Syllabus coverage
- Explain the causes of violence in relation to performers
- Explain the causes of violence in relation to spectators at the event
- Explain the consequences of violence for the individual, the sport and society
- Explain and evaluate strategies to prevent violence by performers
- Explain and evaluate strategies to prevent violence by spectators at the event
Part of the AS Level PE 8386 syllabus 8386.
Contact or violence? Drawing the line
A rugby tackle, a shoulder charge in football or a hard challenge in hockey is not violence. It is sanctioned physical contact: contact that is written into the laws of the game, that both performers have accepted the risk of by taking the field, and that is intended to win the ball, the space or the contest.
Violence is different in three ways at once. It is outside the laws, it is intended to harm, injure or intimidate rather than to compete, and it is not accepted by the other participants. A chest-height tackle in rugby that wins the ball is contact; the same player driving a shoulder into an opponent's head after the ball has gone is violence.
The line is drawn by the rules, not by how hard the contact looks. That is why an act that wins a penalty in one sport is a sending-off in another, and why the same act can be legal in one code and violent in the next.
| Who is involved | What it looks like | Sporting example |
|---|---|---|
| Performer on performer | Punching, biting, spitting, deliberate dangerous play, retaliation after a foul | A football player pushing both hands into an opponent's chest after a late challenge |
| Performer on official | Confronting, intimidating or verbally abusing the referee or umpire, refusing to leave the field | A hockey player surrounding the umpire to dispute a penalty corner |
| Performer on spectator | Rare but serious: a performer reacting to abuse from the crowd with physical aggression | A player climbing into the stand to confront a spectator |
Why performers become violent
Performers rarely become violent out of nowhere. Something in the situation raises arousal past the point where the player is still in control of their decisions, and the rules stop being the first thing in their mind.
Notice the pattern in every cause below: a trigger raises arousal, and the performer's decision-making breaks down. That second half is where the marks are.
| Cause | Why it leads to violence |
|---|---|
| Frustration at a decision or at losing | A performer who believes an injustice has been done feels the situation is out of their control, so they use force to take control back |
| Provocation by an opponent | Taunting, sledging or a late challenge is designed to raise the opponent's arousal, and once arousal is too high the performer reacts to the person rather than to the ball |
| Retaliation | A player responding to an earlier foul escalates a single incident into a mass confrontation |
| Pressure to win | A high-stakes match, a coach's demand or a financial reward makes winning feel more important than the laws, so a performer deliberately injures an opponent or an opponent's key player |
| Over-arousal, fatigue and adrenaline | Once arousal passes the optimum, control, decision-making and technique all fall away, so a performer lashes out instead of tackling properly |
| Copying what is seen | If a team or a sport's culture treats aggression as normal, and performers see it go unpunished, it spreads through the side |
| Abuse from the crowd | A performer provoked by personal abuse from spectators may react toward the crowd |
Why spectators at the event become violent
Spectator violence has different causes from performer violence because the crowd is not competing. The crowd is identifying, not playing, so the triggers are mostly about identity, crowd psychology and alcohol rather than about winning a tackle.
In a large crowd a person can lose their sense of being an individual with responsibility for their own actions and simply go along with the group around them. Once that happens, behaviour the same person would never consider alone becomes easy.
| Cause | Why it leads to violence |
|---|---|
| Strong identification with the team | A defeat or a disputed decision is felt as a personal attack, so the rival fans or the officials become the enemy |
| Crowd size and anonymity | In a large crowd individuals feel less personally responsible for their actions, so normal restraint disappears |
| Rivalry and history between clubs or nations | Existing tension means a small incident, such as a disputed goal or a red card, is enough to start disorder |
| Alcohol and other substances | Alcohol lowers inhibition and slows judgement, so provocation that would be ignored sober is answered with aggression |
| Provocation by rival spectators | Gestures, chanting and missiles thrown between sections turn one group's anger into a two-way confrontation |
| Poor officiating or a perceived injustice | A decision the crowd believes is wrong gives the violence a justification in the crowd's own mind |
| Poor facilities and poor policing | Crowding, long queues, inadequate segregation and a weak stewarding presence remove the practical barriers to disorder |
Consequences: the individual, the sport and society
Cambridge names three levels of consequence, and the same incident produces all three. Build your answer in that order and you cannot run out of points.
