Some countries achieve international sports by building specialised facilities to train top athletes, instead of providing sports facilities that everyone can use. Do you think this is a positive or negative development?

Building special infrastructures for top sportsmen in terms of training is an arguable debate subject, with advocating constructing public facilities as an optimal variant. The results of

this

development can be regarded as a drawback or a pleasant,

however

, I drastically opine that the upsides might be eclipsed by the issues. The first and foremost argument is that constructing

sports

buildings which are specialised for the top athletes in a country can open a door to a lack of public facilities.

Hence

, it might lead to certain serious health ailments in terms of the local

people

. Put simply, an average lifetime in any country can experience a slight decrease as it relies on doing exercises regularly in

sports

centres.

For instance

, If you had been to the United States, you would see several public soccer areas all over the country. Municipalities want to keep

people

fit and for them to play games in these places in order to reveal talented

people

as Brazil does.

Secondly

, another perspective is that middle-class

people

might not be able to afford a fee for these centres

while

prosperous

people

enjoy using

this

advantage. Admittedly, it is undeniable to acknowledge that the majority of top athletes come from poorer families

according to

the experiences of soccers in Western Europe. To cite an example, Messi and Ronaldo were born under low conditions, but now they are the best footballers in the world.

To conclude

, despite the concerns about providing

sports

facilities that everyone can use, only considering high-level athletes

while

creating construction for

sports

is not a promising option

due to

the facts explained above.