In Argentina: The working class hates Rugby

[nickdnz]

Conrad - you kind of seem like a racial imperialist...

Better genetics etc...

 

[Peat]

Conrad - you kind of seem like a racial imperialist...

Better genetics etc...

I don't know whether he's a racial imperialist or just clumsy in expressing himself, but he does have a point. Some ethnicities throw up ideal rugby player material more readily than others. The Pacific Islanders are an obvious example; at the other end of the spectrum, the Mbenga and Mbuti (Pygmies in other words) aren't going to throw up too many international rugby players.

However, it shouldn't be taken too far. Rugby is still sorta a game for all shapes and sizes. I believe the native black populations of South Africa tend to be fairly short. I doubt we will see too many locks from that population anytime soon. But we do see wingers, some back-rows and so on - Saffas, correct me if wrong.

I'd also point out that childhood nutrition is probably more important than genetics - look at how the average height of Europeans has shot up as the continent has recovered from the World Wars and introduced better food security. Anyone who thinks that childhood nutrition isn't important is not talking a language I regard as sane. Compared the Lions teams of the 60s and 70s to the early 90s in terms of size. There's a noticeable difference and the 90s team would streamroller even the great teams of the early 70s based on that. You could make a case for McBride and Meads being the two greatest locks to ever play the game, transport them through time and man of their size are now undersized blindsides.

I don't see any huge controversy or stupidity in saying that children from disadvantaged backgrounds are unlikely to make it in pro rugby; they are unlikely to be as athletically developed as kids with better diets when people are selecting kids for elite coaching and they're unlikely to catch up. There will always be outliers but not many. Those who do make it are likely to be wingers or ball-players, positions where size and strength are not as important.

All of that said - virtually every country with a decent sized population produces enough top class athletes of different shapes and sizes that it seems likely that they would produce a good rugby team if culturally inclined and if they possessed a good coaching set-up for producing players (albeit maybe quite a few would have difficulties sourcing locks). It's not a mysterious game, or one solely for supermen or Samoans, no.

 

[marianodan]

Conrad - you kind of seem like a racial imperialist...

Better genetics etc...

Agree, his concepts are good, but his vocabulary picks are...


Also Conrad, did you really reaaaally had to post a pic of a "pibe villero escabiando" as example of the average native american argentine teenager?

PS: There are very few purely "native american descendants" in Argentina nowadays, most of the people -I guess- Conrad is thinking about are mix of european and native actually.

 

[Jaguares]

Agree, his concepts are good, but his vocabulary picks are...


Also Conrad, did you really reaaaally had to post a pic of a "pibe villero escabiando" as example of the average native american argentine teenager?

PS: There are very few purely "native american descendants" in Argentina nowadays, most of the people -I guess- Conrad is thinking about are mix of european and native actually.

A ver genio, como haces para explicarle a esta gente que son en su mayoría ingleses, franceses, kiwis, aussies, galeses, canadienses y de todas partes del mundo la diferencia coyuntural que existe en la sociedad argentina entre "peronistas-radicales", "kirchneristas-gorilas", "descendientes de europeos - descendientes de bolivianos/peruanos/provincias de norte", "futboleros-rugbiers" y etc,etc,etc. cuando ellos viven al otro lado del mundo, tienen una idiosincrasia totalmente diferente a la Argentina? Como haces para explicarles en 10 lineas eso a un kiwi que vive en Hamilton y que lo unico que conoce de Argentina es Hugo Porta y Los Pumas??? IMPOSIBLE y menos en 10 lineas.

En Argentina te guste o no hay diferencias raciales, quizas no son tan profundas y tan drásticas como en otros países pero existen. O me vas a negar que no existieron diferentes olas migratorias en los últimos 100 años? Primero una ola importante de europeos, principalmente italianos, españoles y algunos judíos que "hicieron" este país y en las ultimas décadas hay una ola migratoria de países limítrofes como Bolivia y Peru, los europeos hace muchas decadas dejaron de llegar, ahora solo llegan bolivianos, peruanos y otras nacionalidades de paises limitrofes. Y con los Kirchner ni qué decir, esto se potenció 20 veces con el Plan Patria Grande, con el cual le regalan el dni a cualquier boliviano/peruano con 2 años de residencia en el país. Buscá en Google estadisticas de las principales villas de capital y conurbano y vas a ver que estan copadas en un importante porcentaje por inmigrantes de paises limitrofes, que en su mayoría son etnias nativas de America. Por ejemplo la villa 1-11-14 del Bajo Flores está copada en un 90% por peruanos. Poné en google: "Peruanos Villa 1-11-14" vas a ver que te van a salir muchos videos. Poné: "Bolivianos Villa 31" a ver que te sale. Ojo, no lo digo ni de foema despectiva ni discriminatoria, simplemente estoy contando la realidad, no estoy opinando si es algo positivo o negativo, ese es otro debate que no viene al caso. Sus descendientes son millones, (En algunas se calculan que sus descendientes son de 4 a 5 millones, si hay 1 millon de bolivianos en el pais y cada uno tiene 4 hijos, no es una locura ese numero sino que es bastante real) esa diferencia racial te guste o no existe, no soy facho ni racista pero existe. Nunca vas a ver a un boliviano o descendiente de boliviano jugando rugby.

