Juliano wrote:Gudris wrote:It has nothing to do with the number of people in a country, it is more about system and development, if quantity matter, China, and India would be top in every sports game, but they are not :)
This is partly true, but when the organizations are of similar quality, the more people you have the bigger the pool of potential players is. Brazil have won 5 titles partly because they are a country of 150 millions inhabitants in which every male has kicked a football once.
More controversially, one can also argue that having a more diverse population, ethnically, also contributes to a country's success as well as the impact of inequality within fairly wealthy countries. Significant inequality arguably leads to poorer groups being more likely to see sports as a significant motivator for getting out out of poverty rather than say, education.
The U.S. has a HUGE population, and while our tradition of soccer is developing its sustainability -- due to systemic problems about playing/access to the sport -- is also a key factor exacerbating this. The issue former manager and Germany star Klinsmann argued was how the US pool of players come from a "pay for play" system composed of more often white, suburban and more generally well off young people. For poor Americans other sports are seen as "the way out."
Brazil has a more diverse historical population, but it's inequality also impacts the poorest -- often of African/indiginous descent -- seeing soccer as possibly the only real path out of the favelas (slums) that also gains significant fame and glory.
Croatia, interestingly enough was part of the former Yugoslavia, which if existed today would have one of the best squads in soccer, easily. Serbia and B&H especially have some huge players, but some would come from others. Now, this region is an ethnically a diverse place with various ethnic groups which had significant conflict surrounding these differences that connects to its breakup, war, atrocities and tension that still exists heavily. Yet I would gather that this region of Earth is filled with a mix of various groups from surrounding areas if you traced their linage. The players from this country almost all came from very tough life experiences surrounding the conflicts in the region after the fall of Communism so that could also perhaps explain their success.
France won, similarly as they did in 1998, with key players from impoverished and immigrant group backgrounds, coming from hardened life situations with little access to opportunity for financial success outside of sports success.
India and China have elements of this regarding poverty, but the diversity is limited, and success in sport as a way of "making it" is not as widely accepted in their cultures as it is in these other countries, as far as I understand, nor is soccer the biggest sport -- unsure in China, but really it's growing -- while probably cricket in India.
Forum Po Po and #33 for a reason...
7/15/2018 9:51 AM
