Iceland with 3.34lac population is in football WC, China/India/USA/Indonesia/pak/BD/Philippines are not

[randomGuy]

9 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

WC qualifiers have quotas in each region/continent. There are more highly ranked teams in EU that fail to qualify over some lowly ranked teams in Americas/Africa and Asia. India has to qualify better among Asian countries. 

I know, had thought about it actually, my limited point was on low population countries getting past higher population countries... Perhaps suggesting maybe soccer is a game luck has huge role .. Panama, Costa Rica got past USA Canada .... Iceland Serbia Denmark Croatia got past italy.... 

But you have rightly pointed out that india china never competes with Denmark Iceland etc. For qualification because of different continents

 

Edited June 18, 2018 by randomGuy

[Singh bling]

5 minutes ago, Vilander said:

hehe dude professional sportsmen manage their diet. You should not extrapolate what normal everyday joe eats to professional sportpersons.

 

Its not about diet or genetics - its about economics, facilities, opportunities, exposure, learning..

 

 

I am talking about growing up , at that time out of thousands of probables only few become professional and many times childhood nutritional deficiencies cannot be undone

 

As facilities opportunities economics is concerned , just look at terrible state of indian field hockey after the introduction of astro turf.I discussed that with my cousin who was emerging hockey player , he told me that since introduction of astro turf speed and stamina became more important than skills which is a weak point of Indians.O/W several states of India has enough astro turf grounds for players

[Vilander]

45 minutes ago, Singh bling said:

I am talking about growing up , at that time out of thousands of probables only few become professional and many times childhood nutritional deficiencies cannot be undone

This is a bigger problem. Malnutrition, look at Rahane for instance. Does not matter what he does now, he will remain malnutritioned. Some one like bhuv who was similar must have had better upbrining he seems to have crossed the bridge to normal territory, while Rahane remains in midget malnutrition territory.

[Tibarn]

Again, people become elite level athletes only with sufficient time to practice. It's called the 10,000 hour rule in pop psychology, meaning someone requires 10,000 hours of practice to become an elite athlete in their field.

 

In general it is established  ~20 percent of the difference in performance between athletes is from practice. 

 

In most cases, genetics are just an excuse for why people can't do it. Genetics matters when you reach the level that all the competitors are of similar preparation. 

 

11 hours ago, AmreekanDesi said:

That validates the point. Asians are genetically less gifted with desis bottom of the lot

Many Asian groups have high Testosterone levels compared to non-Asian groups. That implies they should be better at many sports. The Chinese already are doing great at the Olympics nowadays...  

[jusarrived]

46 minutes ago, randomGuy said:

I know, had thought about it actually, my limited point was on low population countries getting past higher population countries... Perhaps suggesting maybe soccer is a game luck has huge role .. Panama, Costa Rica got past USA Canada .... Iceland Serbia Denmark Croatia got past italy.... 

But you have rightly pointed out that india china never competes with Denmark Iceland etc. For qualification because of different continents

 

The luck factor in football is no more than any other sport, in fact I would argue its much less than cricket. This is the 21st WC and we have had only 8 winners , on the contrary India in 83, pak in 92 and SL in 96 where big surprise winners which you don't see in football. 

The gap between top 30 teams in football is not much and since every team goes through qualification it throws few surprises in qualifiers. Am sure if we do the same in cricket, you can't be sure of the top teams qualifying every time. 

[UrmiSinhaRay]

This is a bigger problem. Malnutrition, look at Rahane for instance. Does not matter what he does now, he will remain malnutritioned. Some one like bhuv who was similar must have had better upbrining he seems to have crossed the bridge to normal territory, while Rahane remains in midget malnutrition territory.

Rahane Malnutritioned?
He is an Elite pro athlete IMO.

Sent from my CPH1609 using Tapatalk

[Vilander]

1 minute ago, UrmiSinhaRay said:

Rahane Malnutritioned?
He is an Elite pro athlete IMO.

Sent from my CPH1609 using Tapatalk
 

dude.. he has a teenangers frame though. Kohli is what 5'9 - 5'10?  medium framed individual - Look at rahane. 

 

 

 

[Vilander]

12 minutes ago, jusarrived said:

The luck factor in football is no more than any other sport, in fact I would argue its much less than cricket.

Cricket because of its point scoring system pretty much lets a team win by strategic attrition or accretion and continued excellence. Football is sudden death by scoring a goal ( although needs tactical excellence to score and do so consistently game to game), it inherently rides more on luck than cricket. A team cant be lucky all 600 or 240 deliveries in LOI leave alone 5 days.( actual cricket totally removes luck). By extension football is tougher to master and maintain 'dominance on other teams' than cricket, cricket is so not based on deviant sample that its easier to stay a top team once the skill level is achieved than football which has vagaries based on tactics.

