flamin
Warlord
You do realise that the clip is of AFL and not rugby league or union.
Rugby vs American football
- Thread starter otago
- Start date
I watched a very interesting program last night on the force of hits by American Football players and Rugby players. National Geographic channel.
After a multitude of test their findings were that Football players hit with more
force (like a 35mph car wreck) than Rugby players. (((But))) Rugby players hit
far more times. Football averaged about 6 or 7 super hard hits per game by a
player (linebacker) and the Rugby (middle defender?) averaged about 18 super
hard hits per match. Also the padding, while allowing the Football player to hit
harder- also spread the hit out on both the hitter and the player receiving the
hit, preventing for one thing broken ribs- as the hit displaced the chest a bit.
Still, since the sports/equipment/rules/etc. are different it is almost impossible to say that one is 'tougher' than the other. Endless cycle.
After a multitude of test their findings were that Football players hit with more
force (like a 35mph car wreck) than Rugby players. (((But))) Rugby players hit
far more times. Football averaged about 6 or 7 super hard hits per game by a
player (linebacker) and the Rugby (middle defender?) averaged about 18 super
hard hits per match. Also the padding, while allowing the Football player to hit
harder- also spread the hit out on both the hitter and the player receiving the
hit, preventing for one thing broken ribs- as the hit displaced the chest a bit.
Still, since the sports/equipment/rules/etc. are different it is almost impossible to say that one is 'tougher' than the other. Endless cycle.
MilesGregarius
Half-baked Renegade
Found this at CNN/SportsIllustrated from DR. Z, who writes full time about American football:
I, for one, am a big fan of both rugby (Six Nations rocks and Jonah Lomu is a beast) and American football (and that OTHER kind, as well). I think debates over who's tougher are idiotic. They generally seem to be started by Brits or, more often it seems, Aussies who insist American football players are pansies for wearing helmets and pads. Most American football fans couldn't even tell you what 'rugby' means, let alone have an opinion about it. Smacks a bit of an inferiority complex on the part of ruggers fans. So, quit your moaning and sit back and watch two groups of large, talented athletes pound each other into the turf for your entertainment.
I, for one, am a big fan of both rugby (Six Nations rocks and Jonah Lomu is a beast) and American football (and that OTHER kind, as well). I think debates over who's tougher are idiotic. They generally seem to be started by Brits or, more often it seems, Aussies who insist American football players are pansies for wearing helmets and pads. Most American football fans couldn't even tell you what 'rugby' means, let alone have an opinion about it. Smacks a bit of an inferiority complex on the part of ruggers fans. So, quit your moaning and sit back and watch two groups of large, talented athletes pound each other into the turf for your entertainment.
MilesGregarius
Half-baked Renegade
So it kind of comes down to do you want to get hit by a truck once while wearing a helmet or get hit by a car three times without one.
.SenhorDaGuerra
Prince
first of all, Football (played with your feet and a spherical ball) is the majesty of all sports. bow to your sensei!
Rugby is far better than AFL. more fluid, more interesting, more edge of your seat stuff. spreading an 80 minute game over 5-6 hours makes for boring TV.
Rugby league is crap. what you want is rugby union.
Rugby is far better than AFL. more fluid, more interesting, more edge of your seat stuff. spreading an 80 minute game over 5-6 hours makes for boring TV.
Rugby league is crap. what you want is rugby union.
MilesGregarius
Half-baked Renegade
Soccer
is a fine game - unless you're a Kopite, that is.Actually closer to 3 hours; NFL games are scheduled to start at 1PM and 4PM East Coast time with an occasional 5-10 minute overlap. Also, there is no AFL, it was merged with the NFL decades ago. Unless your talking the Arena Football League, which is similar in its relations to regular (American) footbal in some ways as Rugby Union is to Rugby League - i.e., not the same thing.
I won't get into a p!$$ing contest about which is better. I enjoy them both. There different games, both having their own appeal. Yeah, rugby is more fluid, but American football, because of its resetting between plays, more tactically intricate.
Like I said, though, it's nearly always Brits and Aussies who feel the urge to make comparisons between the two; apparently some folk need to reassure themselves that their game isn't inferior. We Yanks (and Canucks, for that matter, who have their own version) are content play/watch our sport without giving a hoot what others think of it.
Can't say as I've ever seen a rugby league match, so I couldn't tell the difference.
Catfish
Emperor
It seems more like Brits and Kiwis here. Rugby Union's dying a slow death in Australia. It can't compete with either Australian Rules Football (southern and western states) or Rugby League (north-eastern states). Rugby's Super 14 competition doesn't feature on free-to-air television any more because it rates so poorly. Now we also have the increasing popularity of soccer.
It's funny listening to Rugby Union fans complaining of too many stoppages in American Football. That's one of the complaints League fans have about Union. Rugby Union is a much more anaerobic game than either Australian Rules Football or Rugby League.
There is an AFL and it stands for Australian Football League - hope that broadens your knowledge.
"It seems more like Brits and Kiwis here" Wobbegong beat me to it - repeating something doesn't make it true - responses on this thread would indicate you're speaking through your lower orifice.
cronullasharks
Warlord
Rugby LEAGUE and NFL are two of the hardest , most exiting extreme ball sports on the face of the planet
As an avid League fan I totally respect the NFL players ,they have similar levels of toughness and skill...pads are 100% needed in NFL due to the explosive nature of the hits and the fact they can come from anywhere.
I think alot of Americans correctly are underwhelmed by Rugby as they have only been exposed to the "poor mans" version , Rugby union. A far slower , softer version of the game (and yes I expect to get smashed by any union fans who may still exist).
So NFL fans , take a look , find out about Rugby LEAGUE and you will be pleasantly surprised..........this coming from an Aussie who constantly sticks up for the merits of NFL when some of my countrymen sell it short.
As for union , why would I eat fish and chips when I can dine on lobster for 30 weeks of the year
As an avid League fan I totally respect the NFL players ,they have similar levels of toughness and skill...pads are 100% needed in NFL due to the explosive nature of the hits and the fact they can come from anywhere.
I think alot of Americans correctly are underwhelmed by Rugby as they have only been exposed to the "poor mans" version , Rugby union. A far slower , softer version of the game (and yes I expect to get smashed by any union fans who may still exist).
So NFL fans , take a look , find out about Rugby LEAGUE and you will be pleasantly surprised..........this coming from an Aussie who constantly sticks up for the merits of NFL when some of my countrymen sell it short.
As for union , why would I eat fish and chips when I can dine on lobster for 30 weeks of the year
MilesGregarius
Half-baked Renegade
I'm fully aware of Aussie Rules. Given SenhorDaGuerra's description of this particular AFL - inferior to rugby, "spreading an 80 minute game over 5-6 hours makes for boring TV" - I didn't assume any AussieFL fans would care to claim it in this case. Unless of course you think your AFL to be as abysmal as SenhorDaGuerra says.
"It seems more like Brits and Kiwis here" Wobbegong beat me to it - repeating something doesn't make it true - responses on this thread would indicate you're speaking through your lower orifice.
OK, I'll amend: it's nearly always rugby fans with funny accents from godforsaken little countries
who feel the urge to make comparisons between the two...
Words of wisdom.My main exposure to rugby has been internationals - Six Nations and World Cup (sad to say I've never gotten a chance to see any Tri-Nations) - so I'm not familiar with Rugby League. Ain't knocking it, just ain't seen it yet. Next time I have access to Aussie TV I'll give it a shot.
cronullasharks
Warlord
Every year a mate and I take the monday off and watch the superbowl cause it kicks off around 10.30am.......we just bet on the outsider and ride it home.
$500 on the Giants this year.....possibly the most exiting 4 hours of sport I have seen.....forget the winning touchdown it was the catch with a minute to go that did it , he could try that another 100 times and not get close
The Pats with the field goal when massive outsiders against the Rams was another big one at our house.
NFL kicks ass and when the only counter argument is pads and stoppages ,then it must have something going for it.
Now jump on "you tube ", type in Benji Marshall and see what I mean re. Rugby League
By the way , America has a League comp...... www.AMNRL.com
$500 on the Giants this year.....possibly the most exiting 4 hours of sport I have seen.....forget the winning touchdown it was the catch with a minute to go that did it , he could try that another 100 times and not get close
The Pats with the field goal when massive outsiders against the Rams was another big one at our house.
NFL kicks ass and when the only counter argument is pads and stoppages ,then it must have something going for it.
Now jump on "you tube ", type in Benji Marshall and see what I mean re. Rugby League
By the way , America has a League comp...... www.AMNRL.com
MilesGregarius
Half-baked Renegade
Sadly, I missed this year's SB. What odds were you getting for the Giants?
Though, apparently the Pats may have cheated...
The forward pass, like you mentioned above, adds a level of excitement, athleticism, and indeed violence that few other sports have. The stoppages, while slowing the game, make for a more tactically demanding game. Coaches and managers in most sports make truly decisive decisions only periodically - substitutions, formation changes, go forward or defend; NFL coaches are involved in every single play.
Thanks for the tip. I'll give it a look.
cronullasharks
Warlord
I`m not as adept as you with the quotes
$3.80 the Giants with half point start(to remove the tie option).
An important point........NFL would be a WORSE game without pads or helmets and heres why
Its vital that the quarterback has the courage to dedicate himself to the pass without"hearing footsteps" and checking for whats coming.....its that fraction of a second before the potential sack where the QB KNOWS he will get smashed , but never takes his eyes of the reciever and lets fly which is just brilliant....without the padding he cant do that.
Likewise tacklers cant commit to the crazy hits they put on without pads.remember everyone is fresh(ish) due to the breaks in play so it is intense from the first play of the game to the last.
You also need to have the stoppages cause it would be ridiculous to have guys that size playing fatigued.....its not an endurance sport its a high intensity , high action , organised sort of mayhem.
If I want to watch overweight , unskilled guys play football I`d watch union.
