Originally Posted by marcus agrippa

i understand what you are saying, but imo you are contradicting Scholesy, whom you agreed with in the first place, since you claim that improvement is possible. his opinion is that practice is more a thing to get into shape physically and mentally, than a process by which one may hone one's skills.

it is appealing and romantic to ascribe some nebulous notion of natural talent to certain things in football. i can understand that. and certainly when people like a young Pele , Georgie or Maradona, Messi, Ronnie, Rooney etc come along, you say, well, there you go. i don't debate these players have a natural (as in born-with/innate) ability that wasn't taught. this, however, doesn't mean that it can't be taught or learnt. to imply that would fly in the face of everything we now know about the brain and how we learn physical tasks.

this is separate from the mental aspect of things, which can be innate. so, certain players make very mature decisions that belie their age (Rooney being an excellent example). nevertheless, certain players begin to come into their own and make such decisions later on in their careers (Zidane, Deco etc). it is easy to say, like Scholesy likely would, that this was there all along and all he needed was to acquire the experience. but how does one prove this scientifically? - imo, such an explanation is very ad hoc, unfalsifiable and therefore unpalatable.

now, on the Ruud vs. Henry example, what you describe is more temperament that anything. and that is innate. certain players are simply composed in front of goal, and it shows in their chance conversion rate. Ruud has the ability to be at the right place at the right time, and i'd wager this is natural, but it can be taught. i was reading an interview with Paloschi, the young Milan striker, and he was asked about a goal he'd scored against Samp i believe. he said he'd learnt a great deal from talking with arguably the poacher's poacher of world football: Inzaghi, who had instructed him on what positions to take up in the box. after that point, natural temperament takes over, which has as much to do with nature as it does confidence.

also, Henry is more of a footballer. it is no coincidence that he is often not inside the box when the ball gets there. Ruud, on the other hand, thrives in within those 12 yards. he is therefore more likely to score typical poacher's goals.