Ahora bien, andá a explicarles a estos muchachos con una mentalidad totalmente diferente a la nuestra las diferencias que existen en la sociedad argentina y en 10 lineas. Mi explicación no es 100% perfecta, y puede ser un poco exagerada por momentos. Pero justamente es así porque va dirigida a un público que no sabe nada de Argentina y tiene otra mentalidad. Mi explicación es la perfecta para que ellos entiendan mas o menos de qué se trata esto. Y muchos están interpretando.

Explicale a un australiano lo que es que te maten por UN celular en la calle. Cuando que en su país ni siquiera hay villas, le podes explicar 350 veces que no lo van a entender porque su realidad es totalmente diferente a la realidad de latinoamerica.

Hay muchas diferencias entre ellos y nosotros como para explicarles al pie de la letra algo que nunca van a entender. Por ejemplo para ellos, que en su mayoría son de primer mundo, pobre es aquel que no puede tener casa propia y vive en alquiler, pero es alguien que aunque sea trabaja de obrero y tiene algun tipo de formación. Para nosotros pobre es alguien que ni siquiera tiene cloaca, literalmente caga a cielo abierto, no tiene acceso a ningun tipo de educacion, no tiene las necesidades basicas cubiertas (Comida, vivienda, vestimenta) y sale a robar enfierrado.

Entonces, genio mundial. Como haces para explicarles eso a estos muchachos en 5 lineas? Voy a leer tu explicacion atentamente. La mía tal vez no es 100% exacta pero se adapta a ellos, de modo tal que entiendan mas o menos de qué se trata esto.

Y si, el villero escabiando se adapta perfectamente a los descendientes de bolivianos y peruanos que copan todas las villas (esto lo digo sin ningun tipo de discriminacion) y tambien a la gente del interior, de lugares como Salta, Formosa o Tucuman, que tambien copan las villas y no son precisamente rubios, de ojos azules y de 1,90 y no son precisamente aquellos que se destacan jugando al rugby. La mayoría juega al futbol y odia al rugby porque es el deporte de los "chetos". Andá explicale a un aussie el significado de la palabra CHETO, ya que en la jerga villera, cheto no es precisamente alguien que tenga 100 millones de dolares en el banco. Cualquiera que sea mas o menos blanquito, tenga el comedor completo y se exprese mas o menos bien, es "CHETO" para la jerga villera o miento? Como le explicas ese concepto a un aussie que vive en Perth cuando que en su país el 99,9% tienen la dentadura completa, tiene algun tipo de educacion y en Australia no existen villas de emergencia ni analfabetos?=

Saludos

 

[dasNdanger]

you...dirty...raging racist BASTERD....



Oh and btw uhm, how does HITLER find his way seriously in a Rugby forum thread ? I would very much like to ask that question.
And Georgians aren't Slavic ??...

Big E...time to take your meds like a good boy.


RE: Argentina and rugby:

As in many other countries, football/soccer is just more accessible to lower income kids, just like basketball in the States. Firstly, the rules are not that complicated, unlike in rugby. Football is an easy game to learn. Secondly, all that's needed is a ball (and net) and a couple kids. It can be played in the streets - no need for soft turf like a park, pitch, or back yard. No need for a lot of kids to make a game - one-on-one play is quite popular in both [soccer] football and basketball. The game is just easier for kids with less to get involved in, and feel good about their street-level sporting accomplishments.

Getting involved in rugby is a bit more difficult for kids who have less. You can't play it one-on-one in the streets. You need some sort of team, you need soft ground, you need someone who has a grasp of the rules so everyone has some idea how the game is actually played.

Physical conditioning really isn't an issue. It's not that kids don't get into rugby because they're too small, but that they're too small because they don't get into rugby. If a kid really wanted to play the game he'd learn how to eat and exercise to be fit for the game (even in poorer communities eating well isn't impossible - it just takes discipline for kids to eat fruits and veggies instead of chips and soda).

So, it's not the kids. It's the community as a whole. If Argentina (or any other country) wants to build its rugby culture then it must do something to make it easier for lower income kids to be able to participate in the game. School programs or community programs that can offer kids a place to play, training, and - most importantly - a team, are very important. Rugby - unlike [soccer] football - IS A TEAM SPORT. There is no other way to really play it. You can't just have two guys tackling each other on the street - it'll look a bit suspect. So these kids need a team, and through that team they will learn sportsmanship, physical conditioning, teamwork, camaraderie - stuff that can actually keep them off the streets and out of gangs. In other words, it could actually benefit poorer communities to promote rugby as a viable sport. Of course, it all takes money, and for that there would have to be some sort of financial support, probably from the private rather than the public sector.

Bottom line - [soccer] football is just more accessible for those with less. To make rugby more accessible for those same people takes resources that many communities just don't have. It has nothing at all to do with the mental or physical abilities (or appearance) of the kids, but the resources available to those kids. Make the resources available, and those kids who are inclined to participate in a more physically challenging sport such as rugby will come.



das

 

[Jaguares]

Conrad - you kind of seem like a racial imperialist...

