The world of sports is a competitive place. In the professional realm, success brings fame and fortune, and athletes train relentlessly to get to the top. It takes a lot of hard work (and a liberal amount of talent) to rise in the ranks, and unfortunately some athletes choose to cut corners to succeed. We’ve all heard of a famous athlete or two busted for cheating, whether that be Lance Armstrong or Alex Rodriguez for using steroids, or Tom Brady for deflating footballs to gain an advantage.
Although the most famous scandals involve star athletes, cheating is a problem that extends sometimes down to the least competitive spheres of competition, even to high school athletics. As a crosscountry runner, I have witnessed cheating several times in my own sport, but rather than doping or ignoring equipment specifications, cheating in the case of competitive running literally involves cutting corners. There aren’t many rules in cross-country, owing to the simplicity of the sport, and the ones that exist are somewhat intuitive.
One of the requirements is, unsurprisingly, to run the entire course. This rule is obvious, but it is the one most often broken. A cross-country course is defined by a mowed path, a white line, or both, and in addition includes flags to give runners direction. (Red signifies a left turn, yellow signifies a right turn, and a blue flag means continue straight. ) Runners must stay within several feet of the white line, and must go around the corner flags rather than cutting to the inside.
Sometimes runners seek to shorten the course illegally through cutting the corner flags and straying from the white line. Although they may seem trivial, cuts like these can, when added together, shorten the distance traveled significantly and cut several seconds off the time it takes to run the course. I have seen numerous instances of this type of cheating, and although I would not be able stop it as it happened, there are several ways in which | could remedy the situation afterwards that would stop it from occurring again. Firstly, I would prevent it from happening on my own team.
During the previous cross-country season, I was the de-facto leader of the team due to my age and experience. I was careful to be a positive role model, and to be cognizant of my influence over team culture. If I ever heard that one of our runners had cut corners, I would tell them that it was not right in front of the rest of the team, and I would directly challenge any team sentiment that cheating was acceptable. Younger runners look to team leaders to define what is socially acceptable, so I would make it very clear for them that cheating is looked down upon.
I have noticed that runners who cut corners during a particular race are usually from the same team, which means that older runners on the team are setting bad examples or otherwise encouraging this behavior. If I saw several members of a different team cutting corners, the best course of action would be to simply inform the coach of that team. It is highly embarrassing to the coach when a team is cheating, as it gives him or her, the team, and the school a bad image.
The coach would likely take the lead on addressing and disciplining the runners, which would be much more effective than a person from a different team confronting the runners directly. Guilt, the likely tool of discipline, is a powerful motivator, and it is much more effective if a person of authority wields it. Although the action of illegally cutting distance off of a crosscountry course is a fairly small violation with somewhat insignificant consequences, it is nevertheless morally wrong in fundamental ways. The act of cheating gives a runner an unfair advantage over others.
The idea of athletic competition is to judge winners based entirely on merit. To do this, every competitor must be subjected to the same rules, whether that be the same game regulations for every team or the same race distance for every runner. If some people have a certain competitive advantage that is not based on inherent skill or fitness, the competition is no longer fair. The people who are being treated unfairly are the other competitors, in this case cross-country runners, who have to run faster than someone who is cheating just to cross the finish line at the same time.
These competitors work harder, and over a longer distance, and yet are not recognized as being better. There is inherent dishonesty in the act of cutting corners as well—the times and placements registered at the finish line assumes that every runner ran the same distance, so a person who cuts distance is essentially lying about their ability. In my experience, cutting corners is generally uncommon; it is considered unfair and dishonorable, and looked down upon by most runners and coaches. However, every time someone cuts to the wrong side of a flag or departs from the bounds of the course, it encourages other people to do the same.
Many people reason, “If that person can do it, then I can do it too,” or even, “I must do it so I am not at a disadvantage. ” The more it is done, the more it is viewed as acceptable and necessary. The reason cutting corners is not rampant in competition is that the culture of cross-country running views it as disreputable, but every time somebody breaks a social norm, it becomes more acceptable for the next person to break the convention as well. Thus, the act of cheating erodes the very culture of fair play that is essential to maintaining fair, merit-based competition.
Cutting distance on the cross-country course clearly and unequivocally fails the Rotary 4-Way Test for ethical behavior, failing to provide an answer to any of the four questions. First, it is not truthful. It misrepresents the ability of someone by giving them a better placement and time than they put in the effort to achieve. In addition, it is also not fair to all concerned. The most egregious and serious instance of cutting corners I have heard of was at last year’s conference meet, which was held on our team’s home course. Toward the end, there was a sharp turn hat was apparently cut by some runners. Although cutting distance is always unfair, it was especially consequential at Conference because individual and team place decides who wins Conference and who earns All Conference honors. I don’t know if the individuals who cheated affected the individual or team results, but it is certainly possible. Cheating is unfair to those who compete fairly and by the rules, such as all the athletes that competed honestly at Conference yet may have finished after dishonest runners. Cheating also does not goodwill or friendships.
It sours the reputation of the teams involved, and encourages other people to break the rules by degrading the culture of sportsmanship that is prevalent in cross-country. It is also not beneficial to anyone but the person cheating, and hence is not fair. Like cheating in any other sport or competition, cutting distance on the cross-country course is morally wrong. Though its consequences are fairly minor, it is nevertheless important because it significantly violates standards of ethical behavior and sportsmanship, and is not fair, truthful, or beneficial to the culture of cross-country running.
This behavior ought to be curbed immediately after it happens, both for the sake of other competitors and for the athlete as well. After all, if one is willing to cheat to win on a cross-country course, what else is one willing to cheat on? In competition and in our daily lives, we must keep in mind that cheating, no matter its scope or influence, is never ethical, and we must demonstrate that sentiment to others in our actions, no matter how small or seemingly insignificant those actions may be.
