What is more important : winning or taking part ?

Gotchya · 24-08-2002, 05:37 AM

In a cartoon featuring Hagar the Horrible, Hagar's assistant quotes, 'It is not winning that is important but taking part'. In reply Hagar says the quotation was coined by a loser. There seems to be some truth in this when we realise that winning often means a lot to people taking part in sports. It seems then that the saying is just mere lip service and expresses a sentiment which is unrealistic and it is even doubtful if it was ever accepted at all. Competetive as the cricket played today is, major events mean loads of wealth for the participants what are we 'playing' for ?

Neil Pickup · 24-08-2002, 08:42 AM

Vince Lombardi - "If winning isn't everything, why do they keep the score?"

It's very true that "It's the Taking Part.." is said far, far more often (if not exclusively) by teams that get beaten week in, week out (from first-hand experience) but without them, there wouldn't be anyone for the better sides to beat.

Whilst Winning has to be what's played for, Taking Part is almost, but not quite as, important.

As for money, I don't think that it's reached the point yet where the love of the game has been surpassed by the cash, as it has in football, and that all cricketers still enjoy playing.

luckyeddie · 24-08-2002, 12:34 PM

I am delighted that Derbyshire took part against Middlesex at Lords by 204 runs this week.

Gotchya · 25-08-2002, 07:08 AM

Quote:

As for money, I don't think that it's reached the point yet where the love of the game has been surpassed by the cash, as it has in football, and that all cricketers still enjoy playing.

How would you put it in the context of the current faceoff between the icc/players/boards ?
Surely, money is a problem here...

luckyeddie · 25-08-2002, 12:58 PM

Quote:

In a cartoon featuring Hagar the Horrible, Hagar's assistant

.....

Yay. Lucky Eddie!

Kiwi · 26-08-2002, 12:45 AM

Winning is everything. I hate the 'Take part' attitude. When u are really young it is alright but when u get older u should always try to be the best, and nothing short of it.

Kimbo · 26-08-2002, 03:52 AM

the most important thing is playing to win. competing.

luckyeddie · 26-08-2002, 03:53 AM

No doubt, but you should be gracious in victory and magnanimous in defeat.

Gotchya · 27-08-2002, 08:07 AM

If such a philosophy as 'taking part is more important' is to be promoted, i guess the whole world order will have to be changed ! Perhaps when there is abundance in the world for everything, only then may we realize such an ideal.

Then again it is i think man's eternal wish to overcome the rest that will never allow him to settle for anything less then a win.

By the way how would you explain the "Killer Instinct"?

Anil · 27-08-2002, 10:33 AM

The first priority should be to compete to the best of your ability. If you are good enough to win, you will. Even if you lose, there is no shame because you have put in your best effort.

luckyeddie · 27-08-2002, 10:35 AM

I like the idea of playing to win.

I bowl in international tournaments, and if I do not give of my best, then I am letting myself (and my country) down.

Giving of my best refers to the effort I put in - it does not necessarily mean playing my best but it DOES mean trying my guts out.

It also means playing by the rules (not even making an attempt to 'bend' them) and it also means that come the end of the event, win or lose, I can sit down with my opponent and have a beer, chat, shake his hand etc and get ready for next time.

If playing to win means cheating, sledging my opponent, bending the rules just to give me the edge I otherwise wouldn't have, then winning would not be worth it.

You can fool everyone else but you cannot fool yourself.

Now saying all that doesn't mean that I would not take every opportunity to pressurise my opponent as much as possible - I would.

Tim · 28-08-2002, 05:07 AM

always win, while your on the field..you've got a job to do & if your own team mate gives you stick you know that back in the changing rooms he'll still hand you a beer so you always play hard.

Paid The Umpire · 28-08-2002, 06:31 AM

You should play to win, but if you don't win who gives a ****.

Hah, I love winning but it aint the be all and end all.

I think it is better to lose in a close game, than win by a huge margin.

After all "If stick and twigs, wore silly wigs..."

Hmmm, that last sentence didn't make any sense, but this one neither did.

You should always play to win, but if you have to resort to playing unfairly to do so, then it aint worth playing for. Last season I gave many descisions from square leg (as the SL ump [you know with the orange jacket]) and never did I cheat, infact I gave more out than the rest of the team... Hmmmm did I cheat NO, did they MAYBE.

You should never make the game into a farce by not playing with your heart in it.

Hmmm, they entire post made 5% sense. A new high!

Gotchya · 30-08-2002, 06:59 AM

Hmmmmm....can i say now taking part was more important

luckyeddie · 30-08-2002, 08:03 AM

LuckyEddie told Hagar that.

Do not doubt the greatest philosopher cartoondom has ever produced.

