Perhaps the single fastest rising aspect in sport is not the level of play or the increasing salaries of all that surround their respective sport, but instead the undeniable presence of violence. Society has come to except violence as an essential part of sport, and why not? What would a Sunday afternoon be in front of the TV without some unnecessary hits against a bitter rival, how about baseball without the retaliation pitch from the opposition for that "bean ball", and what would hockey be in general. As many problems that may arise from violence the argument continues; is it made up in entertainment value to the public? On the other side of the coin is kindness in athletic competition. The level of motivation and dedication in intense competition seem to overpower the need to be "kind" to the opponent. When in reality you are not out there to make friends but instead to win, but what is that fine line between violence and kindness that very few athletes are able to successfully achieve?.
Sports violence can be defined as behavior, which causes harm, occurs outside of the rules of the sport, and is unrelated to the competitive objectives of the sport (Hyland in Morgan). On the other hand Kindness according to Kretchmar is looked upon as both a duty and a virtue in sport. In highly competitive sport an athlete struggles to find that diminutive line in which the separation between violence and kindness occurs.
Let us first take violence, which on the sporting field has occurred throughout history and can be traced, back to gladiatorial combat in ancient Rome. Violence is no longer alienated on the playing field and it was taken to a new level on Feb. 2, 2000 in the confines of GM Place in Vancouver, when Marty McSorley took a cowardly swing, from behind, at Donald Brashear's head with his hockey stick. I think it is safe to say that the sports world was pretty much left in a state of shock and disgust over the whole situation.