[UrmiSinhaRay]

dude.. he has a teenangers frame though. Kohli is what 5'9 - 5'10?  medium framed individual - Look at rahane. 
 

 
 

Even Sachin was a midget.
But he is our best player ever



Sent from my CPH1609 using Tapatalk

[jusarrived]

50 minutes ago, Vilander said:

Cricket because of its point scoring system pretty much lets a team win by strategic attrition or accretion and continued excellence. Football is sudden death by scoring a goal ( although needs tactical excellence to score and do so consistently game to game), it inherently rides more on luck than cricket. A team cant be lucky all 600 or 240 deliveries in LOI leave alone 5 days.( actual cricket totally removes luck). By extension football is tougher to master and maintain 'dominance on other teams' than cricket, cricket is so not based on deviant sample that its easier to stay a top team once the skill level is achieved than football which has vagaries based on tactics.

 

Its true if cricket is only about point scoring, but there are other aspects to it . The pitch plays a huge factor, a lesser team can easily get a big advantage when the conditions are in their favour. Toss plays a similar role. One more important factor being pressure, like pressure of chasing etc we recently saw Scotland which has not even qualified for WC beat the no1 ranked side but skill wise England is far superior here, so if it was simple point scoring England should have chased that target of 370 in 40 overs?  Doesn't work that way though. 

 

[Vilander]

4 hours ago, jusarrived said:

 

Its true if cricket is only about point scoring, but there are other aspects to it . The pitch plays a huge factor, a lesser team can easily get a big advantage when the conditions are in their favour. Toss plays a similar role. One more important factor being pressure, like pressure of chasing etc we recently saw Scotland which has not even qualified for WC beat the no1 ranked side but skill wise England is far superior here, so if it was simple point scoring England should have chased that target of 370 in 40 overs?  Doesn't work that way though. 

 

agreed on a particular match instance, but then we would be looking at a sample of games played ever or over a long period where conditions and toss will even out as a probability, where in the games inherent attrition/accretion method takes over and ensures real victors. Cricket does have toss/conditions that evens out the games, on the flip side if this was not the case - if all games were to be played in original uncovered swing seam conditions then only three teams would have still competed Aus/Eng/SA..meaning spinning and true tracks that were developed in SC and WI were the ones that enriched the game and gave raise to new team dynamics.

[Vilander]

5 hours ago, UrmiSinhaRay said:

 

 

Even Sachin was a midget.
But he is our best player ever



Sent from my CPH1609 using Tapatalk
 

 

not talking about stature or playing ability. 

 

Just gave Rahane as an example of malnourished during childhood will never be a good physical specimen - athlete from India.

[rkt.india]

9 hours ago, jusarrived said:

The luck factor in football is no more than any other sport, in fact I would argue its much less than cricket. This is the 21st WC and we have had only 8 winners , on the contrary India in 83, pak in 92 and SL in 96 where big surprise winners which you don't see in football. 

The gap between top 30 teams in football is not much and since every team goes through qualification it throws few surprises in qualifiers. Am sure if we do the same in cricket, you can't be sure of the top teams qualifying every time. 

when gap between teams is narrow that is where luck factor comes up.

[randomGuy]

27 minutes ago, rkt.india said:

when gap between teams is narrow that is where luck factor comes up.

The question comes up why is the gap narrow... 1 answer could be the universal popularity of the sport and 2nd reason could also be the nature of the sport itself... For ex. T20 cricket Afghanistan has more chance of beating india than in test cricket.... Football could be like t20? 

Edited June 19, 2018 by randomGuy

[Ranvir]

15 hours ago, Singh bling said:

And how did we produce Vishwanathan anand?the money in chess is much less than other sports

There are a lot of nerds in India, chess is associated with academics. Sports is not and requires a lot of physical effort that Indians are shy of applying.

[Number]

Such threads always turn into a Genetics discussion.

How different are S Koreans, Japanese and Chinese genetically ?

S Koreans and Japanese have made a lot of progress in Football after they hosted 2002 world cup, despite having 1/15th of China's population. 

The answer to such questions does not lie in Genetics at least.

[Alam_dar]

16 hours ago, Number said:

Such threads always turn into a Genetics discussion.

How different are S Koreans, Japanese and Chinese genetically ?

S Koreans and Japanese have made a lot of progress in Football after they hosted 2002 world cup, despite having 1/15th of China's population. 

The answer to such questions does not lie in Genetics at least.

I believe that multiple factors are involved. 

 

And Genetics is also one of them. 

 

1. It is a common observations that strong people/cattle bringing strong babies in the world by passing strong genes. 
And sports is normally a game of a FIT /(Strong) body. 

 

2. In Indian IITs, I believe most of the students also have a FIT body.
At least they are not fat and lazy. 
I believe a fit body is necessary to be a good sportsman or even for a good student. 

There is a slight difference between Fit and Strong body. 

 

3. And Genetics is itself based upon the NUTRITION (at least in my opinion). 

We are what we eat. 

Japanese/Chinese were short with slit eyes. 
But the 3rd or 4th generation of Japanese/Chinese in US has become tall and their eyes are wide open, and their resemblance becoming more and more of an American. 

 

Japanese/Chinese didn't drink cattle milk or ate butter or any other product from cattle milk. They drank mother milk, and that was all. And their staple food was rice (a that too of specific breed. I don't know the name of this breed in English). 

Rice has also been eaten in Indian Bihar and other states, but their breed is different. 

But in the  present century, they began to drink lot of milk and consume butter and cheese (just like Americans). 

 

Eating habits and climate brings evolution in the bodies. 

 

4. Iceland people led a very tough life. And their diet was also always very healthy and very simple. They had almost NO SUGAR in the previous centuries.

While India got lot of Sweets since centuries. And also Puries and Samosas etc. are not a healthy food. 

 

Therefore, Eating Habits are also making a difference. 

 

5. Yes, culture of any sport, facilities and coaching etc. are also the factors. 

 

 

PS:

South Koreans and Japanese are living longer as compared to Chinese. They have difference of diet. And it seems that environment is also making a difference. Chinese are living in a polluted environment. 

 

 

[MechEng]

3 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

I believe that multiple factors are involved. 

 

And Genetics is also one of them. 

 

1. It is a common observations that strong people/cattle bringing strong babies in the world by passing strong genes. 
And sports is normally a game of a FIT /(Strong) body. 

 

2. In Indian IITs, I believe most of the students also have a FIT body.
At least they are not fat and lazy. 
I believe a fit body is necessary to be a good sportsman or even for a good student. 

There is a slight difference between Fit and Strong body. 

 

3. And Genetics is itself based upon the NUTRITION (at least in my opinion). 

We are what we eat. 

Japanese/Chinese were short with slit eyes. 
But the 3rd or 4th generation of Japanese/Chinese in US has become tall and their eyes are wide open, and their resemblance becoming more and more of an American. 

 

Japanese/Chinese didn't drink cattle milk or ate butter or any other product from cattle milk. They drank mother milk, and that was all. And their staple food was rice (a that too of specific breed. I don't know the name of this breed in English). 

Rice has also been eaten in Indian Bihar and other states, but their breed is different. 

But in the  present century, they began to drink lot of milk and consume butter and cheese (just like Americans). 

 

Eating habits and climate brings evolution in the bodies. 

 

4. Iceland people led a very tough life. And their diet was also always very healthy and very simple. They had almost NO SUGAR in the previous centuries.

While India got lot of Sweets since centuries. And also Puries and Samosas etc. are not a healthy food. 

 

Therefore, Eating Habits are also making a difference. 

 

5. Yes, culture of any sport, facilities and coaching etc. are also the factors. 

 

 

PS:

South Koreans and Japanese are living longer as compared to Chinese. They have difference of diet. And it seems that environment is also making a difference. Chinese are living in a polluted environment. 

 

 

I can assure you that you will find a lot of lazy folks in IITs, plenty of my old friends and family relatives are IITians. 

 

The competition is high and exams are hard, so students are overly involved in coursework to avoid screwing up their GPA, basically no time for outdoor activities. In fact pornography is what they watch in free time to de-stress themselves .

Edited June 20, 2018 by MechEng

[abc]

In India, many might play football as a hobby, but those that do go on to play professional football probably tried their hand at cricket/badminton/wrestling/any sport India is strong at and found they sucked harder than a vacuum cleaner at it.

 

So it's not the cream of the crop in terms of sporting talent that ends up with the sorry task of representing India at football. I doubt Sushil Kumar would have made a bad scrum-half (low centre of gravity, very strong, lots of agility in tight spaces) but why play rugby when (i) you have grown in a culture immersed in wrestling and (ii) you could go on to win two Olympic medals?

Edited June 20, 2018 by abc

[nikred]

No need to be so negative. Granted India blows at the beautiful game but we have our own strengths.
 
For example, can you think of any other country with so many geneticists per capita? Just have to read up this thread to see how naturally blessed we are in this discipline.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk