advertisement


Luke Littler

Woodface said:
Disagree all you like but you are plain wrong. I used to play football in the park with my son but I don't equate that to those who do it for a living.
Click to expand...

I don't think you actually got my point, which was that some people only recognise the worst aspects of it, it's the same with many sports and thus the reasons they don't like it, but it hardly matters, does it?
 
It's probably irrelevant, but I've always, in my own head, tended to equate 'sports' with some sort of athletic prowess and physical fitness demands, and 'games' with those that require skill but don't necessarily demand the same level of fitness. So, football, rugby, tennis, athletics, are 'sports', where I'd categorise darts, snooker, crown green bowls and similar as 'games'. Still requiring considerable physical skill, at the elite level, but not as demanding in terms of physique.

Not sure where I'd put cricket on that basis ;)
 
I think people are sniffy about certain sports in a completely irrelevant way. You could class lots of things as a 'pub game' but not really at the highest level
 
I think I draw on the idea of a ‘sports person’ here. I know football, rugby, etc have ‘players’ but they are also ‘sportsmen’, and women because of the athleticism of their roles. Other games require prowess in different areas, I’d equate an elite snooker or darts player with, say, a chess grandmaster in terms of their skill and mastery of the game, but these are not ‘sportsmen’ in that sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cav
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
It's probably irrelevant, but I've always, in my own head, tended to equate 'sports' with some sort of athletic prowess and physical fitness demands, and 'games' with those that require skill but don't necessarily demand the same level of fitness. So, football, rugby, tennis, athletics, are 'sports', where I'd categorise darts, snooker, crown green bowls and similar as 'games'. Still requiring considerable physical skill, at the elite level, but not as demanding in terms of physique.

Not sure where I'd put cricket on that basis ;)
Click to expand...
I dunno, those curlers don't half have to give it some with those brushes. Lugging those great chunks of granite around isn't child's play either.
 
stevec67 said:
I dunno, those curlers don't half have to give it some with those brushes. Lugging those great chunks of granite around isn't child's play either.
Click to expand...
You don’t see them pausing to sip a warm pint of Carling and draw on an Embassy Regal though. Jocky Wilson is an elite athlete is he not?
 
I heard Keith Deller on the radio yesterday, he reckons that Littler is the tipof the Iceberg and he’s seen kids as young as 10 and 11 getting 9 dart finishes regularly at Darting Academies.

I wonder if Littler will take his place in the Premier League, I imagine the money on offer will be hard to turn down.

Cheers BB
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
It's probably irrelevant, but I've always, in my own head, tended to equate 'sports' with some sort of athletic prowess and physical fitness demands, and 'games' with those that require skill but don't necessarily demand the same level of fitness. So, football, rugby, tennis, athletics, are 'sports', where I'd categorise darts, snooker, crown green bowls and similar as 'games'. Still requiring considerable physical skill, at the elite level, but not as demanding in terms of physique.

Not sure where I'd put cricket on that basis ;)
Click to expand...

This is an old debate.

In my opinion, games like football, cricket, rugby and tennis, are sports.

Games like snooker, darts and shove-ha'penny, are pastimes.
 
myles said:
It's a great name. I didn't see his bulky frame on the oche this time round.
Click to expand...
He won his first round game and then, sadly, lost against Darryl Gurney in the Round of 64. He still walks on to ’Stayin’ Alive’ but has lost the mullet. A darting legend.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top