Better genetics etc...

There are too many differences between you and us. The vast majority of people who write on this forum are from NZ, England, Australia, Wales, Ireland, Scotland, Canada and USA. Most of you live in first world countries, then in their countries no child malnutrition, you don't have huge ghettos like in Latin America, you don't have the crime rates we have, you have good education, good nutrition and many opportunities for ALL your citizens. You are the best countries in the world.

Perhaps the only people who can understand the Argentina's idiosyncrasies in this forum are South Africans, since they aren't a country of first world and have similar problems to ours as: Child Malnutrition, huge ghettos, high levels of crime and much more. So there is a lot of cultural difference between you and us. You are the first world, we are a developing country. The explanation I wrote is the best that can be given to people who don't know the idiosyncrasies of developing countries.

As I was discussing with the forum member from Argentina , there are many differences between a first world country and developing country so that you can understand the differences. You would have to live in Argentina or in any country in Latin America to understand certain things.

It's easy to speak about a developing country from a first world country , we have too many problems here. Many more than you can imagine your . I have a female friend who lives in Sydney and tells me that the differences between Australia and Argentina are very huge. She said that in Australia there is no poverty , that Australia is a serious country, no ghettos in Australia, there no criminals in the streets. So it's a very different reality than Argentina, you have very different from our customs, then it's very difficult to explain the situation that exists in Argentina .

The thread I wrote isn't perfect but is perfect for people like you, guys from the first world.

Big E...time to take your meds like a good boy.


RE: Argentina and rugby:

As in many other countries, football/soccer is just more accessible to lower income kids, just like basketball in the States. Firstly, the rules are not that complicated, unlike in rugby. Football is an easy game to learn. Secondly, all that's needed is a ball (and net) and a couple kids. It can be played in the streets - no need for soft turf like a park, pitch, or back yard. No need for a lot of kids to make a game - one-on-one play is quite popular in both [soccer] football and basketball. The game is just easier for kids with less to get involved in, and feel good about their street-level sporting accomplishments.

Getting involved in rugby is a bit more difficult for kids who have less. You can't play it one-on-one in the streets. You need some sort of team, you need soft ground, you need someone who has a grasp of the rules so everyone has some idea how the game is actually played.

Physical conditioning really isn't an issue. It's not that kids don't get into rugby because they're too small, but that they're too small because they don't get into rugby. If a kid really wanted to play the game he'd learn how to eat and exercise to be fit for the game (even in poorer communities eating well isn't impossible - it just takes discipline for kids to eat fruits and veggies instead of chips and soda).

So, it's not the kids. It's the community as a whole. If Argentina (or any other country) wants to build its rugby culture then it must do something to make it easier for lower income kids to be able to participate in the game. School programs or community programs that can offer kids a place to play, training, and - most importantly - a team, are very important. Rugby - unlike [soccer] football - IS A TEAM SPORT. There is no other way to really play it. You can't just have two guys tackling each other on the street - it'll look a bit suspect. So these kids need a team, and through that team they will learn sportsmanship, physical conditioning, teamwork, camaraderie - stuff that can actually keep them off the streets and out of gangs. In other words, it could actually benefit poorer communities to promote rugby as a viable sport. Of course, it all takes money, and for that there would have to be some sort of financial support, probably from the private rather than the public sector.

Bottom line - [soccer] football is just more accessible for those with less. To make rugby more accessible for those same people takes resources that many communities just don't have. It has nothing at all to do with the mental or physical abilities (or appearance) of the kids, but the resources available to those kids. Make the resources available, and those kids who are inclined to participate in a more physically challenging sport such as rugby will come.

das

100% agree with you, you understood my message. I just add something, for the same reason that you explained it, football is much easier to spread the rugby for all the reasons you gave (for nothing is the most popular sport in the world) is very difficult competition between rugby and football, as they have too many advantages over us. They need less resources (don't even need a field to teach the football to their kids and we need a field to teach rugby to their kids) then here in Argentina NEVER rugby will overcome football because for poor people, football is cheaper and requires less investment and less than rugby. That's another reason why rugby will never be as popular as football here. And that's an uneven struggle we face here rugby supporters, rugby has grown a lot here. Today we are one of the countries with the most amateurs players in the world (110,000 amateurs players) and we have managed to belong to Tier 1, no small feat considering all the difficulties that we have.

I don't know whether he's a racial imperialist or just clumsy in expressing himself, but he does have a point. Some ethnicities throw up ideal rugby player material more readily than others. The Pacific Islanders are an obvious example; at the other end of the spectrum, the Mbenga and Mbuti (Pygmies in other words) aren't going to throw up too many international rugby players.

However, it shouldn't be taken too far. Rugby is still sorta a game for all shapes and sizes. I believe the native black populations of South Africa tend to be fairly short. I doubt we will see too many locks from that population anytime soon. But we do see wingers, some back-rows and so on - Saffas, correct me if wrong.

