Does Italy need to follow the France model to qualify for the World Cup?
that's retarded. all the teams italy were eliminated had more white players than italy
probably not
italy will win the cricket world cup before winning another football world cup
>>154167100Italy has called up 100+ foreigners, lots of oriundi but also others. Unlike France most were born abroad. Italy were more like Morocco now.
>>154167100OUR AFRICANS BEAT YOUR AFRICANS
France is a 20th century moment in time.Frafrica is the 21st century present, and future.
>>154167100the globohomos banned italy from the wc after 2006 for not following the script
>>154167100they'll become France anyway
The ngubus in the youth national teams rarely make it to the senior side.
>>154167100Who cares. Football is a dead sport.
>>154167753Then why is Spain succeeding ?
>>154172085Spain is mystery meat ground zero.
>>154167753Fr?
Seriously though, why are africans everywhere? Is it because theyre poor and poor people tend to become footballers?I dont think anyone could get excited at seeing every single national team be a mashup of blacks and mutts from different origins. Might as well call it AFCON 2
I thought Italians loved nogs?
>>154177090>Is it because theyre poor and poor people tend to become footballers?That's a part of the answer for sure. Very poor people in poor countries have no chance at becoming footballers because there is no infrastructure for them in the first place. But having many relatively poor people in a rich country with good infrastructure? That's a cheat code if you can scout them well enough. Becoming a professional athlete requires tons of work, it's not worth the risk for most people in the middle class and the upper class, they either have it comfy either way or don't want to risk losing everything over a dream only 0.1% can hope to realize. African immigrants are tailor-made to go for this riskAlso, Western Africans (and their North American descendants) in particular are naturally superior sprinters and often pretty good physically in general. That's much more of a factor in football than it was 30 years ago. Creativity for example is not that important anymore because modern football is very system-based. So being exceptionally good physically and being able to listen to orders can get you very far on most positionsThe third reason is that blacks actually mature a bit faster than most other ethnicities. So they reach a certain height and weight earlier. Anyone who has ever played football as a kid knows how powerful this can be: if your opponent is ahead of you in physical development and therefore considerably taller, heavier, and probably also stonger and faster, you will struggle to balance this out even if you are much more skilled. Youth football on a high level is a shark tank in this regard: coaches also want to push their own careers, everyone has to deliver results. Being an early bloomer means delivering results right away, so you get more playing time and have better chances at being discovered. Tough luck if you grow late - you're out by then. Disproportionally many pro players are born in January and February because of that
>>154177090black people are the only ones having kids in 2026, sports are a thing for the youth and the youth is black
>>154177090>>154177300Forgot to add that Africans are a bigger factor demographically than it first seems: they're younger on average. So if your country is 2% black or something, the share of people young enough to be(come) pro athletes is higher than 2% at least. So the share among those able and willing to go for a pro career is quite high even if the African population as a whole is smallAnd they tend to live in densely populated urban areas, so on a relatively small area. Finding them is comparatively easy. And since many of them will have ambitions in that regard, you can reap tons of players if you give them decent access to infrastructure and scout the area well enough. Having tons of them in the same spot also helps with a good training level in generalIt's funny how media likes to talk about representation and how important it is to have diversity (= non-natives) in TV shows, etc. People want to feel represented and seen after all. Understandable. But they have no problem when something is absolutely dominated by non-natives. No one is criticizing the NBA for having lots of black players, but the NHL has to change because there are not enough black people there.In national teams, I think it's also fair to say that the identification from players with the team and nation might be lower that way. On average, at least. And it also goes the other way round for fans, of course. Even if most people don't want to admit it. I genuinely wonder what "the French" as a whole are feeling - their team is excellent now, but do they really consider all these Africans to be bonafide representations of their country? You don't have to hate them to not be enthralled the same way
>>154177519The NBA example just was very obvious since American leagues like telling everyone about diversity and races and so on. The native argument doesn't fit here since American blacks are usually not recent immigrants, and the only real natives in the US are Chief Wahoo's after allWe have similar stuff going on here, but it wasn't quite as telling: our media applauds "immigrant stories" in the football national team and will defend that at all costs, so you will only read positive things from them about the national team if it's particularly black. But God beware if someone goes in the opposite direction
>>154177476No one in western countries is having kids
>>154167100Do they think they have a choice?
