Team Loyalty: Sports and Politics
Team Loyalty—Sports and Politics
Don’t shy away from what I’m about to write if you don’t happen to like sports.
First of all, this doesn’t require that you understand the detail of a sport.
Second, I hope to equip you to break through with someone who does like sports about why politics and governing has become dysfunctional in our lives.
Ladies especially, let me ask you a question. Do you know a man who really likes a sport? The man has a favorite sport and a favorite team. Everything is fine so long as that team is winning. Winning is a lubricant that keeps all the moving parts flowing together without friction.
But, what happens when the man’s team loses? Not fit to live with, is he? Don’t you hear one conversation after another about why the team is losing? Don’t you hear about the inadequacy of the players, their lack of skill and talent and the inability of the coaches to coach? The answer to those questions is yes, isn’t it?
Excuse me, but if the team that is losing is the man’s favorite team, then why doesn’t the man complain about the team that won? Why aren’t the complaints about how the opposing team is not using the offense our team’s defense expected? Why don’t men complain about how the opposing team was able to recruit superior players? The answers to those questions fall into two general areas.
1. The man understands the game itself and its rules and dynamics. He knows and recognizes winning performance.
2. He refuses to accept excuses for the inability to provide winning performance.
3. He knows that he has no control over what the other team does. He only has control (or, more accurately, interest) over his own team.
2. He refuses to accept excuses for the inability to provide winning performance.
3. He knows that he has no control over what the other team does. He only has control (or, more accurately, interest) over his own team.
Now we come to the most important question of all. So what?
Contrast this man’s behavior towards his chosen favorite sports team with his behavior towards his chosen political party. When he comments on political issues, does he talk about his party or the other party? Chances are he is commenting on the other party. And if he is commenting on the other party, then doesn’t that mean—
1. The man doesn’t understand the game of politics itself and its rules and dynamics, other than the thought that his side is right and the other side is wrong. He may have an inconsistent view of winning performance.
2. He makes excuses for the lack of winning performance of his party.
3. He blames the other party for their poor ideas instead of taking responsibility for the quality of his own party’s ideas. After all, if his own party had superior ideas, wouldn’t those ideas be winning both in opinion polls and at the ballot box?
2. He makes excuses for the lack of winning performance of his party.
3. He blames the other party for their poor ideas instead of taking responsibility for the quality of his own party’s ideas. After all, if his own party had superior ideas, wouldn’t those ideas be winning both in opinion polls and at the ballot box?
If I’m describing someone you know, (man or woman), then here is the question you should ask them. Why is it you take one approach to your sports and another to your politics?
Overall, this is one more example of the fact that what we are looking for in elected officials is consistency.
One final thought before we leave this topic. Listen to the post game press conferences with head coaches. Win or lose, with few exceptions, you will hear those coaches give credit to a worthy opponent for an exciting and well-played contest. Their comments about the turning points in the contest will be factual and detached. Contrast that with the type of commentary you hear on talk radio today. Which type of communication do you find more useful and meaningful? Which would you rather hear elected officials use?
Comments