Formalism and strategic fouls

Abstract

It is sometimes claimed that formalism and the logical incompatibility thesis together imply that fouls cannot be part of the game. Some philosophers think this proves that therefore strategic fouls are always morally wrong, but other philosophers think this result undermines formalism itself, since strategic fouls clearly are part of the game and are at least sometimes morally permissible. I show that formalism in fact does accommodate strategic fouls and that it is neutral about whether strategic fouls are morally permissible or not.

Keywords:

• Strategic foul
• formalism
• cheating
• rules
• ethos of sport

Acknowledgments

I thank John Russell and Robert Blecker for encouragement and criticism on an early draft of this paper presented at the 43rd IAPS conference in Wales. I also thank two referees and the editor of this journal, Paul Gaffney, for further helpful comments and criticism.

Notes

1. This is not to imply that Suits ever called his theory by the name formalism.

2. Vossen actually used punching rather than pushing as the foul-type. However, a referee for this journal pointed out that punches get much more severe penalties so I have slightly changed the example to the less egregious push-type foul.

3. This objection is adapted from D’Agostino’s objection to Regimentation in D’Agostino (1981, 66, 67).

4. The severity of the penalty may determine whether the players perceive it as a price to be paid or a punishment to be avoided – such as penalty kick vs. immediate forfeit. This sidesteps the debate over whether rule violations should be viewed as prices or penalties.

5. This objection was suggested by a referee for this journal.

6. See http://www.sbnation.com/2015/5/7/8564791/nba-intentional-foul-hack-a-shaq-must-be-removed for an account of the history of Hack-a-Shaq and why it’s bad for the game.

7. Not everyone would agree that strategic fouls include types III and IV which both involve the attempt to deceive, but I include them anyway for those who do think of them this way.

8. This objection was raised by a referee for this journal.

9. The literature on the morality of sport is vast. See for example Leaman (1981), Lehman (1981), Simon (2000, 2005), Torres (2000), Russell (1999, 2004), Dixon (2003), Morgan (2004, 2012), Howe (2004), and Ciomaga (2012).