I'd also point out that childhood nutrition is probably more important than genetics - look at how the average height of Europeans has shot up as the continent has recovered from the World Wars and introduced better food security. Anyone who thinks that childhood nutrition isn't important is not talking a language I regard as sane. Compared the Lions teams of the 60s and 70s to the early 90s in terms of size. There's a noticeable difference and the 90s team would streamroller even the great teams of the early 70s based on that. You could make a case for McBride and Meads being the two greatest locks to ever play the game, transport them through time and man of their size are now undersized blindsides.

I don't see any huge controversy or stupidity in saying that children from disadvantaged backgrounds are unlikely to make it in pro rugby; they are unlikely to be as athletically developed as kids with better diets when people are selecting kids for elite coaching and they're unlikely to catch up. There will always be outliers but not many. Those who do make it are likely to be wingers or ball-players, positions where size and strength are not as important.

All of that said - virtually every country with a decent sized population produces enough top class athletes of different shapes and sizes that it seems likely that they would produce a good rugby team if culturally inclined and if they possessed a good coaching set-up for producing players (albeit maybe quite a few would have difficulties sourcing locks). It's not a mysterious game, or one solely for supermen or Samoans, no.

You understood my message, thanks bud!. Unlike others who accuse me of "racist" and "imperialist"
:Blinky:

 

[Big Ewis]

mmmm, something needs to be said here:
stating realities and facts about life observations over the topic of race, genes and inherent aptitudes isn't racist.

- Saying black people do this or that, white people do this or that isn't racist; it's mere observations and logical conclusions can be drawn from constantly repeated observations.

- Saying black people do this and I hate them all for it and they're an inferior race is racist.

Enormous difference, a universe in between the two in fact: one is neutral and gives no judgment, the other is personal bias and emotion and most importantly, leads to hatred, something that's necessarily wrong no matter the context/period.

Sticking the racist or imperialist card to someone for that is just another fallacious logic that helps confuse the world and hide the truths that occur in it as the world was always intended to be.

 

[Jaguares]

Conrad,
I have an impression that you never read my post.
I have never said that rugby is very easy to play. I was not rugby player (used to wrestle for few years in childhood and only played basketball and football in the street or school gym), but I am watching it since 1996. I have a friend who used to play rugby in Georgian NT.
And please, where did you saw me criticizing rugby players? I am criticizing the attitude (including of rugby officials) which hinders development of rugby and is restrictive by its nature ("we are special" and "few can play rugby" are from this ,,opera")
Or why are you trying to explain that Georgian backs are not as good as Argentinian backs? Did I said that they are? I just said that in youth teams (U-20 and U-18), Georgia has good backs due to well developing infrastructure and new training system.
And can you tell me what I said foolish about Georgian rugby?
Is it fair for Georgia not to play test against tier 1 nations, while Italy is granted all kind of favors and despite this fact there is bigger difference between England and Italy than between Italy and Georgia? And why do you think that example of Argentina is good in this case (despite the fact that Ireland of 1999 and Ireland today are completely different level teams)? Argentina was not treated quite well throughout the years by rugby officials. You shall know it better than me.
And believe me, Georgia would become tier 1 rugby nation no matter if we get big tests outside WC or not. It is just a matter of time. Without stupid protectionism (justified by conservative ideology), we can just do it faster. Thats the point.

As regards the working class in your country, as I see I have better impression about them than you. Have no idea why you offend the ability of your co-nationals, as many of them spread your countries name worldwide.
Anyway, you must know better, but in my country ,,violent" sports like rugby, wrestling, judo and etc. are mostly played by working class and they are quite successful.

P.S. I am not very active here due to following reasons:
- lack of time
- when I have time I prefer to post in rugby unit of forum.ge (Georgian resource) where a lot of former and acting rugby players discuss various issues (even few guys playing or used to play in Top 14 read and post in this forum). And you will never hear from them that they are "special" and such funny things.

I read your post, which is why I noticed that you have never played rugby, you're not a rugby player. So this is a discussion between a basketball player/supporter (you) and a rugby player/supporter (Me). You say that right now Georgia has good young backs, OK, is your thought. Until I see those guys against the best backs internationally like Israel Folau or Mike Brown, I'm not sure if they are as good as you say they are, you understand?

I want to see the Georgian kids against the Argentinian kids, they are very very good, really. In this thread you can meet some:

http://www.therugbyforum.com/thread...ntina-A)-won-the-Pacific-Cup-2014-(Undefeated)

I think Italy has been good in the 6N, they have beaten Scotland, Wales and France not long ago. So they definitely are better than Georgia. You just want the IRB gives a lot of money to Georgia, so it would be very easy. You have to get to Tier 1, as Argentina did, without support and then there you can add conditions.

You can't compare rugby with other sports like football or basketball because we have already explained 200 times in this thread the reasons why sports like football are much cheaper than rugby. Football is just easier in poor developing countries, which is why countries like Brazil and Argentina, despite being in developing countries, are powers in those sports. While Brazil and Argentina could NEVER be powers in the Olympic Swimming or Ice Hockey, because they are sports much more expensive than football and need a very huge infrastructure and a lot money, ok?