Mate if I lived in the States I would be an NFL and NHL nut.......As a cricket lover I also think Baseball is great............not much more nail biting things in sport than a side 3 down with bases loaded in the final innings.
And anyone who thinks cricket is soft......I would love to get you into the nets , no shirt just pads and gloves and have Brett Lee pepper you with short balls.......trust me , facing quality fast bowling on a variable wicket is close to the toughest thing in any sport , anywhere
$3.80 the Giants with half point start(to remove the tie option).
An important point........NFL would be a WORSE game without pads or helmets and heres why
Its vital that the quarterback has the courage to dedicate himself to the pass without"hearing footsteps" and checking for whats coming.....its that fraction of a second before the potential sack where the QB KNOWS he will get smashed , but never takes his eyes of the reciever and lets fly which is just brilliant....without the padding he cant do that.
Likewise tacklers cant commit to the crazy hits they put on without pads.remember everyone is fresh(ish) due to the breaks in play so it is intense from the first play of the game to the last.
You also need to have the stoppages cause it would be ridiculous to have guys that size playing fatigued.....its not an endurance sport its a high intensity , high action , organised sort of mayhem.
If I want to watch overweight , unskilled guys play football I`d watch union.
Mate if I lived in the States I would be an NFL and NHL nut.......As a cricket lover I also think Baseball is great............not much more nail biting things in sport than a side 3 down with bases loaded in the final innings.
And anyone who thinks cricket is soft......I would love to get you into the nets , no shirt just pads and gloves and have Brett Lee pepper you with short balls.......trust me , facing quality fast bowling on a variable wicket is close to the toughest thing in any sport , anywhere
Bollocks, I would ask Lee this question, would he
spend two hours against me in a full on scrummaging in the front row
with two full packs, then I will face him in the
nets.
I know what his answer would be.
Of course with Lee at 18o lb, and me at 290
I doubt if he would last more than ten seconds
before something broke.
Harbourboy
Deity
I don't want to face Brett Lee or go up against you in a scrum for 2 hours. They both sound like sure fire tickets to the hospital for me.
Catfish
Emperor
I see that as a negative. However, it seems to be the way of a number of American sports. I prefer those decisions to be left to the players; that's one factor which differentiates between average players and great players. I don't care if it's a multi-million dollar business, I don't believe coaches should be calling the shots on every single play. You wonder if some of these players need a coach to wipe their own arse. I also like to see pressure and fatigue play heavy roles in decision-making on the field - something that's diminished with constant stoppages and meddling coaches. Each to their own, I suppose.
Can this debate over which sport is the toughest get any more ******ed? IMO, some of the world's toughest athletes are from the endurance sports. Since you're now into comparisons of vastly different sports, how would you fare lugging that 130 kg frame of yours around a triathlon course? A triathlete would hand you your arse, no?
MilesGregarius
Half-baked Renegade
Agreed on all points.
Particularly the love for the NHL. The Stanley Cup Finals, which are just around the corner, are my single favorite sporting event, period, er, full stop. Full contact, with sticks no less, against the same opponent for 4 to 7 games in a row breeds rivalries and intensity like nothing else. And should you make it through round 1, you've got three more to go.As for cricket, I've enjoyed it when I've watched it, but I still can't figure out the damned scoring. Winning by runs, clear enough. Winning by an innings? To my American mind, an inning is a period of time, not a measure of score.
And please, no "Hitting in cricket is soooo much harder than hitting a baseball" BS.
MilesGregarius
Half-baked Renegade
Not meant to be seen as a positive or a negative. There are plenty of sports where, once practice and squad selection are made, the game is largely out of the coaching staff's hands: rugby (both breeds), football/soccer, hurling (for truly lunatic disregard of one's safety), hockey (field and ice), et cetera. The tactical micromanaging of US/Canadian-style football just makes it unique, which I guess is something of a positive.
As for separating average from great, that depends on the sport. American football playbooks can be a thick and as complicated as a textbook on patent law. It adds a cerebral, as well as a physical and an instinctual element to the requirements for greatness.
Pressure and fatigue also play their parts in the NFL. The whole theory of smash-mouth ball-control offense, as opposed to heavily pass oriented varieties, is predicated upon wearing the opposing defense into the ground so that late in the game your team can have its way with them. And any time millions of dollars/pounds/ducats, plus national/regional/professional pride are on the line, pressure will separate the heroes from the goats.
And from an amateur, run-around-in-your-backyard pickup game perspective, the complicated play calling can't be beat: You (receiver #1), run to the oak tree, fake left and go right (receiver #2). You, go straight down the middle. And you (receiver #3), take three steps off the line and turn around. If your defender covers you, go deep.
Harbourboy
Deity
Yes. So if you are so far ahead that you don't even need to bat your last innings, then you have won by an innings as well.
Example:
1st innings - Harbourboy XI scores 220
1st innings - MileGregarius XI scores 420
2nd innings - Harbourboy XI scores 180
Milesgregarius does not need to come out and bat again so wins by an innings and 20 runs.
