NationStates Jolt Archive

Well, it is. On that topic, Rugby is better than Grid Iron.

umm yeah

I don't understand cricket. But I do like Rugby

We, the people of the Narf, like both rugby and cricket, but hate the game the yanks call baseball.

They're both for pussies. Football's (NOT SOCCER!!!) the only manly sport. :D

Comparing Cricket and Baseball to determine which is best, is impossible. It's like saying oranges are better than pogosticks.

The gridiron v. Rugby to - well, rugby - both league and union are proper sports, whereas US footie are just like a PC strategy game - and not a sport.

I'm a huge rugby and cricket fan, but that probably comes from where I was bought up. I remember watching the rugby and cricket world cups when I was 5, and can still see some of the plays happening in my head (I had some of the games on tape and would watch over and over)

If I was born in the states, it probably would have happened with baseball and gridiron, although that being said I am a huge ice hockey fan.

Cricket is better than Baseball

AFL (Australian Football League) is better than Ruby Union which is better than Rugby League which is better than American Football.

Okay, here's how it breaks down:

Anything that takes 3 days and stops for tea breaks isn't, really, well, something i could really get in to. Baseball, on the other hand, provides just enough time to get drunk (3 hours).

Regarding New Fuglies claim that Rubgy is for pussies, as opposed to American Football ("a real manly sport" or something to that effect) I notice that he provides no argument for this proposition. Hey, New Fuglies ... Have you ever seen rugby? yeah, it is the sport without pads. I submit that pads are for pussies. (well, put on a scrum cap if you are a forward, that's okay, not one of those big pussy helmets they wear in american football.) Also, any sport where you get to play for 15 seconds and then stop and catch your breath for 2 minutes is ... yes, indeed, a sport for pussies.

Australian Rules is certainly not for pussies, but is not, contra the last poster, better than rugby union. here's the breakdown:

Rugby Union
Aussie Rules
Gaelic
Canadian Football
Rugby League
American Football

i'm sure i missed some.

Also, oranges are way better than pogosticks; not even close.

-Dave

Okay, here's how it breaks down:

Anything that takes 3 days and stops for tea breaks isn't, really, well, something i could really get in to. Baseball, on the other hand, provides just enough time to get drunk (3 hours).

Regarding New Fuglies claim that Rubgy is for pussies, as opposed to American Football ("a real manly sport" or something to that effect) I notice that he provides no argument for this proposition. Hey, New Fuglies ... Have you ever seen rugby? yeah, it is the sport without pads. I submit that pads are for pussies. (well, put on a scrum cap if you are a forward, that's okay, not one of those big pussy helmets they wear in american football.) Also, any sport where you get to play for 15 seconds and then stop and catch your breath for 2 minutes is ... yes, indeed, a sport for pussies.

Australian Rules is certainly not for pussies, but is not, contra the last poster, better than rugby union. here's the breakdown:

Rugby Union
Aussie Rules
Gaelic
Canadian Football
Rugby League
American Football

i'm sure i missed some.

-Dave
I love rugby, but I can't see much of it since it's all soccer (YUK, almost as bad as American Football) in Holland and we don't get Eurosport (or any other sports channel).

Rugby Union
Aussie Rules
Gaelic
Canadian Football
Rugby League

What's the difference between all these?

PS I've seen cricket very few times, but I don't get it. Especially with those tea breaks and the match lasting for days

i'm mad about cricket. at least you can be drunk all day...and you dont have to pay attention all the time, its an excellent way to spend a long summer day or three....and then playing is even better.

i do not like american football and calling it a manly sport is a joke

not mad about baseball, but i like films that have baseball in it.

big west ham and charlton fan for anyone in england

Okay, here's how it breaks down:

Anything that takes 3 days and stops for tea breaks isn't, really, well, something i could really get in to. Baseball, on the other hand, provides just enough time to get drunk (3 hours).
-Dave

actually cricket test matches have been known to go for 5 days ;)

oh and the reason all those games are similar that are listed above is that irish immigrants started playing gaelic in the different respective countries but it got changed into aussie rules, canadian football etc as happens over time.

cricket is a very simple game to understand...and you have to stop for lunch because the games can last all day and you have to eat!

oh and the reason all those games are similar that are listed above is that irish immigrants started playing gaelic in the different respective countries but it got changed into aussie rules, canadian football etc as happens over time.

cricket is a very simple game to understand...and you have to stop for lunch because the games can last all day and you have to eat!
I meant for real... In what ways are those rugby-variants different?

every one is open to there own oppinion :sniper: :sniper: :gundge:

sigh all the europeans that populate this fourm, u all are just so silly.

#1 Boston Red Sox in Fenway Park-the perfect place to get drunk and watch the yankees get there asses kicked.

#2 Football preferably watching the Jets.

#3 Baseball itself it is the american pastime(its really not so much about the game but the beer)

#4 Football not soccer

#5 all those english sports i ve never heard of. I mean i tried playing slime cricket on the internet but found it confusing

Im going to agree with the first post..

Well all you Americans should start brushing up on your cricket because your nations first official One Day International is on friday vs New Zealand (currently 2nd in the world) and their second game is against Australia (1st in the world) next week.

World records going to tumble?

#1 Boston Red Sox in Fenway Park-the perfect place to get drunk and watch the yankees get there asses kicked.

Why don't I bring a crate of beer to Iraq?

#3 Baseball itself it is the american pastime(its really not so much about the game but the beer)

Why don't I just drink beer and play a more active sport, so I won't get so FAT

#4 Football not soccer

We know. It's you American who have perverted the word Football. Why can't you come up with original names?

#5 all those english sports i ve never heard of. I mean i tried playing slime cricket on the internet but found it confusing
In europe, that's called "stupidity" or "arrogance"

A summary of American sports:

American Football: Like rugby, but with shedloads of padding because the players aren't manly enough to take a tackle without it.