Work down from the person to the sport to the wider society, because that is the order the syllabus lists them in.
| Level | Consequences |
|---|---|
| The individual | Injury or long-term damage to the victim; injury, a ban, a fine and a criminal record for the offender; loss of income and sponsorship; damage to reputation that outlasts the ban; psychological effects such as anxiety, loss of confidence and fear of returning to the sport; the end of a career at the highest level |
| The sport | A damaged public image, so sponsors, broadcasters and spectators withdraw; reduced income for clubs and governing bodies; harsher rules and heavier punishments that slow the game down for everyone; fewer people wanting to take part or to officiate; officials leaving the sport because of abuse; loss of trust in the fairness of results |
| Society | Violence at a sporting event is still violence, and it is punished by the criminal law; injuries and emergency policing cost public money; young spectators see aggression rewarded and copy it; communities around clubs and stadiums suffer; sport loses its position as a positive influence on participation, health and social cohesion |
Strategies to prevent violence by performers
Strategies work in three places: before the performer is provoked, during the incident, and after it as a punishment. Cambridge wants explanation and evaluation, so you must say not only what the strategy is but how it changes behaviour and where it falls short.
| Strategy | How it works and how well it works |
|---|---|
| Clear laws, and tougher, mandatory sanctions | Making a punishment automatic, such as a red card and a fixed ban, removes the performer's calculation that violence might be worth it. Evaluation: strong deterrent, but a sanction applied after the event cannot prevent the injury that has already happened |
| Strict refereeing and the use of video review | Officials who punish the first offence stop a small incident escalating, and video review catches acts the referee misses. Evaluation: effective, but it interrupts the game, and it depends on the official's judgement |
| Education and codes of conduct | Teaching performers that aggression destroys the performance they have trained for, and making them sign a conduct code, changes the attitude rather than only the punishment. Evaluation: the only strategy that changes the performer's own decision-making, but the effect is slow |
| Anger management and psychological control training | Performer learns to recognise the physical signs of over-arousal and use techniques to bring arousal back down, so they keep decision-making. Evaluation: works best before competition rather than during it |
| Removing the provocation | Crack down early on taunting, sledging and time-wasting so the spark is never lit. Evaluation: cheap and effective, but hard for one official to police |
| Coaches modelling the behaviour they want | A coach who accepts a red card for retaliation gives the player permission to repeat it. Evaluation: powerful, since the coach sets the culture, but impossible to enforce centrally |
Strategies to prevent violence by spectators at the event
Spectator strategies work in the opposite direction from performer strategies: they are mostly about control of the environment and the crowd rather than about changing an individual's mind.
Split them into strategies that separate, strategies that watch, strategies that punish and strategies that include.
| Strategy | How it works and how well it works |
|---|---|
| Segregation of rival supporters and controlled entry | Keeping rival groups in separate areas with separate entrances and exits removes the opportunity for confrontation. Evaluation: highly effective, but it treats all spectators as a threat and it needs the venue and staffing to support it |
| Stewarding and a visible police presence | Early intervention by trained stewards stops small incidents becoming mass disorder, and presence alone deters. Evaluation: effective and immediate, but event costs rise sharply and heavy policing can itself inflame a crowd |
| CCTV, body cameras and banning orders | Footage identifies individuals, so the offender is punished personally rather than the whole crowd being blamed. Evaluation: strong deterrent once the offender knows they can be identified, but the violence has already occurred |
| Restrictions on alcohol and on what can be taken into the ground | Lowering consumption and banning missiles removes the two things that most often turn anger into physical harm. Evaluation: effective, but it annoys law-abiding spectators and is hard to apply at long outdoor events |
| Education and campaigns | Anti-discrimination and anti-violence campaigns, and work with schools and clubs, change the culture in which violence is accepted. Evaluation: the only strategy that changes attitudes long term, but it produces no immediate result |
| Tickets sold by name and bans for identified offenders | Makes the individual responsible: a ban from all matches is a real deterrent to a regular supporter |
| Better facilities and treatment of spectators | Shorter queues, better sightlines and comfortable safe standing remove the frustration and irritation that build up before a match even starts |
Evaluating the strategies: how to reach a judgement
An evaluation question wants you to weigh the strategies against each other, not to list them again. The most reliable approach is to judge them on where they act and how permanent the effect is.
