[Start da Game]

Originally Posted by stromatolite

Easy to expain: cricket was exported to the British colonies, so that the great white masters could still play while they were away from mother England lording it over their dominions. When they first taught the locals to play they never imagined that they would end up far better at the game than they were.

I said that the popularity of sports was path dependent, not that every sport follows the same path.

that's a myth......below is the list of english colonies which did not take up cricket and totally suck at it......

canada

united states

egypt

sudan

kenya

somalia

tanzania

uganda

iraq

oman

aden

palestine

burma

malaysia

jordan

kuwait

bahrain



now the list of major cricketing nations,

india

south africa

west indies

new zealand

australia

pakistan

sri lanka

i can agree that your argument might hold good for south africa and australia as they were basically english......but it doesn't hold water to other nations......

india (i mean the indian subcontinent) has a sport called "gilli danda"(started in 7th century AD) which is very similar to cricket......that is believed to be the main reason behind fascination towards cricket in india (and pakistan & srilanka)......

[Start da Game]

Originally Posted by thegreendestiny

It's a sport that needs more brain cells than just muscles. Kidding.

Well, it's kind of expensive and elitist.

middle easterners are filthy rich......what's stopping them to taking to this sport?

[Start da Game]

i will say it again - non whites are feeling like uninvited guests if they happen to possess great tennis talent and end up in tennis profession......

ITF, ATP and WTA should be held responsible for this idiotic recklessness......they have failed to take this sport to all parts of the globe......

what will they do the day when power shifts to the east?

[Invisible Fan]

The WTA top 100 have a sprinkling of "non-white" players even if you don't count Paszek and Watson. Their will be more in the future you would imagine.
BTW some people on here think the WTA has gone to Asia too much in terms of playing tournaments there at the expense of European touraments

[stromatolite]

Originally Posted by Start da Game

india (i mean the indian subcontinent) has a sport called "gilli danda"(started in 7th century AD) which is very similar to cricket...... that is believed to be the main reason behind fascination towards cricket in india (and pakistan & sri lanka)......

I don't want to get into a detailed discussion of the history of cricket, which as you suggested is not necessarily and sufficiently explained by English colonial expansion alone, but I'm glad to see that you agree with my basic point about path dependency.

Getting back to tennis, which I assume is still the point of this thread, I maintain that it's pointless to try to explain it's relative white dominance by citing current conditions. You have to look at its history, which is thankfully also a good deal more complex than the handful of lines I wrote about it.

Each new generation doesn't start with a clean slate and decide which sports, music, movies, lifestyle, etc. it likes. You can throw all the money, publicitly campaigns, etc. at them you can think of, but as long as their main role models are concentrated in other sports, non-whites are not going to suddenly switch en masse to tennis.

[rjd1111]

Originally Posted by Sgt.Timmykinz

I'm not going to even pretend to understand what you were trying to say.

But what I was talking about was not about attractiveness but about skin colour.

Heather Watson and Laura Robson both have achieved very similar things with Heather edging out Laura on ranking until very recently, but according to British media only Laura has achieved anything, Heather is constantly paid dust by the Brits. She doesn't get featured in vogue or get any endorsements, and its not like Laura is supermodel hot, she's as average as they come.

Why would any British parent who harbours any sporting ambition for their ethnic child pick tennis for them when there are so many other sports where ethnic minorities get better exposure and better opportunites (like athletics)?

Despite the Williams Sisters tennis is still seen as a white sport. For years the sisters where ruining the sport (those critics have only shut up because the girls have made them shut up with their results) but now I think by many white folk (probably not the sort you'd find on here) they are seen as the token black players as opposed to pioneers paving the way for other races entering the sport.

At my local tennis club in an affluent white neighbourhood, there is a black family who practice with their sons 4/5 days a week when the weather is good (I suppose they go elsewhere when winter comes) but one time they were there an older member of the club complained to me that one of the boys wasn't wearing proper tennis shoes...I certainly at the time was not wearing "proper tennis shoes" and I could see others falling into that boat too. But the next time I went to the club there was a sign about correct footwear. I assume someone told the family as they were all in the "correct" shoes next time I saw them but I didn't bother changing my shoes. Whenever they are there you always get the chorus of tutting from the other patrons of the club, no matter what they are doing.

I even heard one time a lady asking the mother whether tennis would be the right route for the boys or would they be better off playing football.

To be fair though they're also quite open about their disapproval of the eastern european players...apparently they're the reason why precious Laura Robson hasn't won wimbledon yet.

I know this isn't the case for a lot of serious tennis fans, who want to see the best players pushing the sport higher and higher no matter what their race is. Its the fans who have followed the sport for years and years, but aren't serious enough to follow it throughout the year but aren't casual enough that they don't know the major players.

" Despite the Williams Sisters tennis is still seen as a white sport. For years the sisters where ruining the sport (those critics have only shut up because the girls have made them shut up with their results) but now I think by many white folk (probably not the sort you'd find on here) they are seen as the token black players as opposed to pioneers paving the way for other races entering the sport."



I disagree with this point. I think Ashe, McNeil, Garrison, Washington etal were

considered more like " token " blacks. Mainly because they conformed to the

age old tennis norms. They tried to fit in. In dress, manner, and decorum.

Just hearing Arthur Ashe speak one couldn't tell if he was black or white so

the average black on the street had a hard time relating to him. I later

learned he was a great advocate of racial equality but that wasn't my first

perception.


The Sisters blew all that out of the water. With beads flying, loud colors,

and outragious demeanor they came in doing it on their terms. At first they

were laughed at and ridiculed. But as they started winning the tennis world was

forced to see them in their own light. There was no doubt about where they were

coming from and they demanded accceptance in no uncertain terms. The tennis

world rebelled and still are. But as long as they keep winning.............

They were pioneers paving the way for young blacks by relating to them in ways

they were used to. And not only blacks, look at the

colorful persona's out there today instead of the

old stodgy elitest styles of yeaterday.

[miffedmax]

Ashe and Gibson had to put up with crap no modern player can conceive of. Not that today's nonwhite players haven't had to deal with racism and other issues.

[Raiden]

Originally Posted by pov

Most popular sports in the world:

1 Soccer
2 Cricket
3 Field Hockey
4 Tennis

http://mostpopularsports.net/

(I wouldn't vouch for the methodology but )

Rubbish stats.

The position of cricket and field hockey is inflated by just one country: India (which all by itself constitutes more than 75% of all players & fanbases of both sports).

The real top 3 "most widespread" sports are without a shadow of a doubt
1 = soccer
2 & 3 = athletics and basketball

[Tag]

is this thread trolling?

i really can't decide

[thegreendestiny]

Originally Posted by Start da Game

middle easterners are filthy rich......what's stopping them to taking to this sport?

Again, this sport requires brain cells and money. Middle easterners may be filthy rich but they are _________________ (fill in the blank)

[gbenga]

Originally Posted by thegreendestiny

Again, this sport requires brain cells and money.

No. As in other endeavors success beget success. Until these other countries, either poor or rich have a breakout player to inspire them they won't take to the sport.

[DeucesAreWild]

Originally Posted by Tag

is this thread trolling?

i really can't decide

Same here.

If tennis originated as an aristocratic sport in England does it not stand to reason that the majority(whites and non-whites alike) did not play the sport? If so, go down through history and see that tennis obviously didn't hold the attention or interest of the majority for that reason. You then factor in the individuality of the sport in opposition to team sports. Take the US for instance, organized team sports are apart of the extracurricular fabric of the majority of children's lives in schooling from elementary through college. Doesn't it stand to reason the major sports in the US would be team sports? And why the majority of non-whites as the majority of whites are not as interested in tennis? I don't see tennis as being "dominated by whites" as I see simply a smaller population of whites(that made up the majority in the world of tennis) came up knowing and liking tennis. And thus passed it on to their children. The perception seems to belie the reality. As more and more begin to challenge their own perceptions and witness others doing so it makes an impact. And the tennis world will continue to expand. That's My $.02

[bandabou]

There's no fame and glory to be found in tennis for non-whites. Serena and Venus STILL are threated with double-standards. Despite ALL the beatdowns Maria has been given by Serena, people still wanna act like she's equal to Serena.

NFL and NBA it's more easier to get the rich and get the fame and respect.

[doomsday]

Originally Posted by bandabou

There's no fame and glory to be found in tennis for non-whites. Serena and Venus STILL are threated with double-standards. Despite ALL the beatdowns Maria has been given by Serena, people still wanna act like she's equal to Serena.

NFL and NBA it's more easier to get the rich and get the fame and respect.

Really? Who are those people exactly? I can assure you that in here, French media is all over Serena and deservedly so. But what Maria has achieved shouldn't be neglected, after the French Open she may have stolen the spotlight to Serena a lil bit but since that, it' all about Serena ruling women's tennis.
It may be different in US I don't know but not here.

[Chrissie-fan]

Originally Posted by bandabou

Despite ALL the beatdowns Maria has been given by Serena, people still wanna act like she's equal to Serena.

I don't think that's entirely true. Virtually everyone considers Serena an all time great, and a tier one all time great at that, on par with Court, Evert, Navratilova, Graf and the rest of them. Sharapova gets a lot of praise as well (and what's wrong with that?), but I never heard a commentator say that she's as great, let alone greater than Serena. Maria may be as POPULAR as Serena, but she would also be this popular if there was no Serena or if Serena was white. You can't stop (or blame) people for loving who they love. Kournikova was also the most popular player when she was around, even though she didn't achieve nearly as much as Hingis, Davenport and some of her other very white contemporaries (or Sharapova for that matter).