S
semental
Guest
of course i prefer rugby, its more rustic
-
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
W
westgapbroncs
Guest
Yeah for me its rugby all the way 
ive played for 4-5 years and its just such a brilliant sport, even though you can get those extremely un-likely un-eventful games where the only points put on the board are from a drop goal i love it (like most of the 07 rwc), so its 2-0; but its what went on during those 80 mins that counts. Ive watched 2 NFL games in my life, 1st. was 10mins of the 07 superbowl which i got bored of you guessed it...10mins in, and 2nd. was when i was flying down to sydney on virgin blue and they had teles in the back of the seats and cable tv with the gridiron on, i woulda continued watching but after 15 min(which it took 1 min to take the kick off but then a 14 min break to re-set) you have gotta pay to watch. But nfl is more of a novelty thing for me, becasue it really quite a spectical to watch,(silly though with all that bloody defencive, offensive, goal defence yada yada ya stuff) but i cant take it, and never will be able to take it serriously as a sport. (and besides 97%of the guys who play are actualy obese fat just hanging out, no muscle wat-so-ever)
But as they say...only in America
ive played for 4-5 years and its just such a brilliant sport, even though you can get those extremely un-likely un-eventful games where the only points put on the board are from a drop goal i love it (like most of the 07 rwc), so its 2-0; but its what went on during those 80 mins that counts. Ive watched 2 NFL games in my life, 1st. was 10mins of the 07 superbowl which i got bored of you guessed it...10mins in, and 2nd. was when i was flying down to sydney on virgin blue and they had teles in the back of the seats and cable tv with the gridiron on, i woulda continued watching but after 15 min(which it took 1 min to take the kick off but then a 14 min break to re-set) you have gotta pay to watch. But nfl is more of a novelty thing for me, becasue it really quite a spectical to watch,(silly though with all that bloody defencive, offensive, goal defence yada yada ya stuff) but i cant take it, and never will be able to take it serriously as a sport. (and besides 97%of the guys who play are actualy obese fat just hanging out, no muscle wat-so-ever)But as they say...only in America
N
nine_iron
Guest
I enjoy the NFL, would love to try the game but i cant imadgine all that padding! I would feel a bit like cotton wool boy, whats wrong with a broken nose?
F
franky_philips
Guest
I have played both for quite a while now and even though the two games use a similar ball they are very different. When it comes to which is more dangerous I would say American football as out of the two its the one in which I have sustained the most injuries!
R
Ripper
Guest
Yeah, because American Football Players are never injured...
S
Steve-o
Guest
What type of injuries are common? My guess is you're getting all those injuries because of the stop-start nature of the game. Especially muscular injuries. I'd say the adrenaline you get during a rugby game helps with injuries in some way. And of course because your muscles stay warm in rugby.
D
DC
Guest
What type of injuries are common? My guess is you're getting all those injuries because of the stop-start nature of the game. Especially muscular injuries. I'd say the adrenaline you get during a rugby game helps with injuries in some way. And of course because your muscles stay warm in rugby. [/b][/quote]
More injuries in general
more pads = more disregard for personal safety.
J
JPBEANTOWN
Guest
ok i live in the U.S and i am also from boston massachusetts home of the best team in football history and i must say rugby is by far the better sport. first you need to be in great shape to play both sports but in football you have so much plastic on that you cant tell if there white or black players when in rugby you have to be in shape so you dont get a injury. also the play has more skill in rugby you dont have downs or time to really think about your plays for the most part so i think it takes more on the fly thinking.i just wish rugby could have found its place in the states and i might have if it wasnt for president roosevelt thinking rugby was to ruff a game for people to be playing. but i guess the sport has had its up and downs over the many years. well have a great season!!!! :rahh:
P
paddyknight
Guest
i completely agree with the disregard for personal safety, which makes it frankly hilarious when you get an american footballer making his debut in rugby with little training...
