Q: Recently little league baseball has flourished, and the number of teams is increasing greatly. Many people argue that although the Unified Competition system has contributed to this, the main reason has really been subsidies. So many people are concerned that schools will only "go for the money" Is that consistent with educational ideals?

It's how you play the game

A: The Ministry of Education has promoted the Unified Competition and the subsidies entirely with the idea of encouragement. Basically we hope everyone will play baseball. Those with more skills can organize a school team; those with less can organize a team just for fun. We hope that the number of people who play and watch baseball at the base level will increase greatly.

I have also emphasized more than once that the development of little league baseball should be from the angle of education. Sports are about teamwork, not about stressing personal "star" performances. You have to take the position of respecting coaches and officials and even respecting the playing field. If you win you must win modestly, and if you lose it doesn't matter. Thus we don't stress winning and losing, and don't distinguish a national champion, but play everywhere, so everywhere there are champions. In national Unified Competitions, nearly everyone walks away with a prize.

As for the issue of subsidies: We by no means give the most money to the stronger teams. These few thousands of dollars are really just for buying equipment. This isn't necessarily the best way. In harsh terms, it's "choking down a quick fix medication," because little league baseball is already facing a difficult situation. We hope that when the number of teams reaches a certain number, we can use more nonmaterial rewards, such as an "MVP list" or something, so that teams and players will have the desire to pursue glory and thus bring into play the sporting spirit.

Should schools pay the costs for expensive sports?

Q: Sports is an expensive activity. Given our trend of taking the school as the unit of action, how can the costs of competitions or teams be covered?

A: Baseball is a rather expensive sport. But this is not insurmountable. For example, one could use those nearly indestructible rubber baseballs--they're very cheap and you won't feel bad even if you knock it so far it gets lost. Or bats--you don't have to use aluminum bats; locally made wooden ones are also fine. Diamonds? They don't have to be so perfect, and if the home run fence is in a little closer, so be it. These don't affect the nature of the game. As for the problem of the costs of physical education, I don't think that sports should always be promoted top-down by the government, but should be undertaken by the people on their own. The best thing would be to get business to participate, but I only hope they don't attach any conditions.

Athletes = scholars

Q: There are more than 160 teams in Taitung, the most prolific area for little league baseball in Taiwan. Some people say this is because kids in eastern Taiwan can't compete when it comes to studies with the kids in western Taiwan, so baseball is seen as one way to succeed. What do you think of the development of little league in eastern Taiwan?

A: There's nothing wrong with making ballplaying a road to success. But to devote all of one's school days to sports is courting disaster. Just because one plays well as a small child doesn't necessarily mean one will be a professional ten years down the road. In fact, in baseball it's not necessarily good to mature too early, because one might prematurely end one's career through injury.

In fact, in the view of specialists like myself, there is no conflict between sports and study. In practice many athletes also are outstanding academic performers.

What's regrettable is that these examples are all foreign. In our society, it seems that if you want to study you can't play sports, that sports interferes with study. These views are deeply ingrained--parents, teachers, and students all think this way. This in fact deserves to be rethought.

In theory, an outstanding athlete definitely cannot be "all brawn and no brains." In practice, athletics is really a supreme test of the neurological system. Being able to control athletic performance down to the fraction of a second shows that one's brain has control over one's body, and that the part that is responsible for learning cannot be too inferior.

Sports as life

Drawing an "equals" sign between poor academic performance and sports is in part a result of outlook and in part created by the system. In the past we placed great emphasis on medals. Athletes didn't have to worry about hitting the books, and in all channels for advancement in higher education there would be an independent section for athletes. This moreover only stressed athletic achievement--this is really something different.

I often joke that a dolphin from Penghu could win a place in college because of its jumping ability. This type of "athletic ecology" is not created in a day, so it can only be changed slowly.

Thus I want to say to the children of eastern Taiwan, if you play sports don't forget to study. The grades of baseball players don't necessarily have to be the best in the class, but they should generally be in the middle.

Q: At this year's Far East Little League Baseball Tournament, we lost to the Philippines for the first time ever, and did not win the title. What do you think of that? Has there been any change in the views about winning and losing in society at large?

A: I'm really not very concerned about losing to the Philippines or not winning the title, and I think society is the same. In fact we adults shouldn't struggle for "prestige" by using children. Children are in the process of growing up, and must have chances to fail, so that they learn how to handle themselves when faced with defeat. In fact the playing field is a microcosm of life.

Q: In the past few years the International Little League Baseball Association of the U.S. has repeatedly asked us to develop baseball and organize teams on the basis of neighborhoods, but our basic unit is the school. Thus some people suggest that we just get out of the International Little League Baseball Association. What is your sentiment about leaving the association which has so much historic meaning for us?

A: The international championship at Williamsport has its historical significance. But our baseball development is really of a different kind than that in the West, and we can only do it as best we can. I think that our participation now in international competitions and the meaning of winning the championship are different than in the past, when it was a national morale-booster. Watching baseball really has its function on the psychological level. If we won the competition, it's like we were successful ourselves, and could breathe a sigh of relief and be happy. Today everybody knows that we should not make little league players carry the weight of responsibility for this feeling.

[Picture Caption]

Greeting the morning sun, sweat running down their backs. What they learn on the playing field is not only the desire to win, but also self-discipline and team spirit. (photo by Vincent Chang)