The age-old argument of whether cheerleading is a sport was raised today by the opening arguments of a case in Bridgeport, Conn. where a judge will decide.
The problem was that the volleyball program at Quinnipiac University was cut in favor of cheerleading because of the cost and number of athletes impacted more students. Of course I’m not even considering the type of cheerleading that takes place on the sidelines of basketball and football games. That’s little more than rhythmic clapping.
I’ve never argued whether cheerleading, or gymnastics, is a form of athleticism. You only have to watch for a couple of minutes to determine that the backflips, jumps and twists require loads of athleticism and talent. The problem is the scoring system. Just like figure skating and skiing, to name a couple, the winner of a competition cannot be determined without an outside, and subjective, judge.
For example, two teams of sports that require goals or bases can play by themselves without a referee, umpire or official and still reach a conclusion. Cheerleading, figure skating and skiing can’t do that. That’s why cheerleading isn’t a sport. If somebody came up with some kind of unbiased scoring system, we’ll revisit it.
Because Quinnipiac receives federal funding, it is required to abide by Title IX, and therefore budgets and the number of athletes are compared with male sports. The decision that the judge makes is how to interpret a law that was passed in 1972, especially considering the advancements in cheerleading in the last 38 years.
The school’s argument is cheerleading is a competitive, athletic activity that creates more opportunities for women than volleyball, ABC News reported. It says it has adequately complied with the law.
"The university believes that it has complied with all aspects of Title IX legislation and will continue to do so. Given that this is a matter awaiting adjudication, we will not comment further," said Lynn Bushnell, vice president for public affairs, in a statement reported by ABC News.
This could easily turn into a case of sexism. I can’t see a similar situation involving male sports, especially a male cheerleading squad.
Most cheerleading supporters reach for the argument of training time and dedication. They belabor the point about endless hours of practice, strength training and fitness to throw each other, and tumble through the air. But just because a football, basketball or baseball player can’t do a back flip or somersault doesn’t somehow enhance the athleticism of cheerleading.
But if you say cheerleading is a sport, where do you draw the line after that? Is ballroom dancing a sport? Considering the hours of choreography and practice needed to compete in Dancing With the Stars, for example, you could make that argument.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
I probably would have agreed with you a few months ago, but a few things have happened lately to change my mind. I'll give you a hint. Armando Galarraga, and US vs. Slovenia.
ReplyDeleteI used to believe that sporting contests were decided by the players on their respective teams. Now I know better. Sporting contests are decided by something called "The Human Element". The Human Element dictates that all contests are ultimately decided by officials. So despite video reply and even the admission of errors by the officials (when they man up to it), the powers at the top refuse to take corrective action. Failure to correct a mistake is the same and doing it on purpose.
I can only conclude that the only thing that really matters is the show. Fill those seats and sell those TV spots. The contest doesn’t matter. Just put on a show and find some plausible way to declare a winner.
So sure Cheerleading can be a sport, as can gymnastics, dancing, video games, spelling. You name it, if it can command an audience it’s a sport by current standards.
Link to scoring guide for CHEERSPORT Nationals held in Atlanta, GA.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.cheersport.net/nationals.asp?content=scoring
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fxJZ3umUDM&feature=related
ReplyDeleteTopGun out of Miami competing at CHEERSPORT
Keith, first of all... so excited for you guys and your engagement!!
ReplyDeleteBut man, this is really disturbing that you feel this way about competitive cheerleading. Saying cheerleading is not a sport is well... a little old school. In competitive cheerleading, points are earned by skills that the cheerleaders complete and how well they are executed. Yes, there are no goals scored or touchdowns acquired, but the object of the game is different. In competitive cheerleading, you are to execute your routine comprised of many difficult stunts, jumps, and tumbling elements ... to perfection. Flexing a foot while flying high in the air on a basket toss or while in the middle of your toe touch will get points deducted from your total score. (See score sheet referenced above.) There are also many other items that cheerleaders are scored on in order to come up with what the judges (yes judges) give the team for their final score. The judges also are given strict guidelines for how they score, and the team should know what their estimated score could be for a perfect routine before they even compete. Advanced elements score higher than lower ones. (Example: Perfect Cartwheel, 1pt or Perfect Full Layout, 5pts).
Saying cheerleading is not a sport because it is "judged" also counts out many other sports such as gymnastics, figure skating, and numerous x-games competitions. What about boxing and weightlifting? All sports require some degree of "judging," but the rules of the game are different. Competitive cheerleading is a non-traditional sport, but it is just that... a sport. It is a sport where athletes compete to have the most advanced skills on the competition floor. Cheerleading on the side lines of a football game is a totally different story.
Hey Keith! I'm Sarah, friends with Kristi, and I would also like to say congrats on your engagement. You are a lucky fella! :)
ReplyDeleteAlso, here's my rebuttal: show me a couple of professional or college baseball and football teams who could play a whole game without a ref or umpire (a.k.a. judge) without the whole game devolving into a big fight over what actually happened. I play tennis myself and know the importance of a judge to call the ball "in" or "out" or "back" or, as in the case of Serena, "foot fault" (heh heh) with a greater degree of objectivity than the players themselves. That's why I think your assertion that a sport can only be a sport if it doesn't require judging is false.
What I feel even more strongly, though, is that the definition of "sport" is more gray than black-and-white and will vary according to audience and context. Sport is a word that already has multiple meanings (like, it can mean joking around with someone), and that's okay! Soo, I think if it means something different when a bunch of kids are playing ball in the neighborhood than when a governmental entity is evaluating a university policy, then that's a-ok! :)
Thank you all for the comments. But I just don't see how you can determine a winner in cheerleading without a judge. That's also why I don't think figure skating, skiing and most of the x games are sports. I agree 100% that it takes a lot of athleticsm to perform. But a referee and a judge are not interchangeable. A referee doesn't say whether a goal is scored, or if someone hits a home run. Sure they might need replay, but it's not subjective. The human element is fine, but if you have to have the entire activity based on human element, it's not a sport.
ReplyDelete