Punishment acts after the event, so it deters the future but cannot undo the injury, the abandoned match or the damaged reputation. Prevention acts before the event, but it is slower and depends on the performer's or the spectator's own decision to change.
A supported judgement is built like this: both sides, then a conclusion that says which strategy matters most and why. "Education matters most because only it changes the performer's decision to be violent, whereas a ban only makes him hide it better" is a supported judgement. "Education is the best" is not.
Two practical limits are always worth one sentence: cost, and fairness. Segregation, CCTV and extra police all cost money that comes out of the sport's income, and restricting every spectator because of the behaviour of a few punishes the majority.
Key terms you must be able to define
- Violence
- Physical force used outside the laws of the game and intended to harm, injure or intimidate another person, rather than to compete for the ball, the space or the result.
- Sanctioned physical contact
- Contact that is permitted by the laws of the sport, accepted by the performers taking part, and used to compete rather than to injure.
- Provocation
- A deliberate act by an opponent, official or spectator, such as taunting, sledging or a late challenge, designed to raise the performer's arousal and break down their self-control.
- Over-arousal
- A level of arousal above the optimum, at which control, decision-making and technique deteriorate, making aggressive reactions more likely.
- Segregation
- Separating rival groups of spectators into different areas of the ground with separate entrances and exits, to remove the opportunity for confrontation.
- Deterrent
- A punishment or risk of punishment severe enough to stop a performer or spectator choosing to act violently in the first place.
- Role model
- A performer or coach whose behaviour is copied by others, so their aggression can spread violence through a team or a crowd.
- Spectatorism
- The habit of watching sport as a spectator, which is not violence itself but creates the crowd conditions in which violence can occur.
Applied to your sport
Cambridge requires you to apply this knowledge to physical activities. Use these as models, then write your own for the sport you play.
Retaliation is the classic cause: a player who has just been fouled with a late challenge responds with a shove or a two-footed lunge, and the original foul is forgotten as both players are sent off. A strict referee who punishes the first foul and uses video review against acts off the ball removes the trigger before it escalates.
The sport shows the line clearly. A tackle at chest height that drives the opponent backwards is sanctioned contact; the same contact made to the head is outside the laws and is punished with a card. Automatic sanctions such as a spell in the sin bin change a player's calculation in a way that a free kick does not.
Sledging is provocation with nothing physical in it, but it raises the batter's or bowler's arousal so that the next delivery or the next confrontation is a reaction to the person rather than to the ball. Education and codes of conduct, backed by fines, are the strategies that target this because the incident leaves no obvious physical evidence for the umpire to punish in the moment.
Spectator disorder is rare at hockey, which shows how environment and culture control crowd behaviour: family-friendly facilities, standing away from the pitch edge and alcohol rules at club level remove almost all of the causes listed in the syllabus.
Flashcards
Click a card to flip it. Mark honestly — the tracker uses this.
Exam-style questions
6 questions, 17 marks. Write your answer, then reveal the mark scheme and tick each point you actually made. Answering honestly here is what makes the rest of the site useful.
Mark scheme — tick each point you actually made
Mark scheme — tick each point you actually made
Mark scheme — tick each point you actually made
Mark scheme — tick each point you actually made
Mark scheme — tick each point you actually made
Mark scheme — tick each point you actually made
Exam technique for this topic
- Count the marks and match the structure. Consequences questions are almost always set on three levels (individual, sport, society), so a 6-mark answer is usually two points at each level.
- For "explain", every point needs a because or a so that. "Frustration" is a label; "frustration, so the performer feels the match is out of their control and uses force to take control back" is an explanation.
- For "evaluate", name the judgement before the evidence in your last paragraph: choose the strategy you think matters most, then justify it with the comparison that supports it.
- Keep the syllabus split in your head: performers and spectators at the event. If a question says performers, do not fill the answer with crowd disorder.
- Use only physical activities from the AS Component 2 list. Rugby union, Association football, Field hockey, Cricket, Basketball, Netball, Squash, Table tennis, Tennis and Volleyball are all safe.
Why students lose marks here
Where this fits in AS Level PE 8386
This page is one topic of Cambridge AS Level PE 8386. AS Level PE 8386 is the course home: every area and every topic in Cambridge's own order, the papers you sit and what each one tests, and the exam-practice tools. The full topic list, with each topic linked to its revision page, is on the AS Level PE 8386 syllabus page.