Baseball: Like rounders, which in England is only played when drunk or by old people.

Basketball: Like netball, which is a girls' sport.


And then of course we have:

Football (Called Soccer by silly people): The king of all sports, that the rest of the world plays but America avoids because they're crap at it.

I always find it hilarious that the only sports the Americans can win at are the ones that no-one else plays. :rolleyes:

OMG! Does everything on this forum HAVE TO turn into
people sluging Americans? They saved our ass in every
single war they were in. If they didn't step in korea or
Vietnam at all, indonesia would of invaded us (Australia)
ages ago.

Anyway, I like cricket, but mainly cause I like lazing around.
I hate all forms of Australian football, mainly cause of the
croud it genereates. (You know, Yobbos, blah blah blah, I
like a good shout at the Ref every now and then but FOR
GODS SAKE IF HE SAYS ITS NOT IN... ITS NOT BLOODY IN. :P)

I love soccer and I could not live without the random games
of baseball I see on cable every now n' then, But I never get
to see any of this "Gridiron". Too bad, I hear it's pretty cool. :)

OMG! Does everything on this forum HAVE TO turn into
people sluging Americans? They saved our ass in every
single war they were in. If they didn't step in korea or
Vietnam at all, indonesia would of invaded us (Australia)
ages ago.

Extreme example, but would you stop your abusive father from hitting your mom? After all; he paid for all your bills your entire youth and you should just SHUT THE HELL UP AND BE THANKFUL AND LIKE IT.

US is the US because of France, so maybe we should be thankful to France too?

We owe the US nothing anymore

Well all you Americans should start brushing up on your cricket because your nations first official One Day International is on friday...
World records going to tumble?

Not when they're all 42 year-old Carribean and Indian ex-pats, no.



Plus, us Brits used to call Football 'Soccer' back in the black and white days. Its only since Americans, in particular, have started to call it 'Soccer' that the backlash and the 'It's called football, you dumb yank'-Campaigns have started.

A summary of American sports:

American Football: Like rugby, but with shedloads of padding because the players aren't manly enough to take a tackle without it.

Baseball: Like rounders, which in England is only played when drunk or by old people.

Basketball: Like netball, which is a girls' sport.


And then of course we have:

Football (Called Soccer by silly people): The king of all sports, that the rest of the world plays but America avoids because they're crap at it.

I always find it hilarious that the only sports the Americans can win at are the ones that no-one else plays. :rolleyes:

Well, I'm a New Zealander so I'm very into my cricket and rugby but you dunno ya sports history do you now.

Netball was invented from Basketball during the early 1900's as "basketball for girls".

The United States of America are ranked in the top 10 in the FIFA rankings last time I checked.
Heard of a guy called "Freddie Adu?"

Also baseball is actually played in a lot of countries.

Very popular in Japan and South Korea and in the Carribean (that where a lot of MLB players come from).

I'm also into American Sports too....

*rolls eyes in the utter dumbness of Total Despair*

Next time, know ya facts before you post.

From a 16yo :P

Holland and Belgium: Voetbal (= translated Football)
Germany: Fussball (=translated Football)

Yeah, we relapsed big time

OMG! Does everything on this forum HAVE TO turn into
people sluging Americans? They saved our ass in every
single war they were in. If they didn't step in korea or
Vietnam at all, indonesia would of invaded us (Australia)
ages ago.

Anyway, I like cricket, but mainly cause I like lazing around.
I hate all forms of Australian football , mainly cause of the
croud it genereates. (You know, Yobbos, blah blah blah, I
like a good shout at the Ref every now and then but FOR
GODS SAKE IF HE SAYS ITS NOT IN... ITS NOT BLOODY IN. :P)

I love soccer and I could not live without the random games
of baseball I see on cable every now n' then, But I never get
to see any of this "Gridiron". Too bad, I hear it's pretty cool. :)

Ummm...let's see...the US invaded veitnam because oa US Navy ship was sunk near the Vietnam coast.
The American government weren't very happy and blamed the communist Veitnamese government for the sinking.....then from there started the Vietnam war using communism as an excuse.
The Vietnam war was a waste of money and lives on both sides.
(American verterns are still dying because of the Vietnam war)
By the way, the Americans STILL have bases in Germany and Japan......nearly 60 years after WWII ended.

yeah, i don't know about all this political this and that, but here's the problem, you know ... all of the Americans who have posted so far are apparent illiterates (with the notable exception of me.) can anyone explain why we get to bully everyone else? oh wait, bullies are dumb, but big. (Nelson voice: Haw Haw!)

um, someone asked about the differences in the sports:

Rugby Union: You move the ball forward by running with it, or kicking it. you have to touch the ball down in the try zone for 5 points, then you can kick a conversion for 2 points. you can also drop kick the ball in open play through the posts for 3 points or convert a penalty kick (like an american football field goal) for 3 points. there are no downs. when you get tackled, you have to release the ball. you may pass, but only backwards. all players must be behind the ball (i.e. the ball carrier is the most forward person) then there are a lot of rules about scrums, rucks, mauls, line outs, kicking into touch and whatnot, but basically the rules are to run like heck forward and ruck over when your teammate goes down.

Rugby League: i'm not entirely clear, but there are like 5 tackles and then a turnover. scrums are a formality (there is no pushing).

Aussie Rules: (gathered entirely from watching television) The sport to which the word "football" best applies (excepting football proper, or, as i like to call it "soccer") you can kick the ball forward or run, but you have to bounce it every few steps. you can pass it, but you can't throw it, you have to punch it. (i think you can pass in any direction). if you catch it on a kick from your teammate within 20? meters of the goal, you establish a mark and can kick at goal from there. you can also kick for goal from open play. the goal has two inside posts and two outside posts. there is no crossbar. kicking inside the inside posts is a "goal" worth 6 points. kicking it through the outside posts is a "behind" worth 1 point, and i think if you run it in the goal that is also a behind. the best part about aussie rules is the goal judges.

