Sad that kickers leave your sport Rugby to be punters in the NFL. Pansies to other football players. Bananas do not be mad that Football is way better and harder and has more of EVERYTHING, okay, we Americans are just better at almost anything. So please if you where smart maybe you would have chosen Football.
that doesnt even warrant a reply…
Yet, you replied.
Fair point… i meant i didnt need to start a rant about how stupid he/she is! Welcome BTW!
Frankly I’m sick of this argument. And, being American, I have a certain resentment for Europeans on this topic.
Every time I see this argument, Rugby vs. Football, its ALWAYS European people starting it. Their typical arguments are:
1 - Football players wear pads. They’re pussies.
Before proper pads were in use, people in the NFL got KILLED. Therefore, if people in the NFL got killed, and nobody in Rugby gets killed, where do you think the harder hits are?
2 - Rugby players require much more endurance because football only have to play for 30 seconds at a time.
This is result of the nature of the game, not because athletes in football don’t have endurance or stamina. In rugby, the movements and play are more spontaneous…whereas in football, there are plays and tactics and plans of attack for every situation. There are 30 seconds of playing because in between, football players plan and anticipate, instead of running around like a bunch of mindless morons playing Rugby. Besides, try playing in pads that weigh you down, you’ll get tired faster.
Also, in response to the Rugby hits video posted:
Having ended my rant, you can see that I am completely bias for American football. However, I do admit that Rugby takes an incredible amount of athleticism and skill. I also admit that the argument is like comparing apples and oranges in that they are two different sports. However, I posted rant above for the following reasons:
- I love football
- I want to give the Euros some sort of rebuttal
- I want to be an asshole
rugby seems like a cool game though i admit i dont know much about it, just seen cool youtube highlights, and the athletes seem to be top notch. i also must admire the fact that the game is virtually none stop.
i dont know what rugby has specifically for athletes but what i can say about the NFL and college football is that some of the fastest people in the world are in the NFL/NCAA football, the fastest 300 pounders in the world are in the NFL/NCAA football. I think the best potential oly lifters for the US are playing football. i think many lineman in the NFL would make great strong man if they wanted. many NFL guys played multiple sports in highschool and dominated. NFL running backs, defensive backs, and wide receivers are amazingly fast, strong, lean. the NFL is filled with freaks, check the NFL combine. from a pure speed, power, stand point, it would be hard to imagine finding a greater concentration outside of the NFL/NCAA football anywhere.
in the end, why cant both be cool?
any good rugby youtube suggestions so that i can check it out.
a couple of good examples of the explosiveness of american football, i suggest going to youtube and typing in either chris johnson or trindon holliday. amazing stuff, and no its not in fast forward, but you will swear it is on some of those plays.
AC
This is the most ignorant crap ever.
Seriously every time I go on youtube to watch either and NFL or rugby clip the comments are bombarded with either ignorant rugby fans spewing cliche’s about NFL or ignorant NFL fans spewing cliche’s about Rugby…
I am from New Zealand, I have grown up in a country where Rugby is the no.1 sport and love it, I also love NFL… you can’t compare the two…
New Zealand’s loose forwards are all 6 foot and between 220 and 245 pounds and athletic, there is a back called Ma’a Nonu who I think is very similar in size and power to a RB at 5’10 225 pounds… Don’t listen to northern hemisphere guys wanking on about rugby, their players are notorious for being slow, overweight and under-skilled…
If you actually want some perspective look up the All Blacks and South African rugby teams… Not saying its better cos its not, but it will give you US guys a bit of an idea…
I totally admire NFL players and their athleticism and they are hands down the best collision sport athletes but the nature of the sport allows the massive guys, and the small but blazingly fast guys… most rugby players compare favourably to safeties, running backs, linebackers and fullbacks as they need to be well rounded athletes who have a range of attributes…
Both are great sports for different reasons, but rugby players are not pansies and NFL players are not pansies either for wearing gear…
[quote]rich_rich wrote:
Don’t listen to northern hemisphere guys wanking on about rugby, their players are notorious for being slow, overweight and under-skilled…
[/quote]
thats a totally different agruement right there…
i think northern and southern hemipshere teams are now equally skilled. i dont however think we are overweight or slow either. i think the problem if you want to call it that is we are medicro (sp) at too many different sports. (speaking here for UK + Ireland)
i dont know if im right in assuming this but in the trination countries, at school, is it not a case of rugby/aussie rules in the winter, cricket/athletics in the summer. (i also know the tri nations are world beaters at field hockey, but i dont no when thats played) pretty much no other option.
three of those sports lend nicely to rugby.
in the schools me and my mates have went to… you HAVE to try different sports for at least a term. in my last year at high school, while we were on the biggest cup run our schools ever been in, i played rugby, soccer, volleyball, basketball, cricket, atheltics, badminton, squash, field hockey and cross country. not because i wanted to becasue i had to to complete school. and becasue of this happening every year through school… we always loose very talented rugby plaeyrs who want to follow one of these different sports, which is fine but i think if they didnt have exposure to them then they would have went on to play rugby.
im not contesting the point about southern hemisphere at the minute being better, because australia, New Zealand, South Africa and even Argentina are all better than every Nothern Hemisphere side and prob all could beat any kind of British Lion team we could put together.
Thosebananas. Remember Mick Skinner the English Flanker? He was my next door neighbour:) 
He was an awesome fucker strong as an ox. I think I side with the rugger boys but that’s because I dont know fuck all about any US sports and not from any definative viewpoint
Thing is the more global a game is tends towards greater skill levels as different counties employ slightly different rule applications and training styles. Rugby during the course of the Autumn tours have both S.H teams and N.H teams testing the rules to the limit. I think quite a lot of US sports tend to be played solely in the US and maybe dont get that degree of mutation and evolving that a diaspora might give
just saw that… wtf at the referee!
[quote]thosebananas wrote:
rich_rich wrote:
Don’t listen to northern hemisphere guys wanking on about rugby, their players are notorious for being slow, overweight and under-skilled…
thats a totally different agruement right there…
i think northern and southern hemipshere teams are now equally skilled.[/quote]
The Six Nations champs(Wales) made for a nice ,gentle warm up for the Boks yesterday.Expect more of the same next week hehehe…
Then the real business begins,the Tri Nations.Rugby at its hardest.
(Just yanking your chain,bananas)
i could argue the game was played in south africa and in heat that the welsh arnt used to… 
also ireland werent too shabby eh?
[quote]thosebananas wrote:
i could argue the game was played in south africa and in heat that the welsh arnt used to…
also ireland werent too shabby eh?
[/quote]
I only saw the highlights,which don’t really show much,but the score surely was close!
And just to clarify,I have always been a fan of Irish and Welsh rugby.
irish being your fav ofcourse
I respect the way the NH teams approach the game sometimes, to get around their lack of athleticism compared to NZ, SA and, to a lesser extent Australia, they work out really smart gameplans that do their best to slow the game down and turn it into trench warfare…
HOWEVER, my comment was mainly in relation to the fact that I’m sick of seeing NH club rugby clips or clips of the US Rugby team or the 6-nations teams being put up as being supposed to compare to NFL athletically…
No wonder the americans can’t understand why in every one of their awesome highlights clips there’s a rugby fan on there going on about how much better Rugby is…
The only rugby athletes that come close to comparing to NFL guys play in the south, usually of pacific descent or the big SA’s and incredibly fast african wingers…
Anywho, plug a guy like Ladainian Tomlinson into a backline at 2nd 5 (inside centre, whatever its called) and you’ll probably see some mayhem…
PS
Ireland came to play on saturday but considering all the weight that was on the AB’s shoulders I thought it was a huge win, looking for them to survive these early games then slowly hit some stride again… looking forward to the Tri Nations and looking forward to the return of the REDSKINS and the NFL!!!
I gotta post on this one. I played both during high school and I liked rugby much more. That being said it was because I was way too small for football (5’9" 155 all through school).
I really resented that I couln’t play because I was too small and before someone says I wasnt talented enough my high school had 1400 students and there was always someone bigger and just as talented. Anyway I made a hell of wing for my local rugby club.
As far as brutalness you have to remember in rugby you can only hit someone as hard as you are willing to take it. My first season I got 20 stitches in my face and a broken nose. but in football I was playing defensive end and got my hand inbetween our helmets and totally crushed my hand.
so I would have to conclude that football is fun but I hate being limited by my size.
[quote]rich_rich wrote:
The only rugby athletes that come close to comparing to NFL guys play in the south, usually of pacific descent or the big SA’s and incredibly fast african wingers…
[/quote]
Agreed. Islanders tend to be a pretty intimidating combination of strength, speed, and raw power – very mesomorphic builds and a perfect design for rugby. Also, for some reason they make for some MEAN drunks.
[quote]thosebananas wrote:
Looks jaw droppingly amazing… i stand corrected!
[/quote]
It is, I was a season ticket holder for about 20 years there. And still get to a few games a year. Every game gets over 100,000. th picture you saw was what the call a whiteout. They want all the fans to dress in white to add to the intimidation of the other team. not that that really works, but it does pump up the crowd, which helps.
[quote]SinisterMinister wrote:
thosebananas wrote:
also i think its strange that rugby was invented in 1820 and american football around 1860. yet nfl still basically remains in america but rugby is global…
Rugby is big primarily in countries that were at some point colonized by OTHER rugby-playing countries (see United Kingdom): New Zealand, Australia, South Africa, Tonga, Fiji, Samoa, etc. It’s influence and popularity wasn’t spread by word-of-mouth, it was a by-product of imperialistic ambition.
[/quote]
You’re obviously well read, but lack the basic understanding that should come with it, have you ever seen the Maori’s in NZ play rugby? Or an inter tribal 7’s tournamant in Fiji? These people play rugby cos they love it, not because of some post-Colonial cultural hangover. Plus they have TV, they are aware of what American Football is … …
Take a look at some viewing/playing figures for cricket on the Indian sub-continent, they make American Football look like … … rugby?!?