“Discipline that hurts”: Punitive logics and governance in sport

Abstract

In this paper, we undertake a case study of the National Hockey League’s supplementary discipline regime to reflect on the ways in which discourses about social harm are configured, taken up and used in the sporting landscape and how they reflect and reify narrow understandings of crime and punishment. We find that the hockey world employs predictable crime and justice metaphors when discussing on-ice violence and suggest this breeds fear and legitimates governance strategies. The National Hockey League’s supplemental discipline process itself—much like penality away from the rink—is characterized by multiple, sometimes contradictory, objectives. Notably, the league responsibilizes players, long endorsing or accepting vigilantism, refusing to enact structural changes, and compelling players themselves to create a safe workplace. This regime has contributed to financial struggles, chronic physical and mental health issues, and the early deaths of a host of former players.

‘Did the NFL start caring about women a lot more after Ray Rice? Probably not’: White-collar deviance and violence against women in racial capitalist sport

“…This could have downstream impacts on reductions of violence against more generally. However, it is also important to note that leagues and organizations sanctioning players after a violent arrest does nothing to change many of the underlying professional sport structures that promote violence, aggression, dominance and in the case of the NFL, brain injury (Kennedy and Silva, 2020; Messerschmidt and Connell, 2005), all of which are important factors in explaining continued off-field violence by athletes.…”

“…Research examining media coverage of off-field athlete violence has found that the men accused (and especially Black men accused) are framed and pathologized as naturally aggressive (Enck-Wanzer, 2009). Athlete violent behaviour is also blamed on the few 'bad apples' involved, rather than interrogating sport leagues and larger sporting culture's complicity (Anderson, 2017;Kennedy and Silva, 2020). This is consistent with Raymen and Smith's (2019) description of the leisure and sport space as privileging the 'individualism of the autonomous subject, protected by negative liberty' which, combined 'with the competitive individualism of consumer capitalism, cultivate(s) subjectivities willing to harm others in the pursuit of their own desires ' (p. 122).…”

“…Corteen’s (2018) study of pro wrestling and Kennedy and Silva’s (2020) analysis of punitive logics in the National Hockey League (NHL) stand out in examining the responsibility of corporate entities and sport culture in the harm suffered by its participants. Corteen (2018) attributes the physical and psychological harm done to wrestlers – including injury, substance abuse and death – to the decision makers, governing body and wider structures of the sport, while Kennedy and Silva (2020) discuss how the NHL’s discipline system puts the responsibility for injury prevention and ensuring a safe workplace solely on athletes themselves, obfuscating the league’s own role in condoning and encouraging violence in the sport.…”

“…Though they are discussing state and not corporate responsibility, the mechanisms – failing to intervene or act and differentially applying existing laws – by which a culture of violence is created can also be applied to the corporate and sport-corporate spheres. Moreover, sport leagues have a particularly overarching, state-like role over the affairs of organizations and players and therefore should have both a responsibility to intervene after violence has occurred and a role in violence prevention (Kennedy and Silva, 2020).…”

Privatisation and accountability in Australian immigration detention: A case of state-corporate symbiosis

“…My analysis was conducted using critical discourse analysis (CDA), which many criminologists have used to highlight how relations of power are sustained through 'language-in-use', or language as used to interact and communicate (Kennedy & Silva, 2020;Van Dijk, 2011). CDA has a particular focus on highlighting the impact of language use (Gee, 2011, in Tight, 2019.…”