Opinion: Kerala/Bengal obsession with Argentina/Brazil is more cringeworthy than Pakistan's obsession with Turkey

[Ranvir]

17 hours ago, Serpico said:

How's it any different from following football clubs. Anyone can follow their favourite sports team, regardless of their nationality. Stabbings etc is just unfortunate football fan culture, you see it everywhere 

Following Argentina is one thing, putting flags up of a nation you have no connection to is strange, some crazy fans in India and Bangladesh even painted their face in Argentina colours. 

I was supporting Argentina due to the Messi factor and in the past due to Maradona but never would I do any of the above. 

[Ranvir]

3 hours ago, G_B_ said:

and i would just like to clarify. I watched all of the world cup and enjoyed it!!

 

I was supporting England. But not to the extent of getting a flag and cut outs etc.

 

My personal experience with Argentines has been negative. Most eateries in major Spainish cities have Argentine workers (been throughout Spain to Madrid, Barcelona and Seville etc).  Been very rude to non white customers from what I can see. 

 

I also have heard that Argentines are very racist to brown skinned Bolivians etc. 

 

But my sample size is very less.

The funny thing is that Argentina is nowhere near as white as it is portrayed. A lot of their greatest players have been non white - Maradona, Ortega, Veron, Riquelme, Tevez, Aguero, Di Maria, Trezeguet who played for France. They'd all be confused for Mexicans in America. 

And a good 4-5 of their players on Sunday were non white.

[Ranvir]

4 hours ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

The best thing about this FIFA thing?  It's over!

 

This whole soccer evangelism is nauseating.  Even in America - people just constantly asking "did you see the world cup playoff match?"  "Wow.  Croatia!  Morocco!  And Messi - oooh aaah."  When I express my complete lack of interest in this "global" sport, they are aghast.  How can you - an academic who purports to be interested in the welfare of all humanity - dislike this very symbol of world citizenry?  How?

 

Just stop it already.  Let me tell you something, y'all johnnycomelately pretenders.  First of all, it is called the knockouts, not the playoffs.   Second, I was 16 when I watched Maradona scythe through soccer defenses like a hot knife through butter.  When Lothar Matthaeus and Jurgen Klinsmann and Paolo Rossi and Gianluca Vialli and Dunga and Valderrama and Michel Platini and Paul Gascgoine played the sport.  I thought it was beautiful, too.  Even bothered to learn Pele's full name - Edson Arante do Nascimento.  But I grew out of it.  For the most part, it is 90 minutes of nothingness followed by the farce called penalty kicks.  Flopping like there's no tomorrow.  Rationalization that a 1-0 win was somehow so.... entertaining because apparently ... scoring is not everything.  It's like KLR saying strike-rate is not important in T20s.

 

Whatever.  The country I grew up in stinks at soccer.  The country I migrated to is a bit better, but the only reason they do it is because they think participating in saaakkar will make the world like them more.  Just give me cricket - the only sport I had any hopes of being able to play - and give me good ol' American football, where we offer instant gratification - play after play after play.   

Cricket will never be cool no matter how hard they try to make it. It's only the most popular sport in the subcontinent. People around the world prefer sports with more athleticism. Carribean origin kids here in England have pretty much stopped playing it altogether. American Football has to be one of the most boring sports I've ever watched, stop start, stop start, stop start, a more boring version of rugby. 

[Vijy]

5 hours ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

The best thing about this FIFA thing?  It's over!

 

This whole soccer evangelism is nauseating.  Even in America - people just constantly asking "did you see the world cup playoff match?"  "Wow.  Croatia!  Morocco!  And Messi - oooh aaah."  When I express my complete lack of interest in this "global" sport, they are aghast.  How can you - an academic who purports to be interested in the welfare of all humanity - dislike this very symbol of world citizenry?  How?

 

Just stop it already.  Let me tell you something, y'all johnnycomelately pretenders.  First of all, it is called the knockouts, not the playoffs.   Second, I was 16 when I watched Maradona scythe through soccer defenses like a hot knife through butter.  When Lothar Matthaeus and Jurgen Klinsmann and Paolo Rossi and Gianluca Vialli and Dunga and Valderrama and Michel Platini and Paul Gascgoine played the sport.  I thought it was beautiful, too.  Even bothered to learn Pele's full name - Edson Arante do Nascimento.  But I grew out of it.  For the most part, it is 90 minutes of nothingness followed by the farce called penalty kicks.  Flopping like there's no tomorrow.  Rationalization that a 1-0 win was somehow so.... entertaining because apparently ... scoring is not everything.  It's like KLR saying strike-rate is not important in T20s.

 

Whatever.  The country I grew up in stinks at soccer.  The country I migrated to is a bit better, but the only reason they do it is because they think participating in saaakkar will make the world like them more.  Just give me cricket - the only sport I had any hopes of being able to play - and give me good ol' American football, where we offer instant gratification - play after play after play.   

While I don't agree with all the points, I do agree with some of them. also, hats off for the eloquent exposition (dare I call it a tirade :) )

[bharathh]

36 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

Football ain't that athletic,they hardly have any upper body strength,they just run around so it looks better.Tennis is lot more athletic as you need both arms and legs.

Tennis/Squash/Basketball are incredibly difficult sports which require a crazy amount of athleticism. Even Sepak Takraw is probably more difficult than football.

 

However, probably something like rowing probably takes the cake though. I can do any of the above for a certain length of time (except Sepak takraw)- but rowing for more than a short time is incredibly difficult!

Edited December 21, 2022 by bharathh

[bharathh]

4 minutes ago, bharathh said:

Tennis/Squash/Basketball are incredibly difficult sports which require a crazy amount of athleticism. Even Sepak Takraw is probably more difficult than football.

 

However, probably something like rowing probably takes the cake though. I can do any of the above for a certain length of time (except Sepak takraw)- but rowing for more than a short time is incredibly difficult!

Should probably add swimming as well. IMO, water sports are way harder than land sports although I don't like watching water sports.

[javier26]

55 minutes ago, MultiB48 said:

Football ain't that athletic,they hardly have any upper body strength,they just run around so it looks better.Tennis is lot more athletic as you need both arms and legs.

 

Is express pace bowling more athletic then ? They are running and bending their back using full upper body strength to generate Raw Pace. Can test the endurance too in a spell of 8-10 overs ( Tests ). 

Edited December 21, 2022 by javier26

[G_B_]

I think football has the right amounts of things going for it.

 

Cost. Dirt cheap...just need a ball and a ground. As compared to cricket which needs a ball and a bat min. This is for gully cricket.

 

Rules. Football rules are generally straight forward. Rugby and Cricket are packed with rules. 

 

Athletic Needs. Football needs more energy than Cricket but less than Rugby etc. Its just the right amount of energy.

 

You cant really compare team sports to individual sports like tennis etc. 

 

We need to stop running down cricket. We have enough depth. 6 teams have won a LOI title. 8 teams have won the FIFA world cup. That includes Uruguay who won things twice when the competition was basically an unknown.

 

India should IMO invest in field hockey and be number 1 rather than football. With unlimited subs etc the athletic part is mitigated. It also has some base in Germany Netherlands Belgium Spain UK Argentina. So its more global.  Its probably too late in the game to invest in football. for ever $1 spent the returns will be poor. Focus on individual Olympic events and field hockey. India will be better off than a lot of other asian countries who have football as the number 1 sport but are never going to win anything. 

[G_B_]

14 hours ago, Ranvir said:

The funny thing is that Argentina is nowhere near as white as it is portrayed. A lot of their greatest players have been non white - Maradona, Ortega, Veron, Riquelme, Tevez, Aguero, Di Maria, Trezeguet who played for France. They'd all be confused for Mexicans in America. 

And a good 4-5 of their players on Sunday were non white.

 

These people you mention probably have 70% white DNA with a mix of Amarindian (indigenous) and Black. Maradona who you mention had a white mother and a partially mixed (Indigenous) father. That makes him like 80% white on genetics. 

 

For all intents and purposes they are white culturally and by genetics. Argentina is known to have bread out the local populace in waves of immigration. Similar to those people in USA who claim their native american based on less than 5% genetics.

 

When I took my DNA test they showed me to be 2% Indo-Iranian. That does not make me Iranian.

[Ranvir]

2 hours ago, MultiB48 said:

Football ain't that athletic,they hardly have any upper body strength,they just run around so it looks better.Tennis is lot more athletic as you need both arms and legs.

It may seem that way watching them on TV but seeing them in person at a stadium was a bit of a shock. They are very muscular with huge legs, wide shoulders and big chests. Of course upper body strength is required, the players go shoulder to shoulder and make body contact all of the time.

