Hypocrisy and groupthink in sports culture: R.O.N. for VP of Sports

Student politics is rarely guided by logic, often centring around friendship cliques and established loyalties, with sparse policy or platform consideration. In several ways, it possesses traits many would attribute to politics generally, and just like politics, positive figures can still emerge, championing positive change. Yet, the baffling nature of student politics is occasionally, on its level, well-exemplified by R.O.N.’s (re-open nominations) success in the Warwick Student Union’s recent Spring Officer Elections for the position of Vice President (VP) for Sports.

To reopen nominations is to suggest that all candidates for a particular role are unsuitable. According to the Warwick SU’s website, it is for voters who don’t “feel that the current nominees for the specific position should be elected”. In this case, only one candidate, Ollie Seal, ran for the VP for Sports position, initially listed under the name ‘A. Bolish Sports’. Although enlisting themselves to begin with in comedic jest, upon realising they were the only actual candidate running for the office and therefore would likely be assuming the full-time SU position for the next academic year, Seal created a manifesto platform based on the principle of broadening sports inclusivity at Warwick University.

the scale and momentum of the counter-campaign against them was astonishing

Seal’s manifesto, principles, and aspirations were, however, retrospectively irrelevant, as a R.O.N. campaign quickly gained traction. Feverishly circulating amongst sports society group chats were messages calling on all members to vote R.O.N., with a sentiment suggesting the only running candidate didn’t care about sports at the University. The result of this campaign: R.O.N. secured 57.2% of the vote, winning by 712 ballots.

Whilst some scepticism surrounding Seal’s candidacy was to be expected, particularly considering the name under which they initially ran, the scale and momentum of the counter-campaign against them was astonishing. Swathes of sports teams voted en masse for R.O.N., citing the need for, in their opinion, a candidate who was committed to Warwick sports. The mass balloting reflected herd mentality voting amongst sports outfits, culminating in the R.O.N. for VP for Sports ticket being the most electorally successful out of any candidate running for any position in Warwick SU’s Spring 2025 Officer Elections (in terms of outright first votes).

If the position was so crucial that there was a wide-spanning counter-campaign, why was this candidate the only one who put themselves forward?

Reflecting upon the result, Ollie Seal remarked they were “just happy that over 2000 people saw everything that was going on and still took their time to read my manifesto and vote for me”, but the result was extremely harsh. Whilst many athletes unquestionably flocked to R.O.N., it was clear many did not question the hypocritical rationale behind such a decision. Voting solely to spite a particular candidate based solely on the instruction to do so from a sport’s captain or teammate is baffling, especially when they suggest it’s because the said candidate doesn’t care about sports, whilst the individual counter-campaigning refused to stand for the office.

Reams of sports captains, officers, and members suggested that an individual who took the time to stand, craft a manifesto, and campaign for a position did not care, despite their counter-action suggesting they didn’t deem the role important enough to stand for themselves. If the position was so crucial that there was a wide-spanning counter-campaign, why was this candidate the only one who put themselves forward?

The mounted campaign certainly implied the position was seen as vital to the wider sports community at the University, yet no one from the sports societies counter-campaigning decided to take up the mantle of filling it. Instead, efforts were taken to mobilise the community against the one individual who decided to. Even if Seal’s undertaking was initially undertaken in a comedic fashion, in doing so, particularly after subsequently drafting a genuine policy platform, they reflected more commitment to the political-bureaucratic side of the University’s sports than anyone else. In a now-deactivated campaign Instagram account, Seal rightly expressed frustration at the hypocritical irony which was being used to crush their electoral chances.

the lack of introspection individuals undertake within such organisations was also apparent, presenting the overwhelming presence of groupthink

The upcoming by-election for VP for Sports will likely have several candidates more akin to what was expected by the University’s sports teams. However, if this turns out not to be the case, it would only serve to reinforce the clear hypocritical culture that surfaced within these sporting groups throughout the Spring Officer Elections. Further, the lack of introspection individuals undertake within such organisations was also apparent, presenting the overwhelming presence of groupthink amongst these circles. There is no doubt these attitudes contributed to past sporting controversies, such as the sanctions imposed on the Warwick Men’s Rugby Union Club following “abusive language”, “illegal behaviour”, and the putting of “someone in danger of serious injury, illness or death” in 2014.

As a recently elected Sports Officer myself, I am committed to confronting such toxic cultures, ensuring they do not go unquestioned, and never allowing blind loyalties to fuel unprincipled campaigns. Toxic sports cultures are by no means universal, but even in concentrated bouts, such cultural underpinnings can be highly damaging and self-producing. Frankly, the Seal platform’s focus on inclusivity is highly admirable – I hope to build it into my role and implore whoever the VP for Sports is following the upcoming by-election to do the same. The toxic culture highlighted by the R.O.N. for VP for Sports movement needs to be tackled, ensuring sports at Warwick are guided by more inclusive principles, as opposed to herd mentality tribalism.