i play in madrid at the moment so we're pretty much a random bunch of nationalities etc turning out, and our last match we had a guy who's clearly pretty athletic play his first game (he was an a.footballer in college and i think he's in a gap year) he was f***ing mental! haha. head first everything...basically as if he had a helmet so led everything with his head, and arms as an after thought, and the same with when he took crash ball, just head down and got smashed. but amazingly, kept at it the whole half, was immense to see, after a few training sessions i shouldve thought he's gonna be brilliant, especially at this level!
admittedly, after the game his body was a mess, at our christmas meal after the match he sat pretty sullen with a slightly lumpy face...but still amazing positive when you could engage his now addled brain about the match!....i'll keep you posted!
i play in madrid at the moment so we're pretty much a random bunch of nationalities etc turning out, and our last match we had a guy who's clearly pretty athletic play his first game (he was an a.footballer in college and i think he's in a gap year) he was f***ing mental! haha. head first everything...basically as if he had a helmet so led everything with his head, and arms as an after thought, and the same with when he took crash ball, just head down and got smashed. but amazingly, kept at it the whole half, was immense to see, after a few training sessions i shouldve thought he's gonna be brilliant, especially at this level!
admittedly, after the game his body was a mess, at our christmas meal after the match he sat pretty sullen with a slightly lumpy face...but still amazing positive when you could engage his now addled brain about the match!....i'll keep you posted!
S
sanzar
Guest
Definately true that NFL players are increidble in their specific roles and have speed, strength etc that can't be matched in rugby, but this merely represents the nature of the game not the superiority of the athlete in my opinion. It's like saying NFL players are inferior to soccer players because an NFL player would run out of puff is forced to run as long as a soccer player. NFL is such a highly specialised game that it lends itself to excellence in specific fields IMO. In rugby you have a 22 man squad for a game with 15 per side on the field. This is quite different from American Football where NFL teams have 40+ players (and college teams up to 70+) for a game with 11 per side on field.
So ultimately while it's all good and well to say a player like Carter just doesn't match up physically to NFL stars in terms of raw power and speed, it doesn't really mean anything when there'd be few gridiron players who exhibit the sheer range of skills and roles taken on by a player like Carter.
As for which I prefer - well while I've come to appreciate certain aspects of gridiron I've never really enjoyed watching it simply due to the fact that I feel it's so specialised and controlled it becomes too mathamatical for me to "get into". If I were emotionally invested in a team it might help, but that'll never happen at this point.
S
shtove
Guest
Used to watch NFL on tv, staying up late with beers for the Superbowl and all that. I think it's kind of like cricket (seriously, I'm going somewhere with this ...) because a lot of the pleasure in watching comes from figuring out the plays. You know what they're trying to achieve in the space of a few minutes, but you're not sure how they're going to achieve it. Stuff doesn't work, the pace slows down, and then ... BAM! one side figures out the other, and you think, Oh yeah, brilliant! And then it's on to the next down, with the same team attacking, but this time the puzzle is slightly different.
But I agree with a lot of other posters: the stoppages, delays, too many players - it all gets a bit trying.
I always guessed that football before the NFL was probably a lot like rugby, with more passing. Am I right in thinking that the only essential difference between the two sports is the offside law? And that the laws on forward passes are part of that difference? I mean, a scrimmage is a scrummage is a scrimmage. All the other differences are just down to decisions by administrators (like protective armour, touchdowns not needing an actual "touch down" etc), and could be wiped out without altering the essence of the sports.
How do they play it in high schools? Surely they don't have the resources for so many players, and need to speed things up a bit. Or is it a mini version of the professional game?
There was a film with Burt Reynolds years ago (Mean Machine?), where the onfield plot boiled down to the devilish ruse of winning the game in stoppage time with ... a drop goal. We loved watching it in school - must have had ***s in it - but the "surprise" DG bit left us shrugging our shoulders. I'm sure football has been separated from rugby by too much interference from people adding rules to the game and preventing players from having a go.
But I agree with a lot of other posters: the stoppages, delays, too many players - it all gets a bit trying.
I always guessed that football before the NFL was probably a lot like rugby, with more passing. Am I right in thinking that the only essential difference between the two sports is the offside law? And that the laws on forward passes are part of that difference? I mean, a scrimmage is a scrummage is a scrimmage. All the other differences are just down to decisions by administrators (like protective armour, touchdowns not needing an actual "touch down" etc), and could be wiped out without altering the essence of the sports.
How do they play it in high schools? Surely they don't have the resources for so many players, and need to speed things up a bit. Or is it a mini version of the professional game?
There was a film with Burt Reynolds years ago (Mean Machine?), where the onfield plot boiled down to the devilish ruse of winning the game in stoppage time with ... a drop goal. We loved watching it in school - must have had ***s in it - but the "surprise" DG bit left us shrugging our shoulders. I'm sure football has been separated from rugby by too much interference from people adding rules to the game and preventing players from having a go.
C
candybum
Guest
Thats Crazy!!! If our school had a football team all the guys from both my year and the year below mine, would have to be in that team to make the numbers!! lol Or do the numbers differ in highschools? Dont they let guys play in 2 or more positions? American schools must pay and expend a lot on uniform, etc?
Watching those movies where the nerds get picked on cause they're not in the football team, isn't there a role on the team for those guys? surely haha
W
Wellycane
Guest
I'd simply prefer rugby over gridiron anydays. More speed and movement is seen every minute in rugby and that makes it more entertaining. But let's not forget about how the structure for both sport creates it as it is. For example both sport is based around the ball, but how we use it in rugby - non-stop punts, countless passing, grubber kicks, etc. is why we see more 'action' in rugby than gridiron.
K
KZNSharksFan
Guest
For any one with any doubts about the "game played in heaven's" supremacy over mindnumbing gridiron, Watch this!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=S6qdM6O26CY&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=S6qdM6O26CY&feature=related
M
Melkman
Guest
Not worth comparing them. They are both completely different sports.
S
SaintsFan_Webby
Guest
Let's try and cut out the rutting stag impressions shall we people? You're all old enough to be using the internet unsupervised, therefore you're also all old enough to debate things without feeling the need to resort to the type of insults which, quite frankly, would make a 10 year old embarassed to use.
I'd hate to have to lock an otherwise productive thread, so this is where the arguments are going to stop. All of them.
I'd hate to have to lock an otherwise productive thread, so this is where the arguments are going to stop. All of them.
D
DC
Guest
And you're old enough to stay out of other peoples arguements/fights, no?
Frankly this guy is a pompous ass, and really im not going to bow down and take his bullshit when he feels like spitting hate about Americans. Sorry if you don't agree with that, but thats just how it is.
S
SaintsFan_Webby
Guest
You wouldn't walk into someone else's house and start fighting with someone would you? Therefore take it to the metaphorical outside.
It's obvious to us all who the protagonist has been, but there are now needless comments flying in left, right and centre. I'm trying to deal with this without getting offical and heavy-handed, it's up to you whether you choose to stop when asked nicely. It's not like I'll ask again.
It's obvious to us all who the protagonist has been, but there are now needless comments flying in left, right and centre. I'm trying to deal with this without getting offical and heavy-handed, it's up to you whether you choose to stop when asked nicely. It's not like I'll ask again.
1
187
Guest
yeah this thread sux now. delete all the silly comments so we can follow the subject of the thread easier.
D
DC
Guest
Actually, if someone said that, yea i would.
And to be honest i think it's hypocritical of you to say "it's not like i'll ask again" because i know for a fact if someone came on here and started spewing useless bullshit about english people the staff would be up in arms to ban his ass. BUT on the other hand if it is about Americans not so much..
Similar threads
