Originally posted by PalynkaHoly cow, this is EXACTLY what i'm saying. I know what the guys on the ice are THINKING. I'm not reading their minds in some kind of magical predictive way.
You're seriously deluded if you think that only ex-players can know the "intent". You cannot know what he was thinking anymore than a non-player. Unless you want to make some claim about mind-reading skills, it all comes down to observation.
Think of it like this:
A hot girl walks by a guy. He turns his head and looks her up and down.
Now, you know EXACTLY what this guy is thinking but it doesn't mean you are a mind-reader. You know because you've been in the situation yourself many times and have thought the same thing.
No difference. For non-players though, they've never been in the position as the player on the ice, so they dont' really know what he's thinking most of the time.
I can't believe you are actually trying to disagree with this. Crowley, fine. Retard. But you?? Shame shame.
Originally posted by uzlessI'm sure Nordlys could tell what the guy was thinking, despite never having been in the same situation.
Holy cow, this is EXACTLY what i'm saying. I know what the guys on the ice are THINKING. I'm not reading their minds in some kind of magical predictive way.
Think of it like this:
A hot girl walks by a guy. He turns his head and looks her up and down.
Now, you know EXACTLY what this guy is thinking but it doesn't mean you are a mind-reader. You ...[text shortened]... actually trying to disagree with this. Crowley, fine. Retard. But you?? Shame shame.
Do you have another anecdotal example? I've given up on expecting anything beyond those.
Originally posted by uzlessNot only are you convinced you are right, you now can tell whether someone who (correctly) disagrees agrees with you is a retard or not. It must be fun to go through life being so ignorant.
Holy cow, this is EXACTLY what i'm saying. I know what the guys on the ice are THINKING. I'm not reading their minds in some kind of magical predictive way.
Think of it like this:
A hot girl walks by a guy. He turns his head and looks her up and down.
Now, you know EXACTLY what this guy is thinking but it doesn't mean you are a mind-reader. You ...[text shortened]... actually trying to disagree with this. Crowley, fine. Retard. But you?? Shame shame.
1 edit
I played basketball for 9 years in a proper club with a proper coach. I think I know why you think this way. For example, I can play 10 minutes with someone and, almost regardless of how good he is, I can tell whether he played in a club or not. Movement without the ball, the awareness of what the other players are doing, the way they have all the "fundamentals" already ingrained in their movements is something which is clear as day (at least in basketball, I presume this is true for most sports).
But this is fundamentally a question of not only knowledge about the sport, but about automating routines. It's not that they can't understand, it's that even if they understand they never had it drilled down to the point where you don't have to think about it.
1 edit
Originally posted by uzlessI don't think I am right because someone agrees with me. I think I am right because you just don't have to be smart to watch sports (especially when TV provides announcers to continually explain things to you). I just am wondering why you think it is ok to decide which people who disagree with you are retarded and which posts are garbage.
Just because someone agrees with YOU, it doesn't neccessarily mean you are both correct.
It may just mean you are both wrong.i
1 edit
Originally posted by quackquackDo you really think that was his point?
I think I am right because you just don't have to be smart to watch sports (especially when TV provides announcers to continually explain things to you).
(PS - This is a good instance of why the poster thinks you're retarded and that your posts are garbage.)
Originally posted by darvlayI know two things:
Do you really think that was his point?
(PS - This is a good instance of why the poster thinks you're retarded and that your posts are garbage.)
(1) his initial premise is that you can only understand a sport by playing it and why would anyone bother watching it if they did not play. The fact that millions of people with expertese in things other than sports attend events each year just seems to disprove this theory. Furthermore, people have the ability to learn without playing by watching on TV and getting the advatage of instant replays and diffenent camera angles to see things that you could have missed the first time. There are announcers who explain things, there are newspapers and talk shows which break down plays and games. There are coaches shows where coaches answer questions about the game etc. His point seems clearly wrong to me.
(2) He has stop discussing his "point" and has instead decide to insult people. Perhaps when it clear that an argument has no merit, all they have left is to call a post garabage and calling people retarded. I have no problem with people disagreeing with a point of view and everyone certainly can disagree with mine. I simply feel it is ridiculous that I am reading someone who is insulting people personal especially when they certainly appear to be right.
1 edit
Originally posted by uzlessSports are necessary for male small talk. You have to know about them even if you couldn't care less if you want to be able to chat with other random guys.
I always find it amazing that many of the guys who talk and watch the most sports are the same guys that can't play.