24-08-2002, 05:37 AM	#1 (permalink)
Gotchya State Vice-Captain Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Lahore, Pakistan Posts: 1,399	What is more important : winning or taking part ? In a cartoon featuring Hagar the Horrible, Hagar's assistant quotes, 'It is not winning that is important but taking part'. In reply Hagar says the quotation was coined by a loser. There seems to be some truth in this when we realise that winning often means a lot to people taking part in sports. It seems then that the saying is just mere lip service and expresses a sentiment which is unrealistic and it is even doubtful if it was ever accepted at all. Competetive as the cricket played today is, major events mean loads of wealth for the participants what are we 'playing' for ? __________________ Once the game is over, the king and the pawn go back in the same box

24-08-2002, 08:42 AM	#2 (permalink)
Neil Pickup Cricket Web Staff Member / Global Moderator Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Oxford, England Posts: 26,361	Vince Lombardi - "If winning isn't everything, why do they keep the score?" It's very true that "It's the Taking Part.." is said far, far more often (if not exclusively) by teams that get beaten week in, week out (from first-hand experience) but without them, there wouldn't be anyone for the better sides to beat. Whilst Winning has to be what's played for, Taking Part is almost, but not quite as, important. As for money, I don't think that it's reached the point yet where the love of the game has been surpassed by the cash, as it has in football, and that all cricketers still enjoy playing. __________________ MSN Messenger: minardineil2000 at hotmail dot com \| AAAS Chairman CricketWeb Black \| CricketWeb XI Captain ClarkeWatch: We're Watching Rikki - Are You? Up The Grecians - Exeter City FC Completing the Square: My Cricket Web Blog

24-08-2002, 12:34 PM	#3 (permalink)
luckyeddie Hall of Fame Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Derby, England Posts: 17,629	I am delighted that Derbyshire took part against Middlesex at Lords by 204 runs this week. __________________ Nigel Clough's Black and White Army, beating Forest away with 10 men

26-08-2002, 03:52 AM	#7 (permalink)
Kimbo International Debutant Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: london Posts: 2,835	the most important thing is playing to win. competing. __________________ life's a gift thats why they call it the present

28-08-2002, 06:31 AM	#13 (permalink)
Paid The Umpire All Time Legend Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: In Your House, With A Knife! Posts: 2,300	You should play to win, but if you don't win who gives a ****. Hah, I love winning but it aint the be all and end all. I think it is better to lose in a close game, than win by a huge margin. After all "If stick and twigs, wore silly wigs..." Hmmm, that last sentence didn't make any sense, but this one neither did. You should always play to win, but if you have to resort to playing unfairly to do so, then it aint worth playing for. Last season I gave many descisions from square leg (as the SL ump [you know with the orange jacket]) and never did I cheat, infact I gave more out than the rest of the team... Hmmmm did I cheat NO, did they MAYBE. You should never make the game into a farce by not playing with your heart in it. Hmmm, they entire post made 5% sense. A new high! __________________ JOIN the CRICKETWEB.NET STEAM GROUP

26-08-2002, 12:45 AM	#6 (permalink)
Kiwi State Vice-Captain Join Date: May 2002 Location: New Zealand Posts: 1,079	Winning is everything. I hate the 'Take part' attitude. When u are really young it is alright but when u get older u should always try to be the best, and nothing short of it.

26-08-2002, 03:53 AM	#8 (permalink)
luckyeddie Hall of Fame Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Derby, England Posts: 17,629	No doubt, but you should be gracious in victory and magnanimous in defeat.

27-08-2002, 08:07 AM	#9 (permalink)
Gotchya State Vice-Captain Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Lahore, Pakistan Posts: 1,399	If such a philosophy as 'taking part is more important' is to be promoted, i guess the whole world order will have to be changed ! Perhaps when there is abundance in the world for everything, only then may we realize such an ideal. Then again it is i think man's eternal wish to overcome the rest that will never allow him to settle for anything less then a win. By the way how would you explain the "Killer Instinct"?

27-08-2002, 10:35 AM	#11 (permalink)
luckyeddie Hall of Fame Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Derby, England Posts: 17,629	I like the idea of playing to win. I bowl in international tournaments, and if I do not give of my best, then I am letting myself (and my country) down. Giving of my best refers to the effort I put in - it does not necessarily mean playing my best but it DOES mean trying my guts out. It also means playing by the rules (not even making an attempt to 'bend' them) and it also means that come the end of the event, win or lose, I can sit down with my opponent and have a beer, chat, shake his hand etc and get ready for next time. If playing to win means cheating, sledging my opponent, bending the rules just to give me the edge I otherwise wouldn't have, then winning would not be worth it. You can fool everyone else but you cannot fool yourself. Now saying all that doesn't mean that I would not take every opportunity to pressurise my opponent as much as possible - I would.

28-08-2002, 05:07 AM	#12 (permalink)
Tim Cricketer Of The Year Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Auckland Posts: 7,888	always win, while your on the field..you've got a job to do & if your own team mate gives you stick you know that back in the changing rooms he'll still hand you a beer so you always play hard.

30-08-2002, 06:59 AM	#14 (permalink)
Gotchya State Vice-Captain Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Lahore, Pakistan Posts: 1,399	Hmmmmm....can i say now taking part was more important

30-08-2002, 08:03 AM	#15 (permalink)
luckyeddie Hall of Fame Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Derby, England Posts: 17,629	LuckyEddie told Hagar that. Do not doubt the greatest philosopher cartoondom has ever produced.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode