Is Britain the Greatest sporting nation on Earth?
Discussion
BJG1 said:
Sports is bigger than just the Olympics... You cant really count tiny nations that win one medal either as their per capita measure is hugely skewed. If Using Bolt was from the Vatican they'd have tgr best per capita ratio but obviously wouldn't be the best at sport. Similarly a country that excels at one sport (Iran and Jamaica for example) can't lay claim to being the greatest sporting nation on earth.
Where's the line then ?You can make a similar claim for small sports which are only played in a few county's or in by far the large part in a couple of countries to a certain standard; like archery, rugby, fencing, field hockey, judo, cricket etc.
BJG1 said:
As for your second post, I don't understand the relevance of looking at investment. Of course a large part of the reason we are so good is because we invest heavily in sport?
Of course that's very relevant. Sport sponsoring enables clubs, governing organisations, talent and professional athletes with the right means and coaches to develop themselves to became a world class athlete. Plus sponsoring makes sure talent doesn't choose a career outside of sports over becoming a professional athlete.
Most athletes in the smaller sports earn very little, sponsoring enables them to commit full time on their sport, travel, hire the right coaches, training facilities, the best materials etc.
I guess it depends on which criteria you choose to use. This site has GB no better than 12th.
http://www.medalspercapita.com/#medals-per-capita:...
http://www.medalspercapita.com/#medals-per-capita:...
CR6ZZ said:
I guess it depends on which criteria you choose to use. This site has GB no better than 12th.
http://www.medalspercapita.com/#medals-per-capita:...
...Which would be a good measure if every nation could send larger squads in. The issue with per capita is that e.g China can enter only 2 ping pong guys. They probably have the ability to field a squad of 10 that will get 8 of the top 10 spots. However, they can only enter 2. Meanwhile, Grenada get to enter 2 sprinters, both of whom may well medal. This year, 1 did. Under this measure, to be "as good as Grenada", China would have to win 12000 medals. There were only 962 in London...http://www.medalspercapita.com/#medals-per-capita:...
BJG1 said:
You are describing reasons why those nations are unable to be the greatest sporting nations on earth, not why Britain isn't. Having the money to produce top athletes is one of the main reasons Britain is arguably the greatest sporting nation.
The ever present islander mentality again.
GB's GDP and national debt doesn't really reflect your claim of "having the money" in the sense that theirs more of it in relation to the direct competition. Brexit by the way doesn't really enhance that.
But it might reflect that GB made other choices, set up a national program to support prof. sports (lottery's). No doubt related to the London 2012 Olympics, but also given where Team GB came from (1996). Often after deep lows you see a counter movement.
And as you might've noticed almost the entire top 25 nations in the medal classification are all 1st world country's. The few 2nd world country's, China and Russia for instance (or former USSR country's and Cuba), have a very strong policy (and history) concerning professional sports, to show off their greatness to the world. They've invested, in other words money matters.
And GB is not top of the table;
http://sportal.spiegel.de/spiegel/olympia-2016/med...
Thankyou4calling said:
To say we are good at stuff where there's little competition and cite Rugby as an example us simply nonsense.
Rugby is an incredibly competitive sport at team and International level, it has high level representation around the world with established and emerging nations.
The Rugby World Cup is on our shores this year and England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales all have teams expected to go far, if that's not high performance I don't know what is.
So how did this work out for you ? Rugby is an incredibly competitive sport at team and International level, it has high level representation around the world with established and emerging nations.
The Rugby World Cup is on our shores this year and England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales all have teams expected to go far, if that's not high performance I don't know what is.
Kenty said:
No, Australia is by far.
I couldn't resist. It is cruel of course. But fun.For every medal winner there is a pyramid underneath, including players in the sport that weren't quite good enough.
My sport is rugby and the standard of game is exceptionally high at lower levels, as is the commitment of players who are paid nothing. I did an end of season compilation for my National League 3 team and there were runs that would have made any Welsh national player green with envy in the pre professional era, some 17 years previously. There was sophisticated play that was world class at the turn of the century. And that's just my sport.
You can play almost any Olympic sport to a high level locally in this country is you live in a town. This despite continued attacks on school playing fields by governments.
My lad works with children excluded from school. He teaches them rugby and it has changed the lives of some of them.
Whether we are the best sporting nation on earth or merely better than the Australians is of no account. I think we, as a nation, give it a good go whatever the sport. We are a great sporting nation.
Let's face it, we invented most sports.
Derek Smith said:
I couldn't resist. It is cruel of course. But fun.
For every medal winner there is a pyramid underneath, including players in the sport that weren't quite good enough.
My sport is rugby and the standard of game is exceptionally high at lower levels, as is the commitment of players who are paid nothing. I did an end of season compilation for my National League 3 team and there were runs that would have made any Welsh national player green with envy in the pre professional era, some 17 years previously. There was sophisticated play that was world class at the turn of the century. And that's just my sport.
But how big is that pyramid ? and where does it exist ?For every medal winner there is a pyramid underneath, including players in the sport that weren't quite good enough.
My sport is rugby and the standard of game is exceptionally high at lower levels, as is the commitment of players who are paid nothing. I did an end of season compilation for my National League 3 team and there were runs that would have made any Welsh national player green with envy in the pre professional era, some 17 years previously. There was sophisticated play that was world class at the turn of the century. And that's just my sport.