Gaelic: I have no idea.

American Football: 4 downs to make it 10 yards. taking the ball into, or catching the ball in the endzone is worth 6 points, the conversion is worth 1 if you kick it, or 2 if you run or pass it in. a field goal is worth 3. a safety occurs when you tackle an opposing player in their own defensive endzone, which is worth 2 points. you can't kick the ball unless you are punting (which is a turnover, if you catch the ball on a punt and your team was punting, it is the other teams ball) or kicking a field goal (also a turnover). offensive play is a mix between the somewhat exciting handoffs (the running game) and the snoozefest known as the passing game. (you can pass forward.) booooooring. George Will has the best line about American football. "Football combines the two worst elements of American society. Committee Meetings punctuated by violence."

Canadian Football: American Football except with 3 downs and the field is longer. I think that's it. Any Canadians here to straighten us out?


Total Despair: two things. First: 1950. Brazil. United States 1 - England 0. Second, uh, 2002. South Korea/Japan. The United States was in the quarterfinal and would have been in the semifinal if the referee would have spotted the obvious German handball. How did England do in the most recent world cup? Oh ... Quarterfinal, huh? that's pretty good.

Re: the American Cricket Team ... we didn't win our independence just so we could put on white pants and stand in front of some wickets. well, hopefully they realize that it was all a mistake. either that, or win.

-Dave

Well all you Americans should start brushing up on your cricket because your nations first official One Day International is on friday vs New Zealand (currently 2nd in the world) and their second game is against Australia (1st in the world) next week.

World records going to tumble?

How on earth did that come about? I mean why more than how. It's like France playing the US in football (not the american kind) or the US playing Argentina in basketball...I mean - the other way 'round ;o)

But honestly, can they (the US) be as bad as Zimbabwe? - well yes probably!

I would not say cricket is better per say than base ball but it is far more widely played. As is Rugby compared to American football, but they are different games, it’s like saying rugby is better than football (soccer) oranges and apples is all I have to say.

The United States of America are ranked in the top 10 in the FIFA rankings last time I checked.
Heard of a guy called "Freddie Adu?"

First of all - where exactly did Freddie Adu come from. Well, NOT THE F'ing US FFS!

Secondly, FIFA rankings are based on your recent results, but as most countries the US plays in qualifiers are complete crap (with the exception of Mexico) the US 10th place just shows that they're a little better than crap. Let the US play top 10 European teams below them in the FIFa rankings and they'll lose all 10!

How on earth did that come about? I mean why more than how. It's like France playing the US in football (not the american kind) or the US playing Argentina in basketball...I mean - the other way 'round ;o)

But honestly, can they (the US) be as bad as Zimbabwe? - well yes probably!

Its the ICC champions trophey, which is the top 12 teams in the world in a 4 pool, 15 day competition. Pretty quick for a tourney with that many teams. Anyway, the 10 test playing nations automaticly qualified and Kenya being the best of the rest easily qualified but for the last space to be filled a tourniment between (I think it was) the US, canada, the netherlands and the UAE. 3 teams finished on equal points, but the US won on run rate to take the 12th spot. When the pools were sorted out (about this time last year) Oz were first, so they got pooled with the 12th ranked team (the US) and a middling team (New Zealand) since then, NZ has destroyed all comers to move up to 2nd (possibly 3rd now) in the world, ruining the pools..

Zimbabwe will still be slightly better if Tiabu is still there.

First of all - where exactly did Freddie Adu come from. Well, NOT THE F'ing US FFS!



Freddy Adu was born on June 2, 1989 in Ghana. His mother won an immigration lottery and came to America. Freddy's mother, father, and younger brother then settled in Washington D.C.

http://users.rcn.com/jizen/freddy/

Hilarius.How did you ever know that new zealand was no.2 in cricket.
I hate to break it to you kid but for two years now India Has Held the no.2 spot.And new zealand hasnt even won a single world cup for that matter.

Cricket is way better than baseball.
Newzealand are no.6 in cricket not no.2
Indias no.2 for about two years now.
Next world cup in 2008 or 2007(sorry i ferget)Indias gonaa win Because Most of the australians are gonna retire before that and indias got a solid young team.

Freddy Adu was born on June 2, 1989 in Ghana. His mother won an immigration lottery and came to America. Freddy's mother, father, and younger brother then settled in Washington D.C.

http://users.rcn.com/jizen/freddy/
Thx for that - just shows my point. The US got one of the biggest football talents in the world thru' a lottery.

Using that as an argument for the footballing capabilities of the US is just ridiculous.

Well all you Americans should start brushing up on your cricket because your nations first official One Day International is on friday vs New Zealand (currently 2nd in the world) and their second game is against Australia (1st in the world) next week.

World records going to tumble?
We have a Cricket team? How'd we do tryouts-"Do you know how to play cricket?" "Uh, sure" "You're on."

Are you positive where not just sending the Orkid Man to do some exterminating?

I'm out with only two. I was sure I could come up with more. We're gonna get slaughtered. Just a guess, goin' out on a limb. I'm still stunned that our Olympic Basketball team choked so hard. You'd think they would have stopped phoning it in after puerto rico.......spoiled......

Well India have The Best Batsmen.
Australia Have The Best Bowlers.
What Are The US Gonna do.
Kenya Can rip apart the u.s.
SO Can Zimbabwe,I mean they still know how to bat and bowl.
And they re experienced.
But in the ICC cup India arere second favorites but now sachin tendulkars injured so there chances arent that high.They ll reach the semi finals though

First of all - where exactly did Freddie Adu come from. Well, NOT THE F'ing US FFS!

Secondly, FIFA rankings are based on your recent results, but as most countries the US plays in qualifiers are complete crap (with the exception of Mexico) the US 10th place just shows that they're a little better than crap. Let the US play top 10 European teams below them in the FIFa rankings and they'll lose all 10!
Lighten up, we get to play, no one thinks we're going to win the cup anytime soon-we're just not fielding a foose ball team is all....

Hilarius.How did you ever know that new zealand was no.2 in cricket.
I hate to break it to you kid but for two years now India Has Held the no.2 spot.And new zealand hasnt even won a single world cup for that matter.

Cricket is way better than baseball.
Newzealand are no.6 in cricket not no.2
Indias no.2 for about two years now.
Next world cup in 2008 or 2007(sorry i ferget)Indias gonaa win Because Most of the australians are gonna retire before that and indias got a solid young team.

From: http://www.icc-cricket.com/link_to_database/ARCHIVE/CRICKET_NEWS/2004/AUG/014079_ICC-ODI_02AUG2004.html
The updated ICC ODI Championship table:

Posn. Team Rating
1 Australia 137
2 New Zealand 117
3 Sri Lanka 116
4 South Africa 110
5 India 106
6 Pakistan 104
7 West Indies 101
8 England 99
9 Zimbabwe 61
10 Kenya 28
11 Bangladesh 0


what I posted before was the Championship table. Those are the anual rankings for 2004

India will have to stop choking in every big match if they want to get near the world cup...

Also baseball is actually played in a lot of countries.

Very popular in Japan and South Korea and in the Carribean (that where a lot of MLB players come from).

I believe they said that americans were only GOOD at sports noone else played, last time I checked the yanks didn't even make the olympic medals :P

Aussie Rules: (gathered entirely from watching television) The sport to which the word "football" best applies (excepting football proper, or, as i like to call it "soccer") you can kick the ball forward or run, but you have to bounce it every few steps. you can pass it, but you can't throw it, you have to punch it. (i think you can pass in any direction). if you catch it on a kick from your teammate within 20? meters of the goal, you establish a mark and can kick at goal from there. you can also kick for goal from open play. the goal has two inside posts and two outside posts. there is no crossbar. kicking inside the inside posts is a "goal" worth 6 points. kicking it through the outside posts is a "behind" worth 1 point, and i think if you run it in the goal that is also a behind. the best part about aussie rules is the goal judges.

Gaelic: I have no idea.

Re: the American Cricket Team ... we didn't win our independence just so we could put on white pants and stand in front of some wickets. well, hopefully they realize that it was all a mistake. either that, or win.

-Dave

Dave,
Gaelic is similar to Aussie Rules, except they play on a soccer pitch, with a round ball, goal is a cross between Rugby goal posts with a soccer net. They use the same for pitch for hurling (another worthwhile sport to watch).

I reckon an American cricket team is a great step forward for cricket, it would be so cool in 15 years time if the Yanks had a team that was in the top ranks... One Day Cricket is the game that would appeal to Americans, it's short enough to hold the attention, and colourful enough with plenty of action. Test cricket would probably test the patience on the average American (mind you, the Aussies have the 3 day test down to a fine art now).

I think we could have some good oneday test matches if we send over our test team to take on the yanks atm :P

Seems to me that comparing Baseball and Cricket is pointless.

Cricket is tradditionally played by Men whereas baseball, or Rounders as it ids called in Britain, is a game played by schoolgirls.

Same goes for netball, or as Americans call it Basketball. This is also generally a girls game.

As for American football, well I;d like to see them try and play Rugby! Oh yeah I did, they played against a welsh team and gave up at half time....

To all you Americans.... :) mostly sarcasm and irony not really having a dig...

I think we could have some good oneday test matches if we send over our test team to take on the yanks atm :P

Not if you bat first :P

They probably have crap pitches anyway. You'd have more chance of breaking records at Adelaide. With the bat anyway.

Jumping back to the orignal topic...

Baseball is possibly the weakest game on Earth.
Let's take a run down of it's weakness:
Firstly pitching involves throwing a ball at an imaginary box. They have to through it there so the battler can hit it because the batter is too poor to swing at something he "didn't like the height of". If the pitcher can't throw it through the magic square the batter has to walk, slowly to the next base. PATHETIC!
In the manly sport of Cricket, bowlers can bowl the ball at speeds of over 140km/h wherever they like! Even at the batter's head is they so desire! And batters can hit the ball, wherever they like! And there are no easy runs, you must earn all the progress you make!

It get's worse for Baseball. Sometimes if one batter is too crap to put bat to ball other batters try to sneak a base. They have to sneak because they are AFRAID.
The weakness continues in the fielding. Instead of opting for the cricket style of fielding, baseball took the wimpy route and decided to armour all players with thick padded gloves to not only take away any skill involved in taking a catch but remove the pain as well. WEAK! PLUS, with weak little areas that the batters are actually allowed to hit the ball, fielders don't even have to run very far to do anything.

Just when I thought Baseball couldn't get any weaker, I was proved wrong.
Softball.
Enough said.

never make fun of welsh rugby, even if using it to make fun of yanks, we don't take kindly to it(I am an australian, but only first generation, before that it was all welsh) :P

Thankst to Chaos Engine: Rugby Union Rules!

A summary of American sports:

American Football: Like rugby, but with shedloads of padding because the players aren't manly enough to take a tackle without it.

Baseball: Like rounders, which in England is only played when drunk or by old people.

Basketball: Like netball, which is a girls' sport.


And then of course we have:

Football (Called Soccer by silly people): The king of all sports, that the rest of the world plays but America avoids because they're crap at it.

I always find it hilarious that the only sports the Americans can win at are the ones that no-one else plays. :rolleyes:

On the subject of the crapness of american sports, have you seen american motor racing? it happens on a round track, or sometimes, for top class highly skilled drivers only, a rectangular one so it goes straight, 90 degrees left, straight, 90 degrees left, straight etc, etc. Put your foot down and go, like scalextric. The tracks are even banked like scalextric so you can't fall off.
I could do that. Am I tripping when I dimly recall british Formula 1 champ and famous bore Nigel Mansell giving up F1 to go to the states, race in indycar (the aforementioned american square-track racing) for one season and completely kick its ass, never having touched the car before? Nope, cos I just checked. Just goes to show, any sportsperson from a proper sport can go to a crap one and win. Like rugby union players playing rugby league.


Still, got to give them yankees credit - remember the world cup in americky? (note I don't have to say what sport, not "rugby world cup" or "tiddlywinks world cup" just world cup, everyone knows what sport is meant) they had quite a good go at footie didn't they? Even though 99.8% of the population neither knew nor cared what was going on.

A couple of points.

1. Brits, we have only ourselves to blame for the word soccer. We invented it, the Americans just borrowed it.

2. For anyone who is worried about basketball being soft and "netballish"; try playing it. Go on. No, no, for more than five minutes! What do you mean you're totally knackered?

3. Arguing that American Football is not a real sport because people wear padding and don't get hurt enough is like arguing that it's not real porn if she's over 14.

4. My folks like baseball, but I don't. I can't defend it. Why do they have to keep spitting, anyway?

Still, got to give them yankees credit - remember the world cup in americky? (note I don't have to say what sport, not "rugby world cup" or "tiddlywinks world cup" just world cup, everyone knows what sport is meant) they had quite a good go at footie didn't they? Even though 99.8% of the population neither knew nor cared what was going on.

Plus didn't their women's team just win the world cup a couple of years ago?

A couple of points.
3. Arguing that American Football is not a real sport because people wear padding and don't get hurt enough is like arguing that it's not real porn if she's over 14.


no it isn't

Ohhhhh yes it is.

Kiddie porn is the dark underbelly of porn, and watching sports, not to support your local team, or see a skilled competition, but rather to see people get injured (or killed) is the dark underbelly of spectator sports.

Plus didn't their women's team just win the world cup a couple of years ago?
So in how many sports are your women better then the men?

I loved your argument 3 btw. But it's not only about the padding. It's about them not being able to do SHIT or else they walk around for 2 minutes just waiting for the game to continue.

So in how many sports are your women better then the men?

I loved your argument 3 btw. But it's not only about the padding. It's about them not being able to do SHIT or else they walk around for 2 minutes just waiting for the game to continue.

Well, that's just part of the game. Who complains about the delays between action in cricket or golf?

American football provides a greater diversity amongst teams.

Look at most Rugby teams, all 6ft public school boys with prominent teeth and built like an ox.


Now take American football, you have your big fat b*stards at the front, your skinny (although in some cases less so) guy at the back pumping the ball down field and you lanky recievers. Its great.

Well, that's just part of the game. Who complains about the delays between action in cricket or golf?
I do, that's why I don't like either

American football provides a greater diversity amongst teams.

Look at most Rugby teams, all 6ft public school boys with prominent teeth and built like an ox.


Now take American football, you have your big fat b*stards at the front, your skinny (although in some cases less so) guy at the back pumping the ball down field and you lanky recievers. Its great.
which is exactly the same in rugby
*applaups for Ferkus' total lack of knowledge of Rugby*

Secondly, FIFA rankings are based on your recent results, but as most countries the US plays in qualifiers are complete crap (with the exception of Mexico) the US 10th place just shows that they're a little better than crap. Let the US play top 10 European teams below them in the FIFa rankings and they'll lose all 10!

Good point - A good example of this was when the USA national team played the Real Madrid reserve team and got absolutely slaughtered :rolleyes: That was a good laff.

Legless Pirates is right - if you look at the England national rugby team, you'll find that they're not all huge and "built like an ox" as Ferkus seems to think. Jonny Wilkinson and Matt Dawson for example.

I noticed some sixteen year old kid was moaning at me about something, but I think various nice people have, since then, systematically dismantled his arguments, so I can safely ignore him :)

Applauds legless pirate for total lack of knowledge of American Football


Take Johnny Wilkinson and compare him to Martin Johnson.


Take a Defensive Tackle and compare him with a wide reciever.


Now, reflect.

Applauds legless pirate for total lack of knowledge of American Football


Take Johnny Wilkinson and compare him to Martin Johnson.


Take a Defensive Tackle and compare him with a wide reciever.


Now, reflect.
Ow well... I think matches between Australia & England & South-Africa & Scotland are absolutly NOT representative

Applauds legless pirate for total lack of knowledge of American Football


Take Johnny Wilkinson and compare him to Martin Johnson.


Take a Defensive Tackle and compare him with a wide reciever.


Now, reflect.

ok, Jonny Wilkinson (no h goddam it) is about 5ft 10in, Martin Johnson is 6ft 4in, that's a reasonable difference plus (although i'll admit I don't know a great deal about American football) wouldn't a flyhalf be more comparable to a quarterback. I could also go futher and tell you that Jason Robinson (who's job is more like a wide reciever) is only 5ft 7in. Now I think that's quite a difference in height. So now you tell me the difference between a defensive tackle and a wide reciever.

Just for information, I actually don't mind American football, I like it when they actually do something even though I never have any idea what's going on but i don't like all the standing around. Although to be fair I think it generally depends on which sport is more popular in your country to which side you will take.

They're both for pussies. Football's (NOT SOCCER!!!) the only manly sport. :D
Gaelic football or austrailian football :)

Cricket really is better than baseball. American and Australian football, however, are both better than rugby.

Ultimate Frisbee > all.

OMG! Does everything on this forum HAVE TO turn into
people sluging Americans? They saved our ass in every
single war they were in. If they didn't step in korea or
Vietnam at all, indonesia would of invaded us (Australia)
ages ago.

