Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"No clapping please"

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Within the bounds of civilized behavior, decorum and good manners, I'm all for crowds doing whatever they are naturally (without the influence of TV cameras, for example) moved by events to do.
    Each event and locale has its own atmosphere.
    What bugs me are athletes soliciting behavior — trying to manufacture rythmic clapping pre-jump or applause post-race.
    It's arrogant to presume to tell an audience how it should react to your performance, especially before you've actually performed.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by tandfman
      Originally posted by Dutra
      I'm not a real big fan of the "quiet please" we get in sports such as Tennis. When a batter steps out of a batters box at a baseball game or the holder stands up out of his stance on a field goal attempt to complain to the officials of their respective sports that "it's a little too noisey for me to continue and if you don't I may storm off the field in a huff" I may consider some sympathy for those offended.
      Tennis is bad. Golf is worse. The ball isn't even moving when the so-called athletes have to deal with it.
      Yeah...but in golf if it wasn't for the "QUIET" signs...those of us watching on TV would never be able to hear the moron yell "get in the hole" from 400yds out.

      Comment


      • #18
        There are at least two different phenomena involved:

        1. Spontaneous clapping by the crowd. This, IMO, should be avoided out of
        respect for those athletes who do not want it (irrespective of whether they are
        in the majority or minority). Exceptions do obviously exist, e.g. as a reaction
        to the completion of a first rate performance.

        2. Athlete induced clapping. If an athlete thinks that it will improve his
        performance _and_ he has a legitimate claim to being the centre of attention,
        this is in order. If not, he should avoid, again it out of respect for other
        athletes. (A legitimate example could be a WR attempt in the high jump; an
        illegitimate, a PB attempt half a foot below the WR. Generally, it will be a
        judgement call depending on the exact circumstances.)

        The important issue is that athletics is about the athletes, not the audience.
        The entertainment for the audience is a positive side-effect, nothing more.
        (Notwithstanding the fact that the audience may be necessary to finance
        athletics.)

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by ExCoastRanger
          What bugs me are athletes soliciting behavior — trying to manufacture rythmic clapping pre-jump or applause post-race.
          It's arrogant to presume to tell an audience how it should react to your performance, especially before you've actually performed.
          These things are so individual. I tend to like it, especially when it's done toward the climax of the event by a contender. Willie Banks could bring everybody (including the ones in their living rooms) on their feet.
          "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
          by Thomas Henry Huxley

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by ExCoastRanger
            Within the bounds of civilized behavior, decorum and good manners, I'm all for crowds doing whatever they are naturally (without the influence of TV cameras, for example) moved by events to do.
            Each event and locale has its own atmosphere.
            What bugs me are athletes soliciting behavior — trying to manufacture rythmic clapping pre-jump or applause post-race.
            It's arrogant to presume to tell an audience how it should react to your performance, especially before you've actually performed.
            You right, dude!
            "Who's Kidding Who?"

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by mrbowie
              I think clapping is rude and selfish.

              Clapping is nothing compared to the funny looks foreign athletes give when morons in the crowd whistle (whole different meaning in Europe).


              I say "morons" because only a moron would think emiting a loud shrill screech would NOT bother other spectators nearby in the stands.


              [Just finished with a real horse's ass doing this at the Minnesota state meet; even when told (by me and others) that he was hurting people's ears, he kept on, insisting it was the "special signal" between him and his (competing) daughter; hearing this, I realized he was never going to quit peacefully and sicced the authorities on him. He then stopped, nearly halfway through the meet. Yeah, I'm a jerk.]

              Comment


              • #22
                Brian, that is some story.

                I was once at a James Taylor concert in Saratoga Springs and a guy kept doing that kind of scream every few minutes or so, right behind me. I kindly asked him to stop it, but he ignored me.

                So I moved my seat, right next to his, and spent about an hour yelling as loud as I could into one of his ears.

                The guy stopped making his own noises and never flinched as I yelled in his ears.

                I would suspect him of being deaf, but he had come to a musical concert, so I think that must not be correct.

                It was surreal.
                "Who's Kidding Who?"

