nope nope nope – that’d make competitive chainsaw sculpture a sport.
If someone wielding a chainsaw announces its a sport I would have to agree with them.
Chess is a game as no physical skill is needed. Snooker is also a sport, as is golf for the same reasons.
Fails the 8 pints and a kebab test.
It's a sport.
Have we done ebikes yet?
Which is why its the Olympic Games and not the Olympic Sports, and its all the better for that.
It doesn't matter, the fact that Simone Biles can and does do all the things she can do, and all the while looks like she's having huge amounts of fun doing it, is impressive. Dismissing it because its judged is in itself, just being judgemental.
To me a competitive sport has to have a winner who wins without having judges awarding points.
Things like gymnastics, synchronised swimming etc are athletic and skillful but not sports.
Sorry didn't read thread properly.
Ignore post
Defo NOT a sport .... you can participate in everyday shoes.
So just like snooker and archery, darts is a past time.
A sport needs specialized shoe wear !! 🙂
So just like snooker and archery, darts is a
pastpastime.
Is pedantry a sport?
I guess you could argue Archery is from a past time but as a current way to pass the time it's valid.
I propose a new definition... Sport has come from practicing martial and hunting skills surely. So prove it developers a useful skill in one of those fields and you're golden.
“an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment.
I think "skill" is the key differentiator between a game and a sport, but you have to adopt a particular approach. Chess is regarded as a game because no skill is involved in performing the physical activity of moving the pieces (for able folk anyhow). Arguably the card game "snap" should be classified as a sport, as should shove ha'penny and the like. But there is the marzipan category of "games of skill". E-sports are sports presumably because of the real - time element.
So darts, archery, rifle shooting and the like are sports.
Is pedantry a sport?
Nah, I bet you are wearing crocs at this very moment.... 🙂
Anything played in a pub while drinking. Darts, pool, snooker (posh pubs), dominoes, cards, tiddly winks, backgammon, chess. Not sports.
Cricket - marginal. I’ve only played twice, but I found you could place your pint behind the wicket while batting and simply carry it while fielding. Might be a port for the bowler and wicket goalie.
If tedious arguing is a sport, this is the World Cup.
It requires time and effort to get as good as they are to allow a level of high consistency - makes no odds what it is classed as, it isn't something you can just grab and be amazingly good at consistently. Putting the time and effort in (for anything) is commendable and doesn't really matter what some people call it and what others call it.
The positive for this website is that it gives plenty of people a chance to get agitated, annoyed and post intentionally wind-up material...and so we go round again.
Personally, I think everyone should be allowed a veto on what is allowed to be called a sport. Hemingway got his veto in early so that reduces the pool quite a bit:
There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing, and mountaineering; all the rest are merely games
I'm going to use my veto for Bullfighting. Not so much because of the cruelty, more because it takes the 'special footwear' argument and goes way too far into the realms of ridiculous.
Motor racing is out as well, I'm afraid. Anything where one of the pre-requisites to enter is having a very very very rich daddy means it can't be a real sport. Also, when Hemingway said it I think drivers had a 50/50 chance of surviving a full season.
That leaves mountaineering as The Only Sport. Unless someone wants to veto that as well.
It’s a sh!t boring pub game and nothing more. Paint drying is far more exciting.
But it's not – that's just a lazy trope. It's a shame that some people here seem so keen to belittler his fantastic achievement.
Sport has come from practicing martial and hunting skills surely
You can kill animals with darts, maybe small ones, so it must qualify......here wench, cook this vole i have slain...
If you have to queue it’s not really a sport
TBF, most of that lot have paid someone to drag them up. I mean, all they are doing is putting one foot in front of the other and wondering how their share investments are going.
If you have to queue it’s not really a sport
Yup, it's official. Sport is dead. We are a species of tiddlywinks players with delusions of grandeur.
Been thinking about molgrips' comment about darts Vs snooker. I don't think he went far enough. The complexity of snooker in term of nuance if off the scale in comparison to darts.
But that's a separate argument. I give you javelin throwing - basically a big dart and you just have to lob it as far as possible. No accuracy, just Wang it. Boring as hell. It makes darts look stupidly complicated but javelin is unquestionably a sport. Darts is a game. A good pub game, sometimes played in front of a crowd in dodgy Spandex tops by competitors who seemingly have to have a nickname.
I'd like to add a further caveat to what makes a sport (on top of no jeans, sweating, specialist footwear and judges doing qualitative only scoring) - you are at real risk of injury if doing it properly. And RSI doesn't count. So wafting a computer mouse or games controller around, twiddling a cue or throwing a 20g dart (or even competitive tommy tanking) don't count as the injury risk is too low.
I don't really get the subjective scoring = not proper sport argument.
Pretty much all sports have some form of 'judging'. In sports like football the referee is constantly making subjective calls about whether play is legal or not. Even sports like weightlifting have subjective judging about whether a lift is pressed out or not.
Every sport has at least some form of subjective judging. I'm not sure why people feel that sports that require judges to directly assign a score means that they somehow aren't proper sports.
throwing a 20g dart [doesn't] count as the injury risk is too low.
My experience as a student was different.
Anything played in a pub while drinking. Darts, pool, snooker (posh pubs), dominoes, cards, tiddly winks, backgammon, chess. Not sports.
Where do we stand on Pétanque?
Surely behind the line?
It’s a sh!t boring pub game and nothing more.
Aye, skittles is much better.
Anyway, Ned Boulting would like a word.
Boxing is clearly a sport, despite judging being involved (although the judges usually ruin it tbf)
also, last time I was in a fight I had a kebab in my hand at the time, so clearly that’s not a disqualified either..
Sounds like Kebabby; British form of Kibaddi, but held at 3am in a high street.
If darts isn’t a sport, not is fishing, curling, shooting, dressage, bowls and others.
I suggest the person who posted this has never tried serious curling!
Scotroutes is correct - it should be obvious to a casual observer with a copy of the rules who won. If it is necessary for the judge to spend years studying the art form to judge who is better then it’s not sport - although it may be a perfectly valid pastime.
Scotroutes is correct – it should be obvious to a casual observer with a copy of the rules who won. If it is necessary for the judge to spend years studying the art form to judge who is better then it’s not sport – although it may be a perfectly valid pastime.
Then football and rugby (and in fact the vast majority of sports) aren't sports.
competitive tommy tanking) don’t count as the injury risk is too low.
You say that, but...
Then football and rugby (and in fact the vast majority of sports) aren’t sports.
Why's that's? Football, rugby - pretty definitive scoring. A referee might have to make a call or watch a video to see if the ball went over a line etc but that's a world away from "well he entered the water a little bit more splashy than the last fella and his wrist was at a tiny bit of an angle so he gets a 7.4 instead of a 7.5.
It's ok for sports to have rules that are not stupids friendly. But artistic impression as a method of scoring is different. Might as well be the WI summer fate flower arranging competition. Or Strictly and a 10 from Len......though someone's going to come along in a minute and say they think that's a sport.
Darts is a popular activity among liberals, atheists, and Europeans, who claim that it is a challenging, skillful, and competitive sport. However, darts fails to meet the basic criteria of a sport, and is in fact a game, a hobby, or a form of gambling. Here are some reasons why darts is not a sport:
- Darts does not require any physical fitness or exertion. Anyone can throw a dart, even children, seniors, and the obese. Unlike real sports such as football, baseball, or hockey, darts does not involve any speed, endurance, strength, or strategy. Darts players simply toss a small metal object at a circular board, hoping to hit the right spot. There is no challenge, no thrill, and no glory in darts.
- Darts is not governed by a set of rules or standards. Darts players often cheat, lie, and manipulate the outcome of the game. They do not respect the authority of the referees, the judges, or the fans. They also use performance-enhancing drugs, such as alcohol, nicotine, and caffeine. Darts is a dishonest, immoral, and corrupt activity, not a sport.
- Darts is not undertaken competitively or capable of achieving a result. Darts players do not compete against each other, but against themselves, the board, and the luck. They do not care about winning or losing, but about scoring points, hitting bullseyes, and finishing the game. They do not have a clear objective, a score, or a ranking. Darts is a subjective, individualistic, and meaningless activity, not a sport.
Darts is a liberal scam, designed to promote a secular agenda, undermine American values, and weaken the national defense. Darts players are not athletes, but gamblers, who should be banned from public places, bars, and casinos. Darts is not a sport, but a waste of time, money, and energy..
A referee might have to make a call or watch a video to see if the ball went over a line etc but that’s a world away from “well he entered this water a little bit more splashy than the last fella and his wrist was at a tiny bit of an angle so he gets a 7.4 instead of a 7.5.
Deciding whether a goal has been scored or not is a tiny part of the referee's job. 99% of the job is continuously making judgment calls about pretty much every aspect of the game.
And those judgement calls are very much open to interpretation. Just look at the amount of time spent in any post match analysis on referees decisions.
But artistic impression is different.
While artistic impression is one thing, most sports have very stringent scoring criteria that has to be met. If you want to talk about artistic impression then look at pretty much any breakdown in rugby. While there are clear rules governing the breakdown you will almost never see a completely legal ruck and commentators are guaranteed to use the phrase, 'painting the right picture for the referee' at least once in any match. Very much artistic impression.
I find the 'judged sport' arguments to be very lazy because once you start thinking about it you realise just how many sporting outcomes are entirely dependent on an official's judgment.
Why single out one particular kind of judgement you don't like?
While artistic impression is one thing, most sports have very stringent scoring criteria that has to be met. If you want to talk about artistic impression then look at pretty much any breakdown in rugby. While there are clear rules governing the breakdown you will almost never see a completely legal ruck and commentators are guaranteed to use the phrase, ‘painting the right picture for the referee’ at least once in any match. Very much artistic impression.
I find the ‘judged sport’ arguments to be very lazy because once you start thinking about it you realise just how many sporting outcomes are entirely dependent on an official’s judgment.
Why single out one particular kind of judgement you don’t like?
Sorry - this is a light hearted thread, so not going to get to bickering. But you are wrong. Wrong, wrong wrong. 🙂 Yes, interpretation of the rules and if they have been broken is a thing. But that's plain not the same as a final result that's purely a judge's interpretation of how pretty/rad the person did the thing rather than a score of goals/distance/ time/weight etc.
You say that, but…
What with molgrips alluding to the fact that people threw darts at him at uni and you can't self pleasure without rupturing something.......the big hitters are going do in my estimation.
Got to agree with convert on this one!
nearly every sport has rules, and an umpire or ref to ensure they are adhered to. In football there may be some subjective assessment of any infringement, however if that’s a barrier to it being defined as a sport then you could argue that really nothing is technically a’sport’
After all if it’s determined little Jonny jumps the gun on the way to running 13 seconds during his school sports day, surely that’s a judgement call? See also any tennis tournament that doesn’t involve hawk eye. Or cycling when Sagan barged cav into the barriers and was subsequently disqualified as the officials determined he’d been reckless
Scotroutes is correct – it should be obvious to a casual observer with a copy of the rules who won. If it is necessary for the judge to spend years studying the art form to judge who is better then it’s not sport – although it may be a perfectly valid pastime.
Back when rugby games always kicked off at 2.30 on a Saturday afternoon, had respectable crowds and those fans decanted into local pubs just in time to see the last hour or so of Grandstand you'd have found that it never takes years studying. The rugby afficionados, who shortly before would have been bickering with each other about how rubbish each other's teams were, and let's not mention the ref, now became absolutely expert about any sport that Grandstand served up. Within minutes they'd become knowledgeable about figure skating, cross-country running, diving, bowls, anything. Just a pity that they couldn't agree on the rules of rugby as applied fairly to both teams. 😀
“an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment.
Based on the above definition is the hunting of animals a sport? I'm not sure the animals would agree.