I repeat, and this isn't racist. Not all countries have the same genetic, the blacks are faster than whites. The Pacific Islanders are bigger and stronger than the Japanese. That is the reality, the average European is larger than the average Latino. So maybe in your country, the boys from the working class can be competitive in rugby. In Argentina it isn't because our boys from the working class are too weak and lack resources, ok?

Cheers

 

[marianodan]

Y si, el villero escabiando se adapta perfectamente a los descendientes de bolivianos y peruanos que copan todas las villas (esto lo digo sin ningun tipo de discriminacion) y tambien a la gente del interior, de lugares como Salta, Formosa o Tucuman, que tambien copan las villas y no son precisamente rubios, de ojos azules y de 1,90 y no son precisamente aquellos que se destacan jugando al rugby. La mayoría juega al futbol y odia al rugby porque es el deporte de los "chetos". Andá explicale a un aussie el significado de la palabra CHETO, ya que en la jerga villera, cheto no es precisamente alguien que tenga 100 millones de dolares en el banco. Cualquiera que sea mas o menos blanquito, tenga el comedor completo y se exprese mas o menos bien, es "CHETO" para la jerga villera o miento? Como le explicas ese concepto a un aussie que vive en Perth cuando que en su país el 99,9% tienen la dentadura completa, tiene algun tipo de educacion y en Australia no existen villas de emergencia ni analfabetos?=

El problema es que usas una foto del villero-escabio como ejemplo del fanático/jugador de futbol común o del mestizo común (como si los chicos "bien" de zona norte no escabiaran como bestias también)... ningún pibe de la 1-11-14 que vive escabiando o está desnutrido llega a primera o siquiera queda en un club, no exagerés. Es una obviedad que los rugbiers son físicamente más fuertes, no hay necesidad de esteriotipar para probarlo.

Aparte no entiendo el énfasis que ponés en los peruanos o bolivianos, la mitad de los futbolistas son tan "blanquitos" como cualquier rugbier.

 

[LeinsterMan (NotTigsMan)]

I will say this rugby in Argentina sounds a bit elitist, anyone honestly can play rugby given the right surroundings and attitude the problem is whether or not they want learn.

They have been plenty of young footballers who have change to rugby in they mid teens and have gone pro. An natural athlete can adapt to most sports given time and correct training.

 

[Jaguares]

El problema es que usas una foto del villero-escabio como ejemplo del fanático/jugador de futbol común o del mestizo común (como si los chicos "bien" de zona norte no escabiaran como bestias también)... ningún pibe de la 1-11-14 que vive escabiando o está desnutrido llega a primera o siquiera queda en un club, no exagerés. Es una obviedad que los rugbiers son físicamente más fuertes, no hay necesidad de esteriotipar para probarlo.

Aparte no entiendo el énfasis que ponés en los peruanos o bolivianos, la mitad de los futbolistas son tan "blanquitos" como cualquier rugbier.

Nunca dije que los chicos "bien" de zona norte no toman alcohol. De donde sacaste eso??? Porque no lo mencioné NUNCA. Simplemente puse la primera foto que encontré de un argentino de clase baja. Casualmente es de los saqueos en Cordoba, te detenes en pequeñeces, si queres cambio la foto y lo pongo a Carlitos Tevez cuando era jugador de inferiores, el punto es que la clase baja en general tiene físico de futbolista (Muy flaquitos). Es mentira? No tenes que guiarte 100% en lo que dije porque como ya te expliqué, es una explicación dirigida a ciudadanos del primer mundo que no tienen ni la menor idea de como son los países en vías de desarrollo como Argentina o cualquiera de Latinoamerica.

Nunca dije que los chicos de las villas que viven tomando alcohol llegan a primera, jamás dije eso. Decís cosas que nunca escribí. Si digo que la mayoría de los jugadores de primera provienen de las villas y muchos de ellos son "morochitos" aunque suene mal y no te guste.

Esta nota de Clarin DEMUESTRA que la mayoría de los mejores jugadores son surgidos de las villas:

http://www.clarin.com/edicion-impresa/futbol-infantil-chicos-cobran-jugar_0_1106889384.html

"En el ambiente se sostiene que las zonas donde se encuentran los mejores jugadores son Pacheco, Tigre, José C. Paz, San Miguel, Moreno, Quilmes, Florencio Varela y Laferrere". Decime genio, esas localidades no se caracterizan acaso por tener muchísimas villas????

Queres ejemplos concretos?

Carlos Tevez - Fuerte Apache, Riquelme - Villa de Don Torcuato, Ortega - Zona pobre de Jujuy, hay algunos casos de jugadores como Zavaleta, que vino de Arrecifes, que vendrían a ser los "blanquitos" que vos decís que en su mayoría vienen del interior. Pero lejos están de ser clase media alta, son personas en su mayoría de escasos recursos, blancos tal vez, pero no tienen recursos.

Ahora bien, si vos decís que no hay diferencias entre los blanquitos del futbol y los blanquitos del rugby, poné a uno de estos muchachos que juegan en las inferiores del futbol a entrenar en un club de rugby. Un Lanzini que pesa 66 kilos o a un Tevez cuando era de inferiores, se come la paliza de su vida!!!!. Como vas a hacer para financiarle todos los gastos que tiene un jugador de rugby si ni siquiera pueden comer una dieta básica? El mismo Carlos Tevez contaba que incluso ya habia debutado en la primera de Boca y no tenia para comer en Fuerte Apache.

