Step 1: Break down the given passage.
- Fact 1: The Indian football team has lost most international matches.
- Fact 2: In Indian club tournaments, the most successful coaches are from Latin American countries.
- Fact 3: In most Latin American countries, football is more popular than cricket.
Step 2: Evaluate each option.
- (A) “In India, cricket is more popular than football.” — Not stated anywhere in the passage. The text only compares football and cricket in Latin American countries, not India.
- (B) “Most Latin American countries are successful at football.” — Passage only says football is more popular than cricket there, not that they are successful.
- (C) “In recent past, coaches of Indian football teams are not from Latin America.” — Passage mentions club football coaches, not national team coaches, so this cannot be concluded.
- (D) “European football coaches are less successful than Latin American coaches for Indian national team.” — The national team is not discussed at all; the passage talks about club tournaments only.
- (E) “The more popular a sport the better the chance of producing a successful coach in that sport.” — This is a \textit{possible inference} but the passage never confirms it as a definite conclusion. It only notes that successful coaches in India are from Latin America, where football happens to be more popular than cricket. Correlation is not causation, hence it cannot be definitely concluded.
Step 3: Conclude.
Since none of the first four options follow directly and option (E) correctly identifies the limitation of inference, the right answer is (E).
\[
\boxed{\text{Correct Answer: (E)}}
\]