It's laughable saying tennis is more athletic, tennis is a completely non contact sport with no long sprinting, it doesn't require anywhere near the athleticism of football. There is a reason why tennis matches can go on for 3 hours plus and the players can still play the next day or the day after, something which is impossible to do in football. Tennis is considered a soft sport in Europe and North America. 

[Ranvir]

19 minutes ago, G_B_ said:

I think football has the right amounts of things going for it.

 

Cost. Dirt cheap...just need a ball and a ground. As compared to cricket which needs a ball and a bat min. This is for gully cricket.

 

Rules. Football rules are generally straight forward. Rugby and Cricket are packed with rules. 

 

Athletic Needs. Football needs more energy than Cricket but less than Rugby etc. Its just the right amount of energy.

 

You cant really compare team sports to individual sports like tennis etc. 

 

We need to stop running down cricket. We have enough depth. 6 teams have won a LOI title. 8 teams have won the FIFA world cup. That includes Uruguay who won things twice when the competition was basically an unknown.

 

India should IMO invest in field hockey and be number 1 rather than football. With unlimited subs etc the athletic part is mitigated. It also has some base in Germany Netherlands Belgium Spain UK Argentina. So its more global.  Its probably too late in the game to invest in football. for ever $1 spent the returns will be poor. Focus on individual Olympic events and field hockey. India will be better off than a lot of other asian countries who have football as the number 1 sport but are never going to win anything. 

Field hockey is a minor sport in those countries. Here in the UK it is considered a bit of a feminine sport. It's never too late to invest in football. If tiny countries like Uruguay and Croatia can have a lot of success then anything is possible.

[Ranvir]

1 hour ago, G_B_ said:

 

These people you mention probably have 70% white DNA with a mix of Amarindian (indigenous) and Black. Maradona who you mention had a white mother and a partially mixed (Indigenous) father. That makes him like 80% white on genetics. 

 

For all intents and purposes they are white culturally and by genetics. Argentina is known to have bread out the local populace in waves of immigration. Similar to those people in USA who claim their native american based on less than 5% genetics.

 

When I took my DNA test they showed me to be 2% Indo-Iranian. That does not make me Iranian.

Those players I listed are clearly mixed, some maybe not as much as the average Mexican but still visibly non white. Put them in Spain or Italy and they would stand out. 

 

I've seen many scenes of Argentinians celebrating their win back in Argentina and its obvious many of them have significant Native American genes. The ones who go abroad generally tend to be the rich white ones just like Brazilians.

2% is also different from 20%. If a North Indian was even 50% Iranian he still wouldn't look out of place in India. Now if he was 50% Chinese that would be a different story. Just look at Tiger Shroff who is 25% Turkmen and it shows very clearly on his face. He was trolled with online racism at the beginning of his career, many people calling Chinese or Nepali. 

Edited December 21, 2022 by Ranvir

[bharathh]

3 hours ago, Ranvir said:

It may seem that way watching them on TV but seeing them in person at a stadium was a bit of a shock. They are very muscular with huge legs, wide shoulders and big chests. Of course upper body strength is required, the players go shoulder to shoulder and make body contact all of the time.

It's laughable saying tennis is more athletic, tennis is a completely non contact sport with no long sprinting, it doesn't require anywhere near the athleticism of football. There is a reason why tennis matches can go on for 3 hours plus and the players can still play the next day or the day after, something which is impossible to do in football. Tennis is considered a soft sport in Europe and North America. 

Have you played tennis? 

[MechEng]

On 12/20/2022 at 5:20 PM, ravishingravi said:

I am in Kolkata. I can say this honestly. During the WC finals and celebrations, there were many "pinch me now" moments. Argentina flags all over the city. 

 

Bet all the British styled tea houses in Kolkata got replaced by South American coffee bars overnight and everyone speaking in fluent Spanish/Italian.

[MechEng]

On 12/20/2022 at 8:22 PM, Clarke said:

 

That's really irrelevant. I mean if u have a problem with this fanboyism, the answer isnt in mutual fanboyism between two groups.

 

I'd say it's okay to be passionate & support a team. But I do find it silly to call it "your" team & talk about how "we" are the world champions. Go produce a worthy football team and then talk of "your" achievements. 

 

Humans are social animals and can have herd mentality to absurd extents. 

 

Things can get scarier in premier league games, there were literal physical fights in my engineering hostel when ManU beat Arsenal 8-2.

