On Sunday, December 7th, the Carolina Panthers faced the New Orleans Saints in an important divisional game. At stake 
was first place in the NFC South.
In the first quarter, Cam Newton scored a touchdown on a 2 yard dive to give the Panthers a commanding 17-0 lead. As Cam went to perform his signature “Superman” celebration, one of the Saints players took exception to the idea. A scuffle ensued. Benches emptied. It appeared it could get really ugly very quickly, but the officials stepped in. Players responded. Things calmed down.
The result – one Carolina player, Brandon Williams, was ejected. Curtis Williams of the Saints received a personal foul penalty.
The next day, Panthers’ Coach, Ron Rivera, when interviewed about the incident, commented that he was glad his players stood their ground.
“Unfortunately, we got a guy thrown out for being a little overaggressive,” Rivera said. “That’s unfortunate. But we stood up for ourselves and that’s the approach. I appreciate that as far as our guys are concerned. We didn’t walk away from anybody. We stood our ground.”
My question is “Is this behavior really commendable?” “Is it the expression of redeemed or broken sports?”
The answer lies somewhat in your perspective of the athletic field.
Over the years, I hear a growing trend, especially in football, where the athletic field is referred to more and more as a “battlefield.” Images and illustrations abound from that perspective, including Ron Rivera’s. Christian players and coaches seem quick to adopt this metaphor in an attempt to motivate their players. Bible verses are marshaled forward, especially from the Old Testament, that refer to warfare and applied to the game at hand.
The problem is – that perspective isn’t biblical. The issue isn’t whether it works, for it many cases it does. The issue is whether it is right. To take Old Testament passages related to Israel and her enemies and apply them directly to football is bad hermeneutics and poor leadership.
As a result, we see competition as something against our “enemies” and someone therefore to be dominated and destroyed, rather than fellow image bearers to respect. It makes competition fundamentally a “striving against” those involved.
When competition is seen in this way, striving against, it is opposed to the original and redeemed view of competition that sees competition as fundamentally “striving with” those involved. “Striving with” competition doesn’t eliminate keeping score, trying to win, and giving one’s best effort to do so. It just does all that along a greater goal than the personal glory of winning. “Striving with” competition has the revelation of God’s glory from both teams, whether winning or losing.
With that view of competition, the situation during the Panthers game sees a different end. Rather than one’s territory being invaded and threatened, then to be defended, it sees the players involved as fellow strugglers trying to live out this redeemed competition. Rather than retaliation, reconciliation is the goal in this kind of a setting. To walk away from a fight would not necessarily be a sign of weakness but a sign of strength, with the goal of allowing time for tempers to cool and further aggression expressed.
Why? Because the glory of God is the goal not my glory as a “warrior” who is protecting his territory.
Such a goal would certainly change the atmosphere of today’s football, don’t you think?
(For more on these ideas, check out this blog “Was there competition in the Garden?” or this video “For the Love of the Game.”)
