Quote:
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.
|
That is true. I have only just realised this. We weren't quite on the same page with him.
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcus agrippa
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.
|
I disagree. Natural talent is like the arms and legs you were born with. You will never grow others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcus agrippa
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.
|
But it's all provable. Especially if you play sports. People constantly keep mixing natural talent with skills. Because skills can be constantly improved until they become second nature. So some one with no skills can work till the have mastered the skills. Skills can also be used as a tool to refine the utilization of a talent.
However talent can't be increased. It can only be mastered. It's either there or it isn't. Some one without a required talent can't be taught to have it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcus agrippa
......
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.
|
You miss the whole point then. Henry even when he gets in Ruud's positions, due to having the work rate and ability to do it often, despite being involved else where on pitch, is more likely to miss those same chances more often than not. Because it doesn't not come naturally to him. Even though he has refined his finishing skill. He will never be able to just score a half chance like people like Inzaghi or Ruud do. That is something you can't teach or train.
And this Paloschi kid you are talking about IMO looks like he has all the hallmarks of a natural poacher. What Inzaghi is doing is helping him improve the skills need to apply his talent. Not teaching him a new talent.