Several issues raised by literature in the sociology of the body are discussed. The need for and the significance of a sociological study of the body for the sociology of sport is stated. A critical review of competing theories in the sociology of the body is undertaken. Especial attention is given to the work of Frank. His typology draws on the work of Giddens and both are viewed as deficient in certain respects. In contrast, the work of Elias is seen as an example of good practice for the emerging sociology of sport and the body. Several 'sporting bodies' (biomedical, disciplined, commodified and symbolic) are identified and reference is made to existing literature within the sociology of sport.Traditionally, sociology has neglected the study of the body. So-called 'agency' or 'structural' theories have been equally guilty. The tendency has been to treat the individual as either a disembodied decision making agent or as a cultural dupe reflecting external structures. One consequence of this neglect of the body has been that much of our sociological heritage has reinforced rather then overcome the dichotomies that characterize the social sciences. These dichotomies include the mind/body, nature/nurture, individual/society, sex/gender and 'race'/ / ethnicity debatesl.Given that sport participation and spectating involves 'embodied acts', it is rather strange that within the sociology of sport a similar neglect is evident. Yet within the literature on the sociology of sport it is precisely the dichotomies referred to above which repeatedly form the focus of debate. Some work has focused on sport and the body. The early work of Heinemann (1980) and the more recent work of Harvey (1986), Rintala (1989), Harvey and Sparkes (1991), Theberge (1991) and Gruneau (in press) spring to mind. While their perspectives differ, they share the conviction of the need for the sociology of sport to examine 'the body' and the potential this entails.What value has a sociological study of the body to the sociology of sport? The sub-discipline is diminished to the extent that it fails to recognize the importance of embodiment in processes of social identity construction and reproduction. Central in this regard are issues of power, culture and distinction. Let me spell this out. The sociology of sport is in an unique position to emphasize to the parent discipline the importance of the body in understanding human agency, the production of cultural and economic capital and the attainment and maintenance of social status (Shilling, 1991). By giving greater emphasis to this, not only would Int Rev for soc of Sport 28/1 (1993)