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by mrbowie
                  Originally posted by croflash
                  To me it seems like this depends on culture and origin of the athlete very often, a lot of Russian athletes would rather want to make their attempt when nobody is watching instead of asking for clapping and support.

                  Atmosphere and therefore "noise" is part of sports and it should be. There are some situations when the crowd should be quiet, but the general mood can't be positive if the entire stadium is muted.
                  When Charlie Dumas approached the bar in an attempt to become the first high jumper to clear 7 feet, not only was there no clapping, but you could have heard a pin drop. Pandemonium broke loose when he cleared the bar.

                  That, my friend, is atmosphere.
                  I agree that sometimes complete silence can be more memorable and enhance the moment, but there is no general rule to that. There is no definite rule of conduct, noise might come off as unnatural whereas silence would be perfectly fine in one situation and vice versa.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by imaginative
                    Athlete induced clapping. If an athlete thinks that it will improve his
                    performance _and_ he has a legitimate claim to being the centre of attention,
                    this is in order. If not, he should avoid, again it out of respect for other
                    athletes. (A legitimate example could be a WR attempt in the high jump; an
                    illegitimate, a PB attempt half a foot below the WR. Generally, it will be a
                    judgement call depending on the exact circumstances.)
                    I don't think it has to be a WR or PB attempt to warrant an athlete's request for attention. Very often, there are no running events going on, and no reason for a field eventer NOT to get some attention. But if the athlete doesn't initiate the request, many eyes would be elsewhere.

                    Nobody has to clap, but those who do respond to the athletes' requests for support seem to feel good about helping out.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      jerkoffs
                      "Who's Kidding Who?"

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by imaginative

                        The important issue is that athletics is about the athletes, not the audience.
                        The entertainment for the audience is a positive side-effect, nothing more.
                        (Notwithstanding the fact that the audience may be necessary to finance
                        athletics.)
                        Sponsors, networks, meet organizers, and 99.99 percent of the atheletes that compete in a meet would probably disagree.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          ``Sponsors, networks, meet organizers'' would likely disagree, no doubt;
                          however, they are typically people who have no interest in the sport, have
                          little direct connection with the sport, want to make money of the sport, etc.
                          Notably, if we look at sport (not just TFN) in a historical or ``purist''
                          perspective, they are a group of hangers-on. (Where ``hangers-on'' should not
                          be interpreted to mean ``unimportant'', ``powerless'', or similar---the
                          opposite is true.)

                          As for ``99.99 percent of the atheletes'' I do not share your opinion. Without
                          denying that very many athletes are very interested in the money the
                          ``hangers-on'' bring, nor that they may enjoy the attention of the crowd: The
                          typical athlete is more interested in putting in a good effort, reaching a good
                          result and position,
                          etc.

                          Irrespective of that, a meet without an audience would still be athletics, even
                          if between three teenage boys who sprint down a forest path. In contrast, a
                          meet with 50.000 in the audience, but no athletes...

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by imaginative
                            "... meet organizers'' would likely disagree, no doubt; however, they are typically people who have no interest in the sport, have little direct connection with the sport.
                            It was raining where you were yesterday, so I'll cut you a small amount of slack. Which data did you use when entertaining this thought? I know that here, in SE, there isn't a dis-association between meet organiser and their interest in the sport or their connection to the sport; some are rather directly involved in the sport at the highest levels. Not to mention Norway.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              True, I had my mind on the money side, which lead to an undifferentiated
                              statement. To clarify: IMO, most ``big cheeses'' of major meets, large
                              organisations, etc. tend to have their focus on making money (or other
                              non-sport areas). In a similar way, most big-time politicians are more
                              interested in their career than the success of the ideology they ostensibly
                              support. Etc. (This is a very general phenomenon.)

                              When we look at small meets, smaller cheeses, former athletes involved in the
                              organisation, ..., the situation is much better. Similarly, lower level
                              policians will be relatively more interested in ideology.

                              Further, to avoid misunderstandings, I do not include in the group ``meet
                              organizers'' the many volunteers who can be involved in the meet or its
                              organisation. They, in contrast to the big cheeses, are typically people with a
                              great connection to the sport.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X