Anyway, I like cricket, but mainly cause I like lazing around.
I hate all forms of Australian football, mainly cause of the
croud it genereates. (You know, Yobbos, blah blah blah, I
like a good shout at the Ref every now and then but FOR
GODS SAKE IF HE SAYS ITS NOT IN... ITS NOT BLOODY IN. :P)

I love soccer and I could not live without the random games
of baseball I see on cable every now n' then, But I never get
to see any of this "Gridiron". Too bad, I hear it's pretty cool. :)


:D You are hereby officially invited to attend a gridiron game anytime you make it to the US or Japan during football season. (I live in Osaka home of the several good university gridiron teams, if you visit the US in season, I'll pass you on to freinds or family who i can promise will show you a good time.)

And anyone who says gridiron is for pussies because they wear padding has no clue - the protective equipment reduces serious injuries and fatalities (note: reduces, not prevents - several fatalities occur every year due to entierly legal play). Would you say ice hockey players were pussies for wearing protective gear? Same reason and purpose. Gridiron rules allow players to protect the ball carrier by blocking opposing team members, something which isn't permited in other forms of football. That blocking results in high speed impacts which require protective gear. If protective gear were prohibited in the NFL, under current rules, there would easily be more than 100 annual fatalities resulting from legal play - at the professional level, as opposed to the current number of around 5 annually. I haven't come accross any rugby fatalities resulting from legal play, and no one came forth with any the last time this came up. (Oh, and the rugby and association football fans always seem to bring up machismo and claim their sports are manlier, then call gridiron brutish for it's fatalities. Don't try and claim gridiron is brutish because of the fatalities. The rules try to reduce the number.

As for baseball versus cricket, both are interesting. Baseball is faster with one game being completed in a matter of hours as opposed to 3 days for cricket.

Jumping back to the orignal topic...

Baseball is possibly the weakest game on Earth.
Let's take a run down of it's weakness:
Firstly pitching involves throwing a ball at an imaginary box. They have to through it there so the battler can hit it because the batter is too poor to swing at something he "didn't like the height of". If the pitcher can't throw it through the magic square the batter has to walk, slowly to the next base. PATHETIC!


by that logic, the pitcher could throw the ball 50 ft into the air each time.


It get's worse for Baseball. Sometimes if one batter is too crap to put bat to ball other batters try to sneak a base. They have to sneak because they are AFRAID.

YAWN. :rolleyes:


The weakness continues in the fielding. Instead of opting for the cricket style of fielding, baseball took the wimpy route and decided to armour all players with thick padded gloves to not only take away any skill involved in taking a catch but remove the pain as well. WEAK! PLUS, with weak little areas that the batters are actually allowed to hit the ball, fielders don't even have to run very far to do anything.

You catch a ball coming at you at 90 mph with your bare hands and see how it feels. You obviously have no clue about fielding either. :rolleyes:

Just when I thought Baseball couldn't get any weaker, I was proved wrong.
Softball.
Enough said.

Softball uses a bigger ball and thus is harder to hit farther (the larger density and same-sized bat).

:D You are hereby officially invited to attend a gridiron game anytime you make it to the US or Japan during football season. (I live in Osaka home of the several good university gridiron teams, if you visit the US in season, I'll pass you on to freinds or family who i can promise will show you a good time.)

And anyone who says gridiron is for pussies because they wear padding has no clue - the protective equipment reduces serious injuries and fatalities (note: reduces, not prevents - several fatalities occur every year due to entierly legal play). Would you say ice hockey players were pussies for wearing protective gear? Same reason and purpose. Gridiron rules allow players to protect the ball carrier by blocking opposing team members, something which isn't permited in other forms of football. That blocking results in high speed impacts which require protective gear. If protective gear were prohibited in the NFL, under current rules, there would easily be more than 100 annual fatalities resulting from legal play - at the professional level, as opposed to the current number of around 5 annually. I haven't come accross any rugby fatalities resulting from legal play, and no one came forth with any the last time this came up. (Oh, and the rugby and association football fans always seem to bring up machismo and claim their sports are manlier, then call gridiron brutish for it's fatalities. Don't try and claim gridiron is brutish because of the fatalities. The rules try to reduce the number.

As for baseball versus cricket, both are interesting. Baseball is faster with one game being completed in a matter of hours as opposed to 3 days for cricket.
if there's death of sports there's something wrong witht the sport itself.
Rugby: play till you drop; no sissy breaks all the time, no padding (except for the head and teeth), no injuries
AF: stop playing all the time, padding, 5 deaths a year

I haven't come accross any rugby fatalities resulting from legal play,

There have been, although I don't think there have been many recently. To be honest I don't consider any people who play full contact sports pussies because if they were, why would they volunteer to run into people (I know this is oversimplification).

Cricket is very boring to watch and the scores are just all over the place. It's very strange because they celebrate catchs that aren't that remarkable and then cheer at other various points for no real reason. I watched a game (or part of it), India v.s. Sir Lanka and then got so bored I said "To hell with this, is hockey on?".

if there's death of sports there's something wrong witht the sport itself.

And yet deaths have been known to happen in pretty much every sport I can think of, other than perhaps tennis and golf. Anyway, football fatalities generally occur at the high school level, are more often the result of overzealous coaches pushing their players too hard in practice than any inherent problems in the sport.

I've heard that golf can be pretty deadly - re getting hit by lightning.

Anyway...cricket is a fantastic sport, full of nuances and intricacies and guys getting belted by a ball moving at 145km/h. I don't mind baseball, but it can't really compare. :D

No, Cricket sucks.

They both bore me. In fact, team sports in general don't do much for me (although I still sort of follow Liverpool in the football, and Richmond in Australian Rules Football).

I'd rather watch boxing, horse racing or even ten pin bowling...

