Conventional Fouls - A Note on Strategic Fouls

ABSTRACT

Strategic fouls (SF) are intentional violations of the rules ‘in which the violator expects to be detected and penalized but expects some benefit to his or her competitive effectiveness’ (Fraleigh 2003, 169). Sometimes SF are widely viewed within a playing practice as acceptable—possibly as legitimate prices) e.g. stopping the clock in Basketball). In other instances, they are considered illegitimate (e.g., handling the ball to prevent a goal in dying minutes of a football match). And of course sometimes the issue is contested (e.g., fouling to stop a counterattack in football). My aim is to defend Converionalsim: Conventionalism: SF of a certain type in a particular sport is justifiable if there is a legitimate agreement or a convention according to which it is legitimate. Simply put, Conventionalism means that stopping the clock in Basketball is justified because there is a convention that it is legitimate. After briefly setting out the initial case in favor of conventionalism, I will utilize some prominent discussions of SF to challenge Conventionalism, and will offer a response to these challenges.

KEYWORDS:

• Strategic fouls
• conventions
• Norms
• ruels

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1. For a discussion of the difference between a rule that is a prohibition whose violation entails a fine, and a rule which is a price whose violation entails a payment or cost, cf Eylon and Horowitz (2017).

2. Note that there is room for maneuver here—if some types of SF are permitted, then it can be argued that some other type is, or should be, permitted as well, even if it is not recognized as such. Such extensions and developments within a practice are common, typically based on the nature of the game and the practice of playing the game.

3. And see below.

4. Note that this response depends on the ability to make some distinction between a better agreement of the same game, and an alternative one. A better version of football might include a ban on SF, a new offside rule, and an amended handling rule. An alternative agreement would be to play according to the rules of Badminton rather than play football.

5. For a recent view that takes the idea of a central test of a sport for granted cf Kaluziński (2018). For a criticism of this view see also Eylon (forthcoming).

6. Or even among constitutive skills at all. These, presumably, are supposed to be given by constitutive rules. But the identity of these rules is also up to the player or practice. see Eylon and Horowitz (2017).

7. I would like to thank the referee of this journal for helpful comments and suggestions.