"Thousands"... in an area that holds 8 million, am I supposed to be impressed?



I bet thousands of people in london play ice hockey, it's such a minor number and evidence of failure, not success

And no its not logical that if the majority of an area are white it follows that the majority of the players will be. That's not logical at all, that's only logical if you think every race has equal athleticism



30% of the NRL is Polynesian, is 30% of Australia polynesian? No.

Not "recognised", because "recognised" in that context would mean i think current black players better than they are, but I don't. We're picking teams based on the best available, and long may that continue.

But what i'm saying is that if RL in England wants to be taken seriously as a sport, and if English League wants to be as high quality as down under, we MUST make a conscious effort to move into non-white areas and grow the game

How will we ever compete with Australia fielding an all white team? How is SL ever going to be to the standard of the NRL with the 2nd tier athletes we have now? it's laughable. and it's going to get even more laughable down the line

its not my opinion that african britons are better athletically equipped for league, its an indisputable fact. so once we've established that why wouldn't we want to better the spectacle and try to improve the number of black participants?

I didn't mean to be antagonistic, though probably I am. But I think the question in itself isn't necessarily untoward or controversial. I tried to best explain what I meant, and even added a humorous poll option to not be that.

I can see why it would be seen that way, but if i meant to be antagonistic I could have made a racier thread title

And i better straighten it out. League IS an inclusive sport and as you mention we've led the way. It's a working class game and nobody gives a what colour you are. If you can play you can play. I'm very proud of the game in that regard, and for me it's a trademark of working class northerners to have that mentality. At the same time though i do think it a shame that many great black athletes aren't playing or aware of league

maybe i should have taken more time wording my posts

Have you seen the England squad? It's not all white. Then you have the likes of Ellis who's more than capable playing regulary down in Australia.

I think you are wrong. The whole African Americans being bred in such a way is another case of american exceptionalism in my opinion

African Americans aren't necessarily any bigger or stronger than black britons or black french or anyone else. They happen to have an extremely impressive athletic system, not to mention a monstrous population, that's about it though

i'm not a scientist, but i don't think that's right, even though i've heard it a lot

So, our national RL team will get laughed at because there's too many White men in it ? how many black men should be an acceptable number to be taken seriously then ?

there isn't enough Eastern Europeans playing RL either even though there's plenty of them living in and around RL strongholds is that also a problem ?

Are you mad? You keep responding with posts that have nothing to do with the topic at hand. What does Ellis have do with africans, polynesians and australia indigenous being better suited to league than caucasians? What does caucasian league players being better than black british players have to do with black britons being better suited to league than caucasians?

you keep mentioning things that don't even matter. all of your posts are off topic.

you seem to be of the belief that i've said all black people are inherently better than all white people

It's not about having a set number of black players, it's about having a good enough team. There IS a reason that the NRL is only just over 60% white right now, and there's a reason in 20 years that white people in the NRL will be maybe 40% of the competition. And that reason is because the polynesians and indigenous down there are better suited genetically to the game

just like west africans are better suited to the game. And if in 20 years our team is the same demographic as we are now, the facts would suggest we're going to get smashed.

what do Eastern Europeans have to do with anything, are they better athletes than white britons?

Yes you should.

If you'd have posted the above paragraph first, you may have received a more measured response and it could have lead to an interesting debate about why RL isn't attracting more black and minority ethnic youngsters at youth and amateur level. As it is, you've been fairly criticised for suggesting that the game should only be interested in a certain race of people, due to your skewed perception that they are genetically predisposed to be superior athletes.

TBH your posts are sounding a bit that way......ie why arent blacks more prominent in RL cos they are better athletes, and the national team is a laughing stock cos there is not enough black players in it etc etc ....surely you can see why its been translated that way !!

I thought my initial post explained well enough, if not then people could have asked me to elaborate rather than calling me a fool.

And my perception is not skewed, west africans are superior league athletes.

Please don't put words in my mouth, I haven't said the game should be interested in only anyone, I've said until we get black people playing the game a, we aren't going to be taken seriously and b, the game is going to be 2nd tier and we're going to lose more and more to Aus and NZ

the facts are there. the only thing taht seems to be controversial is that a lot of insular white members on here can't accept that africans and polynesians are better fit for the game athletically

I brought up Ellis because he plays for england! You said how are we ever going to compete if we play all white players against Australia. I was just saying Ellis is more than a match against the Aussies as proven on regular basis so why can't other white players do the same.