, PLEASE USE THIS DOCUMENT AS A GUIDE TO ANSWER YOUR ASSIGNMENT
Please note that the author of this document will not responsibility for any plagiarizing you
commit.
Question 1
Read the following scenario and then answer the question below:
The football governing body is investigating Mark Pachio’s deliberate handball during the quarter final
match between Shibobo FC and Maluti FC. Shibobo FC defender, Pachio, used his hand to stop Mpho
Motale’s header on the line which would have sent Maluti FC through to the semi-final.
While Pachio was given a straight red card for his actions, his 'Hand of God' intervention ultimately
paid-off as Maluti FC missed the resulting penalty and Shibobo FC went through to the semi-final
after winning the shoot-out.
Shibobo FC does not consider that handball as unfair or dishonest play but rather as an act for the
higher purpose of winning the game. Maluti FC, however, sees the handball as unfair play which is
inconsistent with the fair play code.
1. Discuss the different philosophical approaches being used here (NB apply the approaches to
the set of facts). In your substantiated opinion, which approach is the correct one? Your answer
should not exceed 1250 words.
Philosophical Approaches to Pachio's Handball Incident
The incident involving Mark Pachio’s handball during the quarterfinal match between Shibobo FC
and Maluti FC highlights two opposing philosophical approaches to moral decision-making:
consequentialism and deontology. Shibobo FC justifies Pachio’s actions based on the outcome, while
Maluti FC criticizes it for violating principles of fair play.
Shibobo FC’s Perspective: Consequentialism
Consequentialism focuses on the outcomes or consequences of actions, asserting that an action is
morally justified if it produces the best possible result. From this view, the end justifies the means,
even if the means involve breaking a rule.
In this case:
Shibobo FC defends Pachio’s deliberate handball because it prevented a goal, giving their team
a chance to survive and eventually win the match.
The key outcome—Shibobo FC advancing to the semi-finals—justifies the violation of rules in
their eyes.
Even though Pachio’s actions resulted in a red card, the desired consequence (progressing in
the tournament) outweighs the immediate penalty.
From this perspective, sport is a competitive activity, and the goal is to win. As long as success
is achieved, the manner of achieving it holds less significance.
The logic of consequentialism implies that certain rule violations are tolerable if they maximize the
benefit to the team. For Shibobo FC, the benefit of winning surpasses the cost of a momentary
breach of fair play. Pachio’s intervention, though illegal, was considered necessary to fulfill the
higher objective—winning at all costs. (Utm.edu, 2024)
