Sports and American Culture

Sports and American Culture

What defines Cheating

"Everybody knows that lying, cheating and stealing are selfish and unethical... [Though] deceiving the opponent is part of the game" Feezell and Hamilton (Feezell, pg. 2).

In Mark J. Hamilton essay, There's No Lying in Baseball (Wink, Wink), he explains the term cheating as plays of deception; categorizing cheating as a jocular lie or a mischievous lie. He even questions the morality and integrity of the baseball player's actions. He also states the consequences of how these actions affecting baseball as a whole and to its nation. Whereas, in Randolph Feezell, Baseball, Cheating, and Tradition: Would Kant Want this Cork Back? Essay, the author attempts to define the word cheating from a few philosophers' perspective. The absolutist, traditionalist, and realist converse whether it is morally wrong to cheat and how it differs from strategically breaking the rules. Ragan Lance Reistma, the author of What Would Machiavelli Do?, agrees with Feezell's argument defining cheating, as lying to gain a competitive advantage, but through the game of pick-up basketball. He mentions Machiavelli perspective on tick-tacking and glorified (honest) cheating. Thomas D. Kennedy, author of To Hack or Not to Hack?, also agrees with Reistma argument about cheating in basketball, but talks about hackers as well as describing who are the excellent players have respect for the game. While in Michael McGrath essay, Should Steroids Be Banned? Yes, explains the reasons baseball players use steroids, the consequences the players face, and the effect on American morals. Thesis: Though it is unethical to cheat in the game of baseball and basketball; athletes cheat periodically through strategic rule breaking and illegal actions. The players demonstrate their trickery and cheating skills through their actions, usage of illegal equipment, taking illegal substance, and gambling.

In baseball, players cheat, lie, and deceive one another to heighten their playing abilities. From Hamilton's point of view the question of acting immoral is open to discussion as to whether or not cheating is a type of deception. Hamilton believes plays of deception can be an "activity of amusement that is expected from opponents, but an intentional lie to the umpire is another story" (Hamilton, 131). The two different types of deception plays are jocular and mischievous lies. A baseball player who plays a trick on an opponent as part of a strategy in a game, but does not gain an unfair advantage is a jocose lie. This type of lying is "a joke and cannot be a lie" because this trickery is expected from the opponents and "acting is part of the game [in which] the opponents agree to be part of this contest" involving deception (Hamilton, 136). Therefore, jocular lies are not immoral because no harm is intended and players do not earn an unfair advantage because they are strategically rule-breaking as part of the game. Opponents expect each other to preserve the competitive equality of the game defined by the rules. Someone who mischievously lies would be considered as an absurd, irrational, and immoral player. Therefore, an athlete, who breaks the "rules with the intention of gaining an unfair advantage, is called cheating" (Feezell, 112). The player not only deceives the opponents and the umpire, but also destroys their own dignity and their pride. The rules that define the sport in question apply to everyone equally. The main difference between a mischievous and a jocular lie is a player lying to the umpire to intentionally gain an unfair advantage.

Jocular lies are displayed through the different performances that baseball players display throughout the game. A common play of deception is the hidden ball trick "where the defense pretends a strike out is the third out when it is not," indicating the runner it is a third out, thus, allowing the infielder to tag out the runner who is not on base anymore (Hamilton, 131). Baseball players have to learn from each other actions in order to avoid getting tricked by an opposing player. This innovative trick play creates an amusing competition for the fans who take pleasure in watching the players get fooled. As long as the players deceiving one another are played within the rules and nobody is harmed, then hoaxing the opponent is not an immoral action. At Fenway Park, a deep fly ball hits to Ramirez, the left fielder, who runs toward the back wall and turns his back to home plate, as he looks up; he acts as if the ball is going to bounce off the wall. Though as the "ball descends, he quickly turns toward the infield and with his back to the wall catches the ball on the fly" (Hamilton, 132).

...