LJU4801
OCT/NOV PORTFOLIO 2024
UNIQUE NO.
DUE DATE: 30 OCTOBER 2024
, LJU4801
October November Portfolio Semester 2 2024
Unique Number:
Due Date: 30 October 2024
Legal Philosophy
Question 1
The scenario with Mark Pachio’s handball in the Shibobo FC vs. Maluti FC match brings
forward a clash of two philosophical approaches to ethics in sports: consequentialism
and deontology. Let’s unpack these approaches as they apply to this situation, then look
at which one might hold more weight in a case like this. Both approaches bring different
lenses to the incident, shaping our understanding of what makes an action "right" or
"wrong" in sports.
Consequentialism: Winning as the Ultimate Goal
The perspective of Shibobo FC reflects a consequentialist approach. In ethics,
consequentialism judges the rightness of an action based solely on the outcomes or
consequences it produces. This approach suggests that if the end result is positive,
then the action that achieved it can be justified—even if that action involves breaking
the rules. Shibobo FC’s view that Pachio’s handball was an "act for the higher purpose
of winning the game" is rooted in this kind of thinking. Pachio’s action of stopping the
ball with his hand kept his team’s hopes alive, and ultimately, they made it through to
the semi-final.
From this perspective, Pachio's red card and the penalty awarded were part of the
game’s consequences, factored into the strategy with a "risk and reward" mindset. They
knew that he might be penalized, but Pachio’s act would give them a better chance of
winning, especially given the uncertainty surrounding penalty kicks. They were aware of
the rules, took a calculated risk, and succeeded because the outcome favored them.
OCT/NOV PORTFOLIO 2024
UNIQUE NO.
DUE DATE: 30 OCTOBER 2024
, LJU4801
October November Portfolio Semester 2 2024
Unique Number:
Due Date: 30 October 2024
Legal Philosophy
Question 1
The scenario with Mark Pachio’s handball in the Shibobo FC vs. Maluti FC match brings
forward a clash of two philosophical approaches to ethics in sports: consequentialism
and deontology. Let’s unpack these approaches as they apply to this situation, then look
at which one might hold more weight in a case like this. Both approaches bring different
lenses to the incident, shaping our understanding of what makes an action "right" or
"wrong" in sports.
Consequentialism: Winning as the Ultimate Goal
The perspective of Shibobo FC reflects a consequentialist approach. In ethics,
consequentialism judges the rightness of an action based solely on the outcomes or
consequences it produces. This approach suggests that if the end result is positive,
then the action that achieved it can be justified—even if that action involves breaking
the rules. Shibobo FC’s view that Pachio’s handball was an "act for the higher purpose
of winning the game" is rooted in this kind of thinking. Pachio’s action of stopping the
ball with his hand kept his team’s hopes alive, and ultimately, they made it through to
the semi-final.
From this perspective, Pachio's red card and the penalty awarded were part of the
game’s consequences, factored into the strategy with a "risk and reward" mindset. They
knew that he might be penalized, but Pachio’s act would give them a better chance of
winning, especially given the uncertainty surrounding penalty kicks. They were aware of
the rules, took a calculated risk, and succeeded because the outcome favored them.
