Is Britain the Greatest sporting nation on Earth?

[northwest monkey]

Thinking back to the OPs question, he might have a point. Although we aren't likely to win the next World Cup, we have at least won it once unlike most other countries. We might not have a driver who will win the next WRC, but we have had in the past. Our snooker players have at some point been the best in the world, our rugby team won the World Cup a few years back etc, etc.

So, my question is this:

Is Britain the Greatest Historic Sporting nation on Earth?

i.e. - has any other country ever been as successful as we are at so many sports. Brazil may have won 5 World Cups, but I bet they are st at cricket.

[AW111]

Pints said:

Not much investment at grass roots level means the results in the international game are far lower than they could be.

In Australia, New Zealand and South Africa, kids seem to be born and bred into a rugby or cricket team and the results in the international game speak for themselves (especially considering the results per capita). I'm certain if they were bothered with "soccer", they might actually start achieving on that field too.

I wonder what the couch potato ratio is for different nations : what percentage of kids/adults play sport vs watching, and does that reflect medal tallies?

[Dblue]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Thankyou4calling said:

Football is often won or lost on the tiniest decision and only one team can win.

England must've been very unlucky, that so many tiny decisions have gone against us in the last 49 years, and we've won fk all. And here's me thinking it was because we were utter st!

So where's the long list of other nations who aren't absolute st that have won the world cup or euros?? More than 9 other nations or less? Italy, Brazil, Germany,Spain, Argentina and, bizarrely, Uruguay have won the WC, in addition Holland, Denmark, Russia, Greece and Czechoslovalkia have won the Euros. Each once only so I reckon that puts them behind England in achievement.

England are perennial quarter finalists, they fail to get further, usually on penalties but so do other "big" nations regularly.

But there's far far too much emphasis put on 1 sport here. Brazil are pretty poor in Olympics , play very few other world wide sports with any degree of success for example.
so just being one of the handful of nations more successful at football is not enough.

[Thankyou4calling]

Dblue said:

So where's the long list of other nations who aren't absolute st that have won the world cup or euros?? More than 9 other nations or less? Italy, Brazil, Germany,Spain, Argentina and, bizarrely, Uruguay have won the WC, in addition Holland, Denmark, Russia, Greece and Czechoslovalkia have won the Euros. Each once only so I reckon that puts them behind England in achievement.

England are perennial quarter finalists, they fail to get further, usually on penalties but so do other "big" nations regularly.

But there's far far too much emphasis put on 1 sport here. Brazil are pretty poor in Olympics , play very few other world wide sports with any degree of success for example.
so just being one of the handful of nations more successful at football is not enough.

That's a good post.

I knew it'd be a controversial topic but I wanted people to look at all high level sport.

Of course you can say Pakistan are fantastic at Kabbadi or cite the Sherpas of Nepal as great climbers.

I am saying that the UK has representation at the highest level and is in contention in nearly every sport that is widely played.

Horse racing, fencing, curling, darts, football, boxing, cycling, bodybuilding, squash, badminton, bowls, archery, power boating, sailing, I could go on but the fact is we are an absolute top draw sporting nation whether participating or staging.

[Brave Fart]

Thankyou4calling said:

I am saying that the UK has representation at the highest level and is in contention in nearly every sport that is widely played.
Horse racing, fencing, curling, darts, football, boxing, cycling, bodybuilding, squash, badminton, bowls, archery, power boating, sailing, I could go on but the fact is we are an absolute top draw sporting nation whether participating or staging.

TY4C I agree with you; our top level participation across a wide range of sports is something we should celebrate - but we won't, 'cos we're British. By the way, no-one has mentioned golf, which we're pretty good at too.
And, when we stage top class sports events, we do it rather well: Henley, Cheltenham, Goodwood Festival of Speed, Wimbledon, The Open, "Tour de Yorkshire", Test matches in cricket, this year's rugby World Cup, the 2012 Olympics.......you get the picture. Hey, we even attract NFL teams to Wembley.
To those of you muttering "yeah but we're rubbish at football"; no we're not "rubbish" we just under-achieve in (mens)tournament finals. Largely, I think that is because the Premier League imports foreign talent rather than develop our own, and also because it is a fast/furious/exciting brand of play that just doesn't work against superior technicians.
Disappointing footie aside, we should be proud of how we participate in, and stage, top level sports. Quietly proud though, it's the British way.

[johnxjsc1985]

Cycling,Rowing and Boxing all do very well. Golf is well represented and Tennis with AM is doing ok.
Lots of other non mainstream Sports will do very well its just that they are not on TV.
i would say we are a nation of Sports lovers.

[The Mad Monk]

Leafspring said:

World Darts tournament in Japan last night both finalists were British (Taylor and Wright... Taylor won despite an epic comeback by Snake Bite )

Sorry, but darts isn't a sport.

'Sport' means that that the activity involves strenuous physical exertion. You can insert the word rigorous or violent or sustained instead of strenuous if you wish, but I am sure you can see what I am getting at.

If darts is a sport, then so is snooker, billiards, bridge, chess, reading, walking round a museum etc etc. You can't play a sport wearing a bow tie and a waistcoat.

