That some people steadily complain about some activity they regularly voluntarily participate at is an existing phenomenon, but not something specific to spectator sports.
Also, even if the very act of watching the match is unpleasant, it may be offset by subsequent pleasant discussions about the game, to which having seen it is a natural prerequisite. And even if the discussions weren’t pleasant, they may be an easy way to strengthen tribal membership.
1) doing something you do (claim to) not enjoy
2) Participating in a tribal ritual that seems to make everyone worse off by having to do an activity they dont enjoy. (A group that is locked into doing something few members actually want to do.)
1) Even if the group would be better off if nobody did the activity, it doesn’t follow that the individuals are stupid if they are participating. (I don’t think the adjective “stupid” is applicable to group decisions which are a Nash equilibrium.)
2) I seriously dispute the assumption that everybody is doing an activity they don’t enjoy. Most sports fans enjoy their fandom. Now I watch sports much less than in my high-school years where I had much more opportunities to discuss football or ice hockey with my friends—therefore I know how important part social reinforcement plays. But never I watched a game with a sense of obligation or feeling that I am doing an unpleasant work. (Edit: most of the complaints about how the last night game was horrible are simple signals of sophistication—a true connoisseur can’t enjoy every game. The presence of such signalling doesn’t necessarily imply lack of enjoyment.)
By the way, a better example of a Nash equilibrium where everybody would be better off if nobody had participated in the activity is advertising. Even here, I wouldn’t talk about stupidity.
That some people steadily complain about some activity they regularly voluntarily participate at is an existing phenomenon, but not something specific to spectator sports.
Also, even if the very act of watching the match is unpleasant, it may be offset by subsequent pleasant discussions about the game, to which having seen it is a natural prerequisite. And even if the discussions weren’t pleasant, they may be an easy way to strengthen tribal membership.
What exactly is stupid here?
1) doing something you do (claim to) not enjoy 2) Participating in a tribal ritual that seems to make everyone worse off by having to do an activity they dont enjoy. (A group that is locked into doing something few members actually want to do.)
1) Even if the group would be better off if nobody did the activity, it doesn’t follow that the individuals are stupid if they are participating. (I don’t think the adjective “stupid” is applicable to group decisions which are a Nash equilibrium.)
2) I seriously dispute the assumption that everybody is doing an activity they don’t enjoy. Most sports fans enjoy their fandom. Now I watch sports much less than in my high-school years where I had much more opportunities to discuss football or ice hockey with my friends—therefore I know how important part social reinforcement plays. But never I watched a game with a sense of obligation or feeling that I am doing an unpleasant work. (Edit: most of the complaints about how the last night game was horrible are simple signals of sophistication—a true connoisseur can’t enjoy every game. The presence of such signalling doesn’t necessarily imply lack of enjoyment.)
By the way, a better example of a Nash equilibrium where everybody would be better off if nobody had participated in the activity is advertising. Even here, I wouldn’t talk about stupidity.