So what's your definition of a sport then?
"Jacques Santini...will be greeted in every dugout of the country by "one-nil, one-nil" - Clive Tyldsley, 89th minute of France-England June 13, 2004.
"Ooooohhhh Nooooooo" Bobby Robson 91st minute.
is any form of motor racing a sport or horse racing ???
darts is a personal skill and not relying on other outside factors such as car or horse ( or money ) to aid the win.
Dodge, does your da think its not a sport ????
Ignore Max Power, he is no more, the future is Ron Burgundy. I'd love to be Ron Burgundy but they won't let me........
My da does but he's a fool. Motor Racing isn''t a sport either. Great engineering competetions though.
54,321 sold - wws will never die - ***
---
New blog if anyone's interested - http://loihistory.wordpress.com/
LOI section on balls.ie - http://balls.ie/league-of-ireland/
I would have included Schumi two years ago but the sport is more competitive now so at present I wouldn't call him dominant.
Check out my new sports blog http://www.action81.com
In 2004, Schumacher would have been the only answer to the question but you can hardly call him dominant at the moment when he's not even leading the championship (yet!). If you're looking at it over a 10 or 15-year period though, he'd be one of the leading contenders though.
We're not arrogant, we're just better.
A sport under European law is a competitive recreational activity requiring mental or physical excercise. So darts would probably qualify under that. Even though it's not really.
There's debate in Ireland (as you know obviously) about things like chess and bridge, which aren't recognised as sports in Ireland but are categorised as sports under European law. Obviously, no-one cares if it's a sport or not; they just want access to Sports Council funding. Under that category, you could count Garry Kasparov - head and shoulders above anyone else for years.
What about Michael Johnson (the runner) and yer man from back in the 80s - Moses someone (some biblical name)? Was I think 4 or 5 years unbeaten over 400m hurdles and tried a comeback for the last Olympics.
I presume you are 100% positive that Armstrong is guilty of using performance enhancing drugs in order to beat his rivals??
I didnt say Armstrong based on how many titles he has won. I picked him on the basis that as Dodge says in terms of the media, he is extremley dominant, whether he is up therre with the likes of Federer and Woods on sporting ability is questionable IMO but IMO he is arguably the most dominant figure in modern sport.
Ed Moses doesn't count as he lost in the olympics final so his record was useless. In athletics today only Jeremy wariner could claim to be 100% dominant. Even the russian pole vaulters mix it up every now and then.
54,321 sold - wws will never die - ***
---
New blog if anyone's interested - http://loihistory.wordpress.com/
LOI section on balls.ie - http://balls.ie/league-of-ireland/
Not 100% at all but there is plenty of suspision and I personally believe it to be true so for that reason I wouldn't consider him.
Wouldn't say Schumacher either - its all to do with the car.
Golf and tennis are played on a level playing field more or less so its definitely a contest between Federer and Woods with Woods shading it.
Moses may have lost an Olympic final but it was 12 years after he first won one!
He won in 76 & 84, missing out on a hatrick in 80 due to the boycott. He could have been going for 4 in a row in the event but ended up with bronze in 88 at the age of 33 which isn't all that young for an athlete.
He also won 122 consecutive races, of which 107 were finals. That streak lasted nearly a decade. Discounting a guy with a record like that based on one Olympic final when he was getting on is crazy.
I discounted him because he isn't competing anymore. I'm looking solely at current competitors and their level of dominance.
Check out my new sports blog http://www.action81.com
Hulk Hogan.
I was joking about Ed Moses...
54,321 sold - wws will never die - ***
---
New blog if anyone's interested - http://loihistory.wordpress.com/
LOI section on balls.ie - http://balls.ie/league-of-ireland/
He probably did, as do most of all athletes. After all what's wrong with that? We all know bloody well that some performances( cycling for 3 weeks with an average of 29°C+Pyrénnées + Alps...) are virtually impossible without taking "at least" complimentary vitamins*,... Performance enhancers have always been associated with sports. Drugs or not, you must be bloody well trained to perform at that level.
I am totally opposed to these products and I am an athlete for myself but we, the public, have to agree that this war is long lost. After all it's them that put their health at risk.
As for the question... Lance Armstrong (while still active), Tiger Woods and Roger Federer. Schumacher should not be underestimated.
Now the question is, do Golf and F1 qualify as sports?
* knowing that there is probably more in it than selenium or magnesium...
"Take care to get what you like or you will be forced to like what you get."
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)
Haarlem Globetrotters?
And it's Harlem not Haarlem.
Check out my new sports blog http://www.action81.com
Bookmarks