Boxing is not a sport because the object of the exercise is to inflict physical harm or damage upon your opponent. That can't be sporting. The highest accolade in the boxing world is to knock out your opponent, by definition you have caused some degree of brain damage to that person. That can't be good practice.

I now await well argued posts as to why I am wrong.

[Moonhawk]

The Mad Monk said:

'Sport' means that that the activity involves strenuous physical exertion.

Actually - it doesn't.

The dictionary defines "Sport" as:

"a game, competition, or activity needing physical effort and skill that is played or done according to rules, for enjoyment and/or as a job:"

It doesn't define what level of physical effort is required to meet the criteria of a sport (e.g. "strenuous").

Also, SportAccord (the umbrella organisation for all (Olympic and non-Olympic) international sports) - define a sport as:

• have an element of competition
• be in no way harmful to any living creature
• not rely on equipment provided by a single supplier (excluding proprietary games such as arena football)
• not rely on any "luck" element specifically designed into the sport

Both darts and snookers meet these definitions.

[The Mad Monk]

Moonhawk said:

The Mad Monk said:

'Sport' means that that the activity involves strenuous physical exertion.

Actually - it doesn't.

The dictionary defines "Sport" as:

"a game, competition, or activity needing physical effort and skill that is played or done according to rules, for enjoyment and/or as a job:"

It doesn't define what level of physical effort is required to meet the criteria of a sport (e.g. "strenuous").

Also, SportAccord (the umbrella organisation for all (Olympic and non-Olympic) international sports) - define a sport as:

• have an element of competition
• be in no way harmful to any living creature
• not rely on equipment provided by a single supplier (excluding proprietary games such as arena football)
• not rely on any "luck" element specifically designed into the sport

Both darts and snookers meet these definitions.

My original definition was of my own devising.

My Oxford Reference Dictionary defines sport as 'an athletic (especially outdoor) activity'.

Are you seriously suggesting that, say, snooker and darts are sports and therefore it follows that there is no reason why they shouldn't be in the Olympics?

Your second definition by SportAccord 'Be in no way harmful to any living creature', would seem to exclude boxing, both from a definition of sport and also, of course, from the Olympics.

[mudflaps]

AJS- said:

We're pretty lousy at baseball, American football

They're not sports they're 'advertising opportunities'.

Grown men playing rounders and padding-up for rugby. Pah.

[Amateurish]

We are good at any sport where we can spend money to gain an advantage, e.g. cycling, rowing, horse riding, motor sport, sailing.

[TEKNOPUG]

Amateurish said:

We are good at any sport where we can spend money to gain an advantage, e.g. cycling, rowing, horse riding, motor sport, sailing.

No. We're good at any sport that involves sitting.....

On then basis that we invented modern, competitive sport; the sports themselves, the rules, the framework for competition etc, the answer is unquestionably "Yes".

With regards to current individual & team success, that's harder to quantify and will change year on year.

[London424]

I completely agree with the OP on this.

When you take the wide view of sports then Britain is massively competitive in almost every sport you can think of that is played on a global scale.

Yes there are coutries that are better at individual sports, but as a country they don't have the breadth of talent. If Britain only played 1 or 2 sports at the world level and that is where all sport funding was focused then all of the best athletes would gravitate to that sport.

At the moment there could be athletes trying to make it playing football, that could be world class in another discipline.

[Pints]

AW111 said:

I wonder what the couch potato ratio is for different nations : what percentage of kids/adults play sport vs watching, and does that reflect medal tallies?

As an adult I'm more couch potato than runner bean, but as a kid there was really no option. After school sports were mandatory and every school field was jammed with kids from the age of six actively participating in sport after school and on weekends, either in matches or practicing. If you were any good at rugby, cricket, athletics, etc, the local provincial spotters were always out at the schools looking to put together the junior teams. If you were good enough, this meant holiday coaching clinics and playing your sport at provincial or national level.

Not everyone reaches that level, but the investment was there to get kids playing from a very young age, providing the right training for school teachers to teach the youngsters the rules and tactics of the games, and identifying and nurturing talent to help build national squads.

And if you didn't have the talent to be part of that squad, at least they've built one heck of a fan base of couch potatoes.

Edited by Pints on Saturday 4th July 08:01

[Rosscow]

To answer the original question and thread title, I would say that yes, we probably are. And if we're not, then we surely must be in the top 3.

[CR6ZZ]

This site is quite interesting. It does, however, exclude some sports that may be dear to the average PHers heart (e.g. motorsport, shooting, darts, etc.).

http://www.greatestsportingnation.com

[stephen300o]

No.

[Thankyou4calling]

stephen300o said:

No.

Care to elaborate on how you arrived at your answer

[BJG1]

Kenty said:

No, Australia is by far.

Would have agreed with this until the last Olympics.

[BJG1]

The Mad Monk said:

I only wish it were true.

As a nation considering our size and relative wealth, we underperform.

Conversely, consider New Zealand. They outperform.

We don't under-perform - when you take it tiny nations or those that only won one or two medals, we got more golds per capita than anyone else at the Olympics. We have competitive teams in Rugby, Football and cricket. We are the best in the world at Darts, Snooker andMotorsports. We have one of the best tennis players in the world. We are really fking good at sport for a nation of our size, a good comparison would be Germany, who have more people, similar economy and are basically just a bit better at football and lifting weights.