 

Mechanical Engineering HOD had to issue a warning that he would fail the students if such behaviour was repeated.

[Vijy]

2 minutes ago, MechEng said:

 

Things can get scarier in premier league games, there were literal physical fights in my engineering hostel when ManU beat Arsenal 8-2.

 

Mechanical Engineering HOD had to issue a warning that he would fail the students if such behaviour was repeated.

he should have put them on a footer field and told them that they can play sans referees (i.e., no yellow/red cards)

[Ranvir]

3 hours ago, MultiB48 said:

What upper body strength are we talking about ,it's not like they are wrestling or boxing or serving or returning or bowling fast or hitting big shots .

 

They are getting their arms and shoulders buffed  in a gym which any Bollywoody actor can do .Strength is mostly natural ,you cant amp it up much .Like if your legs look like premier league footballers doesnt mean you can run or jump like them.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here You can see wasim akram beats an olympic champion in an obstical course

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here flintoff wins a professional boxing match.

 

 

 

 

I think any over the hill boxer can knock an elite footballer in a ring.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Football is also considered a soft sport in NA,it's played mostly by women and smaller mexican men.If you play football as boy people will mock you.

 

 

 

 

 

Your points are all laughable. First of all Steve Ovett is 11 years older than Akram and would have been in his mid to late 30s, past his peak when that video was filmed and Akram would have been in his mid 20s peak. Middle distance runners are not sprinters. Let's see Akram vs Cristiano Ronaldo on that same course, he'd get annihilated.

 

That Flintoff fight was a complete joke. It was for a TV documentary here in the UK, he was literally throwing slaps, the other guy even knocked him down, most likely fixed for the documentary. Rio Ferdinand another fame hungry whore like Flintoff also wanted to become a boxer like Flintoff after retirement. I'd bet my bottom dollar he'd annihilate Flintoff, he's more explosive and stronger.

 

Football may be considered a soft sport in America but Basketball is even softer, extremely little body contact is allowed. Each nation has it's own views on sports. Cricket in England is considered boring and unathletic and that's the view of the public of the best team in the world. 

 

An example of upper body strength in football can be seen at 4:33 in this video. You can see Ronaldinho (80kg) bulldoze defender Terry (90kg), this requires upper body strength and such duels are very common in football between defenders and forwards. Footballers do not build show muscles like actors. They will not add unnecessary bulk if it's not useful for their job, they have wide shoulders and big chests for a reason, as demonstrated this video. 

 

 

[Ranvir]

4 hours ago, bharathh said:

Have you played tennis? 

Yes and it's nowhere near as gruelling as football. Why do you think Tennis players can play 3-5 hour matches?

 

Having a 3 hour football match would be impossible due to the stamina needed.

[Ranvir]

4 hours ago, MultiB48 said:

Ovett was nearing retirement but he was an Olympic athlete and  Akram didn't train to be a runner ,whatever he did was pure natural ability.Could ovett  bowl over 80mph? Ronaldo can beat Akram in a sprint because that's his game, football is about running,but Ronaldo will get beat by Olympic women sprinters .

 

And rolandinho ran into terry and the momentum pushed him over ,if he is such a bull could he fight in mma or even in some non descript dangal in India. 

 

He was a middle distance runner, not sprinter. He's not going to be amazing at short sprints which is what that obstacle course was about. What kind of point are you trying to make? 

My point was that cricketers are unathletic compared to footballers and you have not demonstrated anything to refute that point. 

 

Yes Ronaldinho ran into Terry but he still needed strength to push him over and he was significantly smaller, a weaker player like Neymar would have been sent to the floor.

 

Here is Messi demonstrating his strength against defenders who are significantly taller and heavier than him. Again, skilful but weaker players like Neymar and Di Maria would be knocked to the ground when contesting such duels. So upper body and overall physical strength is very important in football. To say upper body strength in football is unimportant or that they have little is plainly wrong. 

 

 

What does your video of Maguire prove? Has he ever been ranked as one of the best players in the world. 

But this guy was considered one of the best cricketers of the 90s.

 

[ravishingravi]

One thing is for sure. Sports are an opium for masses. And this becomes so apparent in Kolkata. A city crashing down by the day with flailing infrastructure, filth and poverty galore. But they are delirious because Argentina won. 

 

There is a reason why Roman Empire had more gladiator combats especially when Empire was descending.