A Manly Sport
A Manly Sport is an article published in The Pall Mall Gazette on 15 november 1911, and republished in other newspapers.
Editions
- in The Pall Mall Gazette (15 november 1911 [UK])
- in The Sportsman (16 november 1911 [UK])
- in The Leeds Mercury (16 november 1911 [UK]) as Virtues of Boxing
A Manly Sport
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Spirited Defence of Boxing.
INGRAINED IN THE BRITISH CHARACTER.
Publicity Better than Secrecy
Special to the "Pall Mall Gazette."
Some cogent arguments in favour of boxing and boxing contests were given to-day by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle to a representative of the "Pall Mall Gazette."
Sir Arthur is particularly well qualified to speak on the subject. He has always been a sportsman (in the best sense of the word), has often "donned the gloves" himself, has had a medical training, and has written some of his best stories and a fine play round the prize ring. Throughout the interview he made it clear that he considers it will be impossible to stamp out the love for boxing as a sport in this country.
Referring to the decision of the Birmingham stipendiary, he said:—
"What I feel is that they are simply driving it underground. Common sense ought to tell those who are opposed to these contests that that is so, because boxing is ingrained in our habits. It is not on the decrease, but on the increase in this country. The love of boxing is very large. That is shown by the number of entries in the amateur and Army and Navy championships.
"As long as boxing clubs exist it is only natural that people want to match the best man of one club against the best man of another club. It is deeply rooted not only in the sporting world, but also in our national life. You have to face that fact.
Underground if Not Above.
"You can drive it underground, but you cannot stop it. Instead of having contests in the presence of the public, the Press, and the police, you will have it underground. 'You can have it in the back parlour of a public-house, but you are going to have it somehow. It is better, surely, to have it in the daylight where, if there has been any brutality, there will at once be a shriek of 'foul' or 'shame.'
"It is certain you will not step it. That is absolutely impossible. I confess I do not understand where the line is going to be drawn between boxing and a veiled prize-fight. Two men never put on gloves but there is a possibility that one may knock the other out.
"I think it is a deplorable thing that one of the few manly sports which we have left should be crippled in any way at all. We have no conscription in this country to teach us manliness. Abroad, men get their manliness through conscription, because if you take one man and mix him up amongst a thousand he has to hold his own, otherwise he gets sat upon. We have nothing like that in this country.
"It is only our individuality and love of sport which gives us a chance of bringing out our manlihood, but if one sport is going to be cut down in this way I think it will do us a great deal of national harm.
"It is not a case only of these two men, but of daily sport being discouraged from start to finish. The best thing would he to le, the fight take place if closely watched, aid stopped if there was any brutality. But to take it for granted beforehand that there is going to be brutality and to stop it seems illogical.
Witnessed a Hundred Fights.
"I have seen a hundred fights at least, and I have seen hardly one in which there has been anything which could shock any sportsmen who love fairplay. I have never — or, at any rate, hardly ever — seen any trace of brutality. I have seen more brutal things done on the football field than in the boxing-ring. I have played both kinds of football myself, and I have seen things done which were brutal — a heavy man charging a light man off his legs, kicking the ball heavily into a man's face, and intentional hacking.
"I certainly hope there will be an appeal, and that the decision will he reversed. It is not in boxing that we find brutality allowed; a good referee will never have it."
More sources
In a "Pall Mall Gazette" interview, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle has expressed his views on the Moran-Driscoll case. Referring to the decision of the Birmingham Stipendiary, he said:
"What I feel is that they are simply driving it underground. Common sense ought to tell those who are opposed to these contests that that is so, because boxing is ingrained in our habits. The love of boxing is very large. That is shown by the number of entries in the amateur and Army and Navy championship.
"As long as boxing exist it is only natural that people want to match the best man of one club against the best man of another club. It is deeply rooted not only in the sporting world, but also in our national life.
"You can drive it underground, but you cannot stop it. Instead of having contests in the presence of the public, the Press, and the police you will have it underground. You can have it in the back parlour of a public-house, but you are going to have it somehow. It is better, surely, to have it in the daylight where, if there has been any brutality, there will at once be a shrink of 'foul' or 'shame.'
"I think it is a deplorable thing that one of the few manly sports which we have left should be crippled in any way at all.
"It is only our individuality and love of sport which give us a chance of bringing out our manlihood, but if one sport is going to be out down in this way I think it will do us a great deal of national harm.
"It is not a case only of these two men, but of daily sport being discouraged from start to finish. The best thing would be to let the fight take place if closely watched, and stopped if there was any brutality. But to take it for granted beforehand that there is going to be brutality and to stop it seems illogical.
"I certainly hope there will be an appeal and that the decision will be rewarded. It is not in boxing that we find brutality allowed; a good referee will never have it.
