling/the-full-lance-armstrong-and-oprah-winfrey-interview-
parts-1-and-2/, (Jan 2013).
Davis, Justin, Ten Years Later, Festina Doping Affair Still Not Forgotten, found at:
http://www.bicycle.net/2008/ten-years-later-festina-doping-affair-still-not-
forgotten, (July 2008).
Khan, Wasim,‘Pressure cooker’ of school sports turning children into a win-at-all
costs generation, ‘Chance to Shine’ campaign, survey results can be accessed
at: http://www.chancetoshine.org/news/pressure-cooker-of-school-sports-
turning-children-into-a-win-at-all-costs-generation, (April 2013).
Lund, Thomas, BWF’s Commitment to Sport Integrity Saluted, found at:
http://www.bwfbadminton.org/news_item.aspx?id=71915, (2013).
Slater, Matt, Anti-Doping group to appeal against Ruling, BBC, found at:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/22359051, (April 2013).
Nascimento, Edison (Pelé), SL Flashback: Soccer’s Greatest Genius, CNN, found at:
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/centurys_best/news/1999/05/19/siflashback_pe
le/, (1999).
Selinger, Evan, ‘But Everybody’s Doing It!’ Lance Armstrong and the Philosophy of
Making Bad Decisions, found at:
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/08/but-everybodys-
doing-it-lance-armstrong-and-the-philosophy-of-making-bad-
decisions/261669/, (Aug 2012).
Tygart, Travis, Statement From USADA CEO Travis T. Tygart Regarding The U.S.
Postal Service Pro Cycling Team Doping Conspiracy, found at:
http://cyclinginvestigation.usada.org/ (Oct 2012).
Yang, Yu, in: Branigan, Tania, China’s Yu Yang quits badminton after Olympic
match-fixing disqualification, The Guardian, at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/aug/02/china-yu-yang-quits-
badminton-olympics, (Aug 2012).

Fair Play in Sport: How Important is Maintaining an Ethos that Values Sportsmanship

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (15)

Similar to Fair Play in Sport: How Important is Maintaining an Ethos that Values Sportsmanship

Similar to Fair Play in Sport: How Important is Maintaining an Ethos that Values Sportsmanship (7)

Fair Play in Sport: How Important is Maintaining an Ethos that Values Sportsmanship