As for the whole "football" debate, let's face facts: soccer is the only real football - in gridiron, rugby and Aussie rules, the players use their hands, so it ain't really football, is it? (yes yes, they use their heads in soccer, I know that :)). On top of that, soccer is more of a game of skill, has been around longer, and is more truly worldwide than any of the others. If you want to watch a game of skill, watch soccer. If you want to see men with no necks ram their heads up each others bums, watch rugby. If you want to see overpaid roid monsters smack into each other while wearing 20 layers of body armour, watch gridiron. And if you want to watch a game that combines some of the skill of soccer, with some of the physicality of rugby, watch Aussie Rules. My opinions, take em or leave em. ;)

several fatalities occur every year due to entierly legal play).
.... I haven't come accross any rugby fatalities resulting from legal play, and no one came forth with any the last time this came up.
Actually there are fatal rugby injuries. Sadly there are a couple of spinal breaks resulting in death or permanent disability pretty much every year. They probably dont make it to the mainstream media in non rugby countries but you might be able to find reference to one fatal injury from the 1995 World cup during which a Namibian player snapped his spine. Lets face it though, people dying is not a good indicator of how good a sport is. The most deadly sport is after all polo due to people falling from horses yet that doesnt make polo any cooler.

As for baseball versus cricket, both are interesting. Baseball is faster with one game being completed in a matter of hours as opposed to 3 days for cricket.
there is one day cricket - over in six hours or 20/20 cricket over in three hours if you dont have the patience.

You catch a ball coming at you at 90 mph with your bare hands and see how it feels. You obviously have no clue about fielding either

Cricket balls travel at up to 100mph and are significantly harder than baseballs yet players can and do catch them with the bare hands all the time. Baseball players do have fantastic throwing arms and I am amazed at them for that but dont try and pretend that the gloves are required to protect them from injury.

Three things:

1. America can call its sports any name they want, So what if they don't want to conform to the rest of the world... Thats what culture is and belive it or not Americans have thier own.

2.Americans have the best womens teams in Basketball, softball, andsoccer/football.

3. Cricket is okay, but it doesn't have the thrill of watching your favorite player hit a Homer




Go Sox!

Well India have The Best Batsmen.
Australia Have The Best Bowlers.
What Are The US Gonna do.
Kenya Can rip apart the u.s.
SO Can Zimbabwe,I mean they still know how to bat and bowl.
And they re experienced.
But in the ICC cup India arere second favorites but now sachin tendulkars injured so there chances arent that high.They ll reach the semi finals though

Australia also have the best batsmen per capita.

Australia also have the best batsmen per capita.
thats pretty harsh, you have five times the population of new zealand but i wouldnt say your batsmen are five times better than ours.

thats pretty harsh, you have five times the population of new zealand but i wouldnt say your batsmen are five times better than ours.

Easy there tiger, I mean that in the Australian team, compared to the other teams have the best per capita. I wasn't comparing the entire Nations Vs Nations.

yeah, i guess so. Ponting, Hayden and Gilchrist are all top class. The rest of them are less reliable but those three are pretty good. There could be trouble in a couple of years when Warne and McGrath retire too. I dont see the likes of MacGill and Gillespie being quite so intimidating by themselves.

The Australian domestic teams are as good as a lot of international teams, and pretty close to being as good as the Aussie team themselves. Thats why no matter who comes up, they always seem to be awsome. Tour matches are never easy in oz.

Actually there are fatal rugby injuries. Sadly there are a couple of spinal breaks resulting in death or permanent disability pretty much every year. They probably dont make it to the mainstream media in non rugby countries but you might be able to find reference to one fatal injury from the 1995 World cup during which a Namibian player snapped his spine. Lets face it though, people dying is not a good indicator of how good a sport is. The most deadly sport is after all polo due to people falling from horses yet that doesnt make polo any cooler.


there is one day cricket - over in six hours or 20/20 cricket over in three hours if you dont have the patience.


Thanks for that info. I never have said one was cooler than the other, just that the padding for gridiron is a matter of safety not wimpishness. I

if there's death of sports there's something wrong witht the sport itself.
Rugby: play till you drop; no sissy breaks all the time, no padding (except for the head and teeth), no injuries
AF: stop playing all the time, padding, 5 deaths a year

If death in sports means there's something wrong with it, then you'll have to say there's something wrong with rugby as well, hmm... ;)
And that's not to mention auto racing, boxing, mountaineering, and other sports where there is a serious threat of fatality.

Gridiron allows blocking to pretect the ball carrier. Rugby doesn't. That blocking results in much harder hits. Would you call a racing driver a wimp for wearing nomex? Because that's effectvely the same as what you're doing by calling a lineman or tackle a wimp for wearing padding....

Here's a modified outlay for you:
Rugby: no protecting the ball carrier at all, constant movement, no padding (except for the head and teeth), injuries and fatalities
AF: protecting the ball carrier by blocking results in harder hits, shorter but sharper bursts of violence, padding to keep fatalities down to a minimum level, injuries and fatalities

Both are rough sports. Both require endurance and toughness.

1. America can call its sports any name they want, So what if they don't want to conform to the rest of the world... Thats what culture is and belive it or not Americans have thier own.

2.Americans have the best womens teams in Basketball, softball, and soccer/football.


1. Yep, you can call the card game blackjack "football" for all I care. You have the right to do so - and the rest have the right to disagree and mock you for calling gridiron football ;)

2. Come back and speak to me after the next World Cup :p

Cricket and rugby, all the way, Ive grown up in countries with american football, rugby, cricket, and baseball, I played all of the sports and by far my favorite was rugby, its just fun. Personally I prefer watching cricket over playing, going to the oval for a day, just doesn't get better than that.