Y eso de los bolivianos y peruanos, me parece que vivís en otro planeta. La mayoría de las clases pobres argentinas, en los años recientes, son descendientes de ciudadanos de paises limitrofes. Por ejemplo el propio Kun Aguero, sus padres son paraguayos. Simplemente el que es boliviano no anda por la vida diciendo: "Soy hijo de descendientes bolivianos" porque lo van a discriminar. El Chipi Barijho tambien es descendiente de paraguayos y pudo haber jugado en la selección de Paraguay. Lo mismo para Lucas Barrios que finalmente jugó en la seleccion de Py. Otro caso es este pibe Iturbe que tambien es descendiente de paraguayos. Esa es una realidad, cada vez las villas tienen mas presencia de ciudadanos de países limitrofes y sus hijos que ya son argentinos no andan por la vida con un cartel que diga: "Soy descendiente de bolivianos". Y si tomamos el hecho de que los mejores futbolistas salen de las villas y cada vez las villas tienen mayor cantidad de argentinos hijos de ciudadanos de paises limitrofes, te vas a dar cuenta que no es una locura lo que digo.

Si vos sos del CASI, supuestamente. Agarrá a uno de los chicos que sobresale en las inferiores de algun equipo de futbol y llevalo al casi con unos 45 kgs. Cuando se haga un entrenamiento conjunto entre Primera e Intermedia, lo llega a agarrar un forward de la primera del CASI y lo deja 3 meses hospitalizado. Además el rugby tiene muuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuchas mas lesiones que el futbol, como va a hacer para afrontar todas las lesiones un pibe de la villa? Ante la primer lesion fuerte deja el deporte y vuelve al futbol.

I will say this rugby in Argentina sounds a bit elitist, anyone honestly can play rugby given the right surroundings and attitude the problem is whether or not they want learn.

They have been plenty of young footballers who have change to rugby in they mid teens and have gone pro. An natural athlete can adapt to most sports given time and correct training.

Are you British? Ok, then you don't know the many differences between a first world country (developed country like England) and a third world country (country in process of development like Argentina ).You simply can't say that Ethiopia could be world power in Rugby or in Ice Hockey, when most of the needs of its population isn't covered. They don't even have food to think about the sport.

You never lived in a third world country (country in process of development), you don't know the needs of developing countries. You only know the reality of the first world country, and in those countries is very easy. In the first world countries all have food, all have education. Here in Latin America things are harder, not all the population has food, here is a lot of crime. Thieves kill you on the street with a knife for your mobile , then you do not understand the situation here.

Given the idiosyncrasies of the developed countries, if it's correct. Rugby in Argentina is elitist , but has many reasons for that. Here the working class doesn't have the resources of the UK's working class.

Cheers

 

[edumerino]

El problema es que usas una foto del villero-escabio como ejemplo del fanático/jugador de futbol común o del mestizo común (como si los chicos "bien" de zona norte no escabiaran como bestias también)... ningún pibe de la 1-11-14 que vive escabiando o está desnutrido llega a primera o siquiera queda en un club, no exagerés. Es una obviedad que los rugbiers son físicamente más fuertes, no hay necesidad de esteriotipar para probarlo.

Aparte no entiendo el énfasis que ponés en los peruanos o bolivianos, la mitad de los futbolistas son tan "blanquitos" como cualquier rugbier.

Hello you guys! First post here!

Just joined the Forum and this was the first topic that pick my attention…

It´s possible to understand some Conrad´s point of views but, as marianodan said, it was a show of “extreme stereotyping†thoughts.

It´s pretty similar to the speech of part of our community here in Brazil that easily blame “genetics†or “outsiders†for every problem that we have and, then, use it as explanation for everything from “why we´re not good in rugby†to “why our criminal rates are so highâ€. Seems like it´s not something exclusive of the Brazilians here in Latin America. I don´t know if we´ll develop that fast with this kind of awareness…

But I´m happy to see that guys from Georgia, USA, UK and Argentina doesn´t easily agree with this kind of “absolute truthâ€.

Ow.. Not sure if I understood the point about rugby players/fans being bigger and stronger than football players/fans and having better one-to-one fighting skills… From what I understand, and please make know if I´m wrong, it´s the opposite of what te “rugby culture†claims...

Regards from São Paulo!

 

[marianodan]

Si vos sos del CASI, supuestamente. Agarrá a uno de los chicos que sobresale en las inferiores de algun equipo de futbol y llevalo al casi con unos 45 kgs. Cuando se haga un entrenamiento conjunto entre Primera e Intermedia, lo llega a agarrar un forward de la primera del CASI y lo deja 3 meses hospitalizado. Además el rugby tiene muuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuchas mas lesiones que el futbol, como va a hacer para afrontar todas las lesiones un pibe de la villa? Ante la primer lesion fuerte deja el deporte y vuelve al futbol.

Decime en qué momento dije que alguien con físico de futbolista puede jugar Rugby? porque en serio no lo recuerdo. A mi lo que me molesta es esa categorización cerrada de negro = futbolista porque con ese tipo de categorizaciones este deporte no va a crecer nunca. Imaginate si pudiéramos hacer que otros 10 indios tucumanos con el físico de Montero jugaran al rugby? O Imaginate lo que podría ser si hiciéramos que los chiquito Romero que hay en Misiones se hubieran dedicado al rugby?

No comment acerca de que ponés en duda mi gusto por el rugby sólo porque osé objetarte algo...

 

[jonny24]

If, magically, every football fan in Argentina woke up one morning loving rugby instead of football, I don't think the "body type" thing would hold back development at all. If all of them are smaller guys, then you have teams of smaller guys playing against smaller guys. It seems like it would take away some of the fear of playing a tougher sport. Training facilities/ nutrition comes into play once you reach a certain level of competition, but anyone can play for fun. It's just the attitude/desire to play. The best will rise to the top like always, and I'd bet some quality backs come out those smaller guys.

 

[edumerino]

Indeed marianodan and jonny24

 

[Jaguares]

Decime en qué momento dije que alguien con físico de futbolista puede jugar Rugby? porque en serio no lo recuerdo. A mi lo que me molesta es esa categorización cerrada de negro = futbolista porque con ese tipo de categorizaciones este deporte no va a crecer nunca. Imaginate si pudiéramos hacer que otros 10 indios tucumanos con el físico de Montero jugaran al rugby? O Imaginate lo que podría ser si hiciéramos que los chiquito Romero que hay en Misiones se hubieran dedicado al rugby?

No comment acerca de que ponés en duda mi gusto por el rugby sólo porque osé objetarte algo...

Que parte de: "ES UN MENSAJE DIRIGIDO A PERSONAS DEL PRIMER MUNDO QUE NO ENTIENDEN NUESTRA IDIOSINCRASIA" no entendiste??!

Ergo, la categorización "cerrada" está hecha adrede para que personas de Australia, NZ, Inglaterra y demás países puedan entender un panorama de la situación. A ver si ahora POR FIN te queda más claro el panorama. Vos tenes que pensar que el mensaje va dirigido a kiwis, aussies y demás. La categorización extrema es justamente para que estas personas puedan entender un poquito de la situación. Entonces tu critica a mi categorización "cerrada" es absurda porque la misma tiene razón de ser en torno al público que lee el mensaje.

Y eso de que podríamos hacer que cientos de "indios tucumanos" (sic) como Montero juegen al rugby y por lo tanto tendríamos 100 Jonah Lomu es mentira, porque con ese criterio el fútbol argentino tendría centrales de 1,95 m por doquier, y no los hay. Por eso es que los mejores defensores de los ultimos años en Argentina se caracterizaron por no ser tan altos: Roberto Ayala, Sensini, el mismo Samuel que está lejos de ser un gigante de 2 metros y etc,etc. Sin ir más lejos, uno de los mejores centrales del futbol argentino en la actualidad es colombiano y no es muy alto que digamos. (Balanta)

Saludos

If, magically, every football fan in Argentina woke up one morning loving rugby instead of football, I don't think the "body type" thing would hold back development at all. If all of them are smaller guys, then you have teams of smaller guys playing against smaller guys. It seems like it would take away some of the fear of playing a tougher sport. Training facilities/ nutrition comes into play once you reach a certain level of competition, but anyone can play for fun. It's just the attitude/desire to play. The best will rise to the top like always, and I'd bet some quality backs come out those smaller guys.

Yeah, but that's talking about a fantasy world, is like saying:

If ALL children from Canada will cease to play ice hockey and start playing soccer, then Canada would be the number one Soccer's world power.
If ALL children from Jamaica will cease to do athletics and start doing swimming, then Jamaica would be the number one Swimming's world power.
If ALL children from China will leave the table tennis and start with soccer, then China would be the number one Soccer's world power.

Nonsense, we must talk about the reality.

that easily blame “genetics†or “outsiders†for every problem that we have and, then, use it as explanation for everything from “why we´re not good in rugbyâ€

Hey Brazilian, in which of my posts I said that we aren't good in rugby???! Can you show me that message, please?. Where I wrote that we aren't good in rugby.

Because we are very good in Rugby Union. We are the ONLY team from American that belongs to Tier 1. We have beaten Scotland in their own country, we have defeated Wales in the Millennium Stadium, we have beaten France in their own country (Twice in the WC they organized), we have beaten England in Twickenham (2006), we have achieved a draw against the mighty British Lions (25-25 in 2005). The only 6N team we couldn't beat in their own country is Ireland. We have also defeated Australia on several occasions, we have also beaten the famous Springboks (Bloemfontein 1982) with a team called: "South America XV" but all the starting lineup was composed by Pumas players.

The only SANZAR team we couldn't beat are NZ, we came close on a couple of occasions, but that day is soon. Sooner or later we will win them. In 2016 we will be part of Super Rugby, the best Rugby Club Championship around the world. I NEVER say: "We are bad", nooooooooooo, we are very good. We aren't the best team in the world, we aren't at the level of the Tri Nations teams, but we are very good and we can proudly say that we belong to Tier 1. The Tri Nations teams have 5 franchises in Super Rugby, we will have 1 in 2016, then we are approaching them. If we are ill, remaining for the rest of the world that would give anything to be part of Tier 1??

My thread is to explain the hatred of the Argentina's football supporters against Argentina's Rugby, they are those who say that the Pumas aren't good. But it's just what I say, they don't know anything about rugby. They mock to the Pumas, they mock the Argentina's Rugby, but they know nothing about rugby. They have never seen a Super Rugby game, they don't know what is Aviva Premiership or Top 14. They just look at the World Cups and the big games, they don't care about rugby.

I say that we are good in rugby, so we are part of Tier 1 teams. We aren't the best in the world like ABs or Boks and we must continue to improve, but we are good. We have our failings, we have our mistakes. As Wales had a few years back ago, like France had in the WC 2007. As England who spent 10 years without winning the 6N. Even like ABs in 2009, but in general terms, we are good, we are a Tier 1 team.

Cheers

 

[Big Ewis]

thinking about that 2007 squad...what a shame the level couldn't be maintained around that longer. That whole 2006-2010ish era must be the best ever in Puma history.
I mean in 2007 they were really a force to be reckoned with, not just a lucky squad getting easy matches and easy praise.

Say, how's the coach situation these days ?? What's happening ?

 

[edumerino]

Hey Brazilian, in which of my posts I said that we aren't good in rugby???! Can you show me that message, please?. Where I wrote that we aren't good in rugby.

Because we are very good in Rugby Union. We are the ONLY team from American that belongs to Tier 1. We have beaten Scotland in their own country, we have defeated Wales in the Millennium Stadium, we have beaten France in their own country (Twice in the WC they organized), we have beaten England in Twickenham (2006), we have achieved a draw against the mighty British Lions (25-25 in 2005). The only 6N team we couldn't beat in their own country is Ireland. We have also defeated Australia on several occasions, we have also beaten the famous Springboks (Bloemfontein 1982) with a team called: "South America XV" but all the starting lineup was composed by Pumas players.

The only SANZAR team we couldn't beat are NZ, we came close on a couple of occasions, but that day is soon. Sooner or later we will win them. In 2016 we will be part of Super Rugby, the best Rugby Club Championship around the world. I NEVER say: "We are bad", nooooooooooo, we are very good. We aren't the best team in the world, we aren't at the level of the Tri Nations teams, but we are very good and we can proudly say that we belong to Tier 1. The Tri Nations teams have 5 franchises in Super Rugby, we will have 1 in 2016, then we are approaching them. If we are ill, remaining for the rest of the world that would give anything to be part of Tier 1??

My thread is to explain the hatred of the Argentina's football supporters against Argentina's Rugby, they are those who say that the Pumas aren't good. But it's just what I say, they don't know anything about rugby. They mock to the Pumas, they mock the Argentina's Rugby, but they know nothing about rugby. They have never seen a Super Rugby game, they don't know what is Aviva Premiership or Top 14. They just look at the World Cups and the big games, they don't care about rugby.

I say that we are good in rugby, so we are part of Tier 1 teams. We aren't the best in the world like ABs or Boks and we must continue to improve, but we are good. We have our failings, we have our mistakes. As Wales had a few years back ago, like France had in the WC 2007. As England who spent 10 years without winning the 6N. Even like ABs in 2009, but in general terms, we are good, we are a Tier 1 team.

Cheers

Wow... I was just giving an example, right? Of course we´re not discussing how good Argentina is playing Rugby. By the way, here in Brazil everyone who is involved with Rugby support Los Pumas! Every good game you make against a strong side is important for the whole South American Rugby comunity, which is getting bigger and better.

Well, my point is not this. I just can´t agree with your arguments about the "poor people" in Argentina, about why they hate Rugby....

It´s pretty similar to the speech that use to I hear from some rugbiers here n Brazil, but I thought that you in Argentina, once you´re at least 100 years ahead of us in Rugby, had passed through this questions a long time ago... As our friend from Georgia said, it just stops the growth of Rugby.. There´s no reason to war against footbal and its fans. They"re different sports, they can live happy together.

 

[LittleGuy]

Guys I appreciate the passion but can we try to keep the thread mainly in English, as that is the de facto language of the forum, I'm willing to let Spanish(or other language) posts in from time to time but there are now large parts of the thread that 98% of the membership would have to translate in order to keep up with the conversation.

Cheers Guys.

 

[jonny24]

Yeah, but that's talking about a fantasy world, is like saying:

If ALL children from Canada will cease to play ice hockey and start playing soccer, then Canada would be the number one Soccer's world power.
If ALL children from Jamaica will cease to do athletics and start doing swimming, then Jamaica would be the number one Swimming's world power.
If ALL children from China will leave the table tennis and start with soccer, then China would be the number one Soccer's world power.

Nonsense, we must talk about the reality.

I didn't say you'd become the best in the world, I just that they'd get out there and play, regardless of size and body type.