Mattyblue Posted July 28, 2011 Posted July 28, 2011 Anyway, to your point. It is undeniable that the worlds greatest long distance runners tend towards East African origin and the world's finest sprinters are all either West African, or have a very strong West African ancestry. I think there is only one person to run a sub 10 second 100m who does not have West African ancestry, and I think he was an Australian aborigine [facts not checked - feel free to correct me]. There must be some inherent strengths within those African populations - that when averaged out over millions of people - means that a few individuals are physically more adept at certain types of running, and can achieve speeds that human beings with a different ancestry can not achieve. So it is true then?
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
yeti-dog Posted July 28, 2011 Posted July 28, 2011 So it is true then? Matty,you should be a politician,your ability to chery pick bits which sit with your own perceptions is exceptional. And no,as I pointed out and the more recent poster suggested...negro and negroid are not what I would call 'acceptable' terms in this day and age.
Mattyblue Posted July 28, 2011 Posted July 28, 2011 I would agree negro is outdated, negroid, cauacasian etc are not.
RoverInverness Posted July 28, 2011 Posted July 28, 2011 So it is true then? The point about African runners may be true, but I was trying to point out that that is irrelevant to the discussion about whether India can ever produce a PL footballer. To suggest that Indians and India produce rubbish footballers because of a gentic disposition is rubbish. The Koreans don't out perform a huge country like China at football because they are genetically superior at it. Similarly, relative to population numbers, the Sri Lankian cricket team massively out perform the Indian cricket team and the Dutch massively over perform at football compared to the English. All three examples are comparing genetically very similar populations, showing that in team sports requiring more than sheer strength and stamina cultural influences are vastly more important. These differences may be obvious, for example, the footballing facilities in Holland. Or they may be very subtle and hard to discern, e.g who can explain why the English always lose their bottle at penalty shoot outs. A PL style footballing academy in India may well be a failure. Especially one run by Venkys (whom I doubt are even capable of building one, let alone staffing and resourcing the place). However, to suggest that it would fail because the Indians have a genetic disposition to be rubbish at football is just nonsense.
Mattyblue Posted July 28, 2011 Posted July 28, 2011 So all this is due to some throw away comment from drog? I would assume India are @#/? at footy because most people there don't give a fig about it.
yoda Posted July 28, 2011 Posted July 28, 2011 So all this is due to some throw away comment from drog? I would assume India are @#/? at footy because most people there don't give a fig about it. No! its because everytime they get a corner they open a shop boom boom
deryck guyler's spoon Posted July 28, 2011 Posted July 28, 2011 So all this is due to some throw away comment from drog? Well, he does like to have threads become all about him and he usually invokes his favourite topic to ensure that this becomes the case.
RoverInverness Posted July 29, 2011 Posted July 29, 2011 As mentioned by Kamy in podcast 3 - Rovers to go to their 'second home' in October. http://www.indianexpress.com/news/######/820776/ I wonder if the person who inserted '######' into the http, had any previous experience of Balaji's announcements. EDIT - The missing word is this "skcolloB" spelt backwards. I am not allowed to post that word and that is why the link does not work.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.