Jump to content

Talk:Amateur sports

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

ok so what i really want to know is how many people have really been affected by this rule? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.88.161.101 (talk) 15:04, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What rule, specifically, are you referring to? Ecopirate 09:47, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sailing

[edit]
Resolved
 – No objection to addition after over 4 years.

Added a section on Sailing. --Dastal 16:06, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV?

[edit]
Resolved
 – No objection to removal of dispute tag.

I was kinda wondering why this article had a NPOV tag? I'll remove it in 24 hours, if a response is not had. Ecopirate 09:47, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Given no response, I have removed the NPOV tag. Ecopirate 17:06, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cycling

[edit]
Resolved
 – Rhetorical question.

What about cycling? -193.77.233.8 18:52, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What about it? If you have sourced material on amateur cycling, then feel free to add it. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 16:30, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other kinds of amateurism?

[edit]
Resolved
 – Article moved to amateur sports; use amateur for amateurism in other contexts.

This article should be called "Amateur Sport", or it should be broadened significantly to describe amateurism in other areas such as culture, education, etc.--Krvovo 03:52, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thoroughly agree. I also think that the articles on Amateur, Amateurism and Pro-am should be combined into one article.
I am thinking about writing on amateur music, and wanted a logical place to put it (I didn't think it merited an article in its own right). But, with three articles on the topic or amateurism, I don't know where to put it.
--Ravpapa 06:50, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Use Amateur for non-sports. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 16:30, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weasel words and opinions

[edit]

This article reads rather like an opinion piece reminiscing about the "good old days". I've added {{weasel}} and {{unreferenced}} as that seemed much better than either deleting the weasel words and unreferenced opinions (which would leave little more than half of the first paragraph as the total article) or liberally scattering {{fact}} throughout it. Could the people who know about this topic please have a look at improving the article? Thanks. --Scott Davis Talk 10:18, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Explain Corinthian

[edit]
Resolved
 – Sub-section added to explain 'Corinthian'

I believe any sports club that has the term Corinthian in its name denotes the members are amateurs rather than professional. The term Corinthian spirit is used in this article without explanation. Can anyone explain or verify this? Vegemine 02:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I added a sub-section explaining the origins of the word Corinthian to describe amateur athletes. Ricardosoli (talk) 07:13, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rugby union

[edit]

Rugby Union in Argentina

[edit]

Argentina has remained staunchly committed to its Amateurism status. The reason for this is because it remains the game of the wealthy elite. The majority of its International rugby team plays its rugby in France and Italy. --A nonny mouse 16:06, 10 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Rugby union bias again

[edit]

Whosoever wrote the section on rugby needs to read "A People's Game: The Official History of Rugby League 1895-1995" by Geoffrey Moorhouse ISBN 0-340-62834-0.

The break was nothing like as simple as being paid to play rugby. Indeed rugby league was staunchly amatuer in the early days with players only being paid broken time payments. Time spent away from work - earnings foregone by playing league. Typically, this was the time "unworked" in a shift as players had to leave the coalface early in order to make kick off. In those days you were only paid for the time actually at the coalface - you travelled through the mine tunnels on your own time.

The northern teams were winning too much for the liking of the rich southern teams. They fought back the only way they knew how. The story about the RFU organising the meeting to outlaw broken time payments is just astonishing in itself.

86.134.199.34 22:34, 23 October 2007 (UTC) Paul[reply]

Class divide before Northern Union

[edit]

Rugby union was not fully amateur before the Northern Union was founded. The issue was that substantial expenses could (and were) paid to gentlemen - but not those of the working class. Thus, those who needed the broken time payments could not afford them.

As stated below, ultimately this became more of an issue of not wanting the working classes making the games competitive (rather than the system of friendly matches) and the amateur ethos, with expenses for gentlemen, was seen as a way of enforcing this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.53.224 (talk) 10:37, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shamateurism?

[edit]
Unresolved
 – Term still appears in article but is unsourced. Provide a source by Feb. 1, 2010 or please deleted it. Two years is long enough.

Perhaps I'm alone, but I'm not familiar with this term. Any sources? Duncan1800 (talk) 06:29, 10 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never heard it before. Tyler John (talk) 01:00, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Background

[edit]

"In the United Kingdom sport had always been the preserve of the rich who were the only people who had free time in which to pursue sport, the working classes worked six days a week and sport was forbidden on the sabbath." ... What imbecile wrote this? This is worse than the sort of rubbish you get in a tabloid newspaper. I'm no historian, but even I know that for a period in mediaeval England, certain sports were banned in order to allow more time for archery practice (itself a sport), which was compulsory on a Sunday for nearly all males; and so, I assume that other sports were already practised, by all sorts of people, on a Sunday. Few things annoy me more than people who try to rewrite or re-colour the past to suit their own political standpoints. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.37.33.46 (talk) 12:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

High School sports?

[edit]
Resolved
 – The topic has a summary section now and a main article at Student athlete.

why do high school sports redirect to this article when there is not one mention in the article, at least none that I found. Tyler John (talk) 01:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because someone redirected it here. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 16:30, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When you research high school althletes you are redirected to this page and there is nothing on high school athletes. I think a section should be added about high school athletes and what the benefits of participating in sports are. Playing sports in high school can be very beneficial and to many people look over that fact. I think people need to be aware of just how beneficial play sports are. Kkosik (talk) 23:33, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whoever added in the part on High School sports, thank you, it was exactly the information I was looking for. However, I'm concerned it has some bias? The article currently reads that "Roger Whitley conducted a study that showed how playing sports can improve you academics"--he did no such thing. He found a positive correlation between athletic participation and several key academic performance indicators. But, the abstract to his study fully admits that there is no research done on any causitive connection, and that in all likelyhood a large portion of the correlation can be explain via self-selection. The quote implies that all, or most, people can improve their academic performance by engaging in athletics. Whitley's research takes pains to avoid supporting such a claim. I would also add that the section is stylistically a bit on the casual side, as seen by use of the second person in the above quotation.
Again, thanks for adding the section, the reference was very useful and the page was noticably incomplete without it. However, I think there is room for improvement. Sardoome (talk) 23:54, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup needed

[edit]

Lead needs to be completely rewritten, and any non-sports material needs to move to amateur. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 13:31, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've done some of this. Needs to be checked for further cleanup needs, section by section. — SMcCandlish Talk⇒ ʕ(Õلō)ˀ Contribs. 16:30, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

amateur racing

[edit]

Why is there no section on amateur racing? Amateurs compete at the highest level with professional jockeys, sometimes with considerable success (eg Marcus Armitage, Sam Waley-Cohen).

At the same time amateur racing, ie racing open only to amateur jockeys, gives rise to a number of interesting and difficult questions.

90.198.128.21 (talk) 18:58, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Amateur sports. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:34, 10 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Amateur sports. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:25, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting reference to read

[edit]

- https://www.vice.com/en/article/gvaqdm/for-love-or-for-money-a-history-of-amateurism-in-the-olympic-games

Also an unknown magazine reference [1] --Greatder (talk) 09:20, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Amateur_sports&oldid=1212936008"