Rugby is a great sport, but let's face it, like cricket only popular in a couple of country's. So are lot's of other Olympic sports, either small or dependant on a couple of nations were socio-demographic factors play a huge factor in de development of and popularity of a sport.
Take sprinting for instance, read an article this morning about the Jamaicans, the best sprinting nation on earth currently. But one of only 3 M. people. Except as they are a rel. poor country it's giving them few options, combine that with a number of successful hero's and a very good system of picking talents, means sprinting thrives in Jamaica. Every school boy and girl sprints.
Take rowing, popular in GB but also in Holland, can't think of a Olympic Games were NL didn't won a medal. Is that a great achievement ? A closer look reveals here in the Netherlands it's just a sport practiced for 95% by students. People start with the sport only wenn they enter University as part of university life. Often just for socialising, some take it further on a more competitive level, some discover it's a way of reaching the Olympics.
What did GB do, it invested from 1997 onwards, in amongst other sports, in rowing, like track cycling it was one of their key objectives. Why ?
Both relatively low developed and unpopular sports, but quite some medals to win. Relatively low hanging fruit. It brought GB 17 medals.
Why Do Team GB Dominate At The Olympics?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHqC33gCSpU
Derek Smith said:
You can play almost any Olympic sport to a high level locally in this country is you live in a town. This despite continued attacks on school playing fields by governments.
My lad works with children excluded from school. He teaches them rugby and it has changed the lives of some of them.
Whether we are the best sporting nation on earth or merely better than the Australians is of no account. I think we, as a nation, give it a good go whatever the sport. We are a great sporting nation.
No question about it, like most developed country's. My lad works with children excluded from school. He teaches them rugby and it has changed the lives of some of them.
Whether we are the best sporting nation on earth or merely better than the Australians is of no account. I think we, as a nation, give it a good go whatever the sport. We are a great sporting nation.
Derek Smith said:
Let's face it, we invented most sports.
That's a nice myth, which over century's thanks to developments and popularity became part of a nations marketing. Country size and a strong imperialistic history like France and GB have, probably play a part as well. Reality is all sports GB calls "Home of...." often originate in very similar shapes and forms, sometimes with just a few minor changes, in Roman, Greek and/or Chinese writings.
Golf and football are very good examples.
According to a German scientist Dr. Heiner Gillmeister the first written evidence of golf (or in Dutch Kolf), a game very much identical to the game as we know it now, originated from 1545 in The Netherlands, a century before the first evidence of the game in Scotland.
The Scots aren't pleased;
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1401957/Sco...
Too bad. But similar (also hockey like) sports were already played century's before it by the Romans and in China. In the 15th, 16th and 17th century few people could read or write. So historic knowledge is based on the remains of a limited number of writings and paintings from religious figures and academics.
So whatever the claims by your GB, I would take it with a grain of salt.
I bet you had that comment lineup like theres no tomorow.....
"In 2015, the total number of registered players increased from 2.56 million to 2.82 million"
Their are 1,3 million registered footballers just in the NL alone....
How many country's call rugby their first sport:
Rugby Union is the "national sport" of Wales, New Zealand, Tonga, Fiji en Samoa and Papua New Guinea.
Maybe you should take your head out of your arse..
Thankyou4calling said:
I stopped reading your gibberish when you said Rugby is only popular in a few countries.
Couldn't be bothered after that ill informed nonsense.
http://www.worldrugby.org/development/player-numbersCouldn't be bothered after that ill informed nonsense.
"In 2015, the total number of registered players increased from 2.56 million to 2.82 million"
Their are 1,3 million registered footballers just in the NL alone....
How many country's call rugby their first sport:
Rugby Union is the "national sport" of Wales, New Zealand, Tonga, Fiji en Samoa and Papua New Guinea.
Maybe you should take your head out of your arse..
DeltonaS said:
Rugby is a great sport, but let's face it, like cricket only popular in a couple of country's.
And yet it ranks in EVERY top 10 of Sports viewed globally on TV.Usually around the No.6 mark.
A simple google will confirm this.
Cricket drew a Billion, yes a Billion viewers in one instance.
Again, a simple google will suffice
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/cricket/bill...
lionelf said:
DeltonaS said:
Rugby is a great sport, but let's face it, like cricket only popular in a couple of country's.
And yet it ranks in EVERY top 10 of Sports viewed globally on TV.Usually around the No.6 mark.
A simple google will confirm this.
Cricket drew a Billion, yes a Billion viewers in one instance.
Again, a simple google will suffice
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/cricket/bill...
t talked about global viewing figures. I wouldn't take it too seriously. Radio 4's stats show More or Less did a piece on it, saying the most watched event on TV at the time was the Chinese Olympics opening ceremony, watched by around 350 million.MarshPhantom said:
lionelf said:
DeltonaS said:
Rugby is a great sport, but let's face it, like cricket only popular in a couple of country's.
And yet it ranks in EVERY top 10 of Sports viewed globally on TV.Usually around the No.6 mark.
A simple google will confirm this.
Cricket drew a Billion, yes a Billion viewers in one instance.
Again, a simple google will suffice
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/sport/cricket/bill...
t talked about global viewing figures. I wouldn't take it too seriously. Radio 4's stats show More or Less did a piece on it, saying the most watched event on TV at the time was the Chinese Olympics opening ceremony, watched by around 350 million.Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff