doc.end wrote:Rasho Brezec wrote:Spoiler:
It's the only way to make sure people appreciate basketball, by showing that only the best the country develops can play for the national team. I still don't understand how Mullens has more connection to British basketball than Ibaka has to Spanish basketball.
That doesn't matter. They are representing country not basketball. It is a country based competition. It's not about who deserve which player because or alleged development or anything.
I looked Mullens case up. He has English mother. I cannot see how that less important than somebody playing in Spain for opportunity. I mean should Ibaka play for Congo, Spain, USA... later when washed he may play somewhere else... On the other hand Mullens is half-English, half-American and no matter where he learned to play that'll never change and it is a good enough reason to play for both countries. Of course some countries would manufacture those ancestries to claim someone eligible, but still. Let's say both Mullens' parents were British - by your logic, he should be still eligible for USA only because he played college there? Being from somewhere, even partially, is primal reason to represent that country. Then it is up to the player what he identifies with.
But I guess Shaq is German by your standards - he grew up there, started playing there, it doesn't matter who are his parents, right? But then he moved to USA and become USA eligible
EDIT: I wonder what rules would you suggest for road cycling
That's silly. Shaq got all of his basketball knowledge in USA. Ibaka made his biggest development in Spain. Mullens never had anything to do with Great Britain. Why should he have more right to represent it just because his mother is British, something he had absolutely no control over? Determinism is such a ridiculous concept.