Any windies fans in here? Brian Lara-BEST BATSMEN EVER

Any windies fans in here? Brian Lara-BEST BATSMEN EVER
Brian Lara holds the record for most double centuries scored in losing teams. He is very good but has a tendency to inspre the worst in people.

Brian Lara holds the record for most double centuries scored in losing teams. He is very good but has a tendency to inspre the worst in people.

True, windies could use a better captain, but watching Lara break 400 was nothing short of spectacular, and, unless I'm mistaken, hes the only one to ever do it.

sport sucks.

Well, it is. On that topic, Rugby is better than Grid Iron.

Rather! Cricket, what a spendid game, old chum! :P

Ultimate Frisbee > all.

DAMN STRAIGHT. "Let's get wasted and throw around a dinnerplate".

Now THAT's a sport

Forgot a somewhere.

A point which hasn't been raised here... American football is a descendant of rugby. It originated in the goldfields when miners played it. The rules of most early football games were pretty flexible, and were adjusted to conditions and circumstances. I'm not entirely sure on the American football history, but wasn't the forward pass introduced only some time between the world wars?

Anyway, the similarities: size and shape of the field, goal posts, shape of the ball, touchdown/try then extra point/conversion, scrums/lines of scrimmage, the Canadians are hopeless at both...

Gridiron allows blocking to pretect the ball carrier. Rugby doesn't. That blocking results in much harder hits. Would you call a racing driver a wimp for wearing nomex? Because that's effectvely the same as what you're doing by calling a lineman or tackle a wimp for wearing padding....

Here's a modified outlay for you:
Rugby: no protecting the ball carrier at all, constant movement, no padding (except for the head and teeth), injuries and fatalities
AF: protecting the ball carrier by blocking results in harder hits, shorter but sharper bursts of violence, padding to keep fatalities down to a minimum level, injuries and fatalities

Both are rough sports. Both require endurance and toughness.
Why does protecting the ball carrier result in harder hits? It's still two 200 pound guys; one running into the other one, the other avoiding to get run into.

Anyway, the similarities: size and shape of the field, goal posts, shape of the ball, touchdown/try then extra point/conversion, scrums/lines of scrimmage, the Canadians are hopeless at both...

:( Well, I have no defence in that statement.. Other than most Canadians are absolutley nuts on Hockey.. And we all kinda focus on that. Anyone else watching the World Cup (of Hockey)?

yes it is agreed Cricket is better than baseball, even Buddy Holly agreed to that

Football vs Soccer: Surely the game where you kick the ball with your foot ALL the time should be called football. As opposed to the 4 or 5 times a ball gets kicked in American football.

Cricket: Any game where a tail ender can knick a googlie that carries to silly mid-on for a duck is great.

Finally.. Shouldn't we put our difference aside and have a go at the people who deserve it, the people who play golf? ;)

forget all other sports football is where its at and i dont mean football like the yanks call it i mean proper football

forget all other sports football is where its at and i dont mean football like the yanks call it i mean proper football

Meh, to be honest I consider football mediocre at best, and its suppost to be the national sport.

forget all other sports football is where its at and i dont mean football like the yanks call it i mean proper football
Austrailian or gaelic? heh heh I prefare "soccer" to American football

Can't we all just get along?

I respect cricket, rugby, and soccer as great sports, and anyone that says those sports are for pussies are morons. But being from the US, I grew up on and love baseball and football.

Though those that say (American) football isn't manly sports or arn't sports at all are out of their friggin minds. American football players didn't wear ANY padding when the game first started here. However, too many college students were dying from all the collisions involved in the sport. You have a play, then a huddle, then another play. During the play, you collide head on with other guys (in pros, they are 300+ pounds), while the offense trys to find a way to get the ball down the field. Even with the padding, injuries happen on a regular basis. So don't insult american football unless you've played enough to have your face slammed in the dirt multiple times. Colliding linesmen, running, passing, kicking, blocking, American football is definitely a great sport. And between downs the players get just enough time to maybe get the wind back in them before it is knocked out again.

Obviously American football was originally a variant of Rugby with the same ball,posts and even the term touchdown instead of try but where did baseball come from?Was in played in the Uk as rounders before it took off in the US.

Cricket - a game which the English, not being a spiritual people, have invented in order to give themselves some conception of eternity. ~Lord Mancroft

"I tend to think that cricket is the greatest thing that God ever created on earth - certainly greater than sex, although sex isn't too bad either"
Harold Pinter

I love cricket :fluffle: lots

American Pro Football is the only true sport in the entire world....

American Pro Football is the only true sport in the entire world....
Nooo... its not its not even very good. I wonder whats his defenition of 'true sport'

Cricket is very boring to watch and the scores are just all over the place. It's very strange because they celebrate catchs that aren't that remarkable

Maybe becuase they've caught someone out...that said I don't understand the scores, or enjoy it. :rolleyes:

But I'm not a big sport fan anyway. I play a bit of golf (poorly!) and watch rugby from time to time. I don't see the attraction with sport though, particularly football (UK) - now there's a boring game *ducks*.

BTW, rugby was called football before any of your other games, hence the names ending with RUFC (Rugby Union Football Club)...so 'football' should really be soccer and american football should be...gridiron?...(also, maybe that's why american fottball is called so, being a derogative of rugby).

can someone explain to me how there is any strategy in cricket? it seems to me you just bowl and hit and run. in baseball, you might bunt, or steal a base, or hit and run, or try to hit a sacrifice fly to score a runner from thrid. you might intentionally walk a guy, you might try a suicide squeeze, you might bean a guy. cricket just seems like bowl and hit and run. for 5 days. maybe somebody can explain.

second, why is everyone trash-talking american soccer? i repeat. 1950: United States 1- England 0. 2002: World Cup quarterfinals (should have been semifinals on an obvious German handball). I mean, what, does someone want to argue that we were just lucky or something? Or that England is a better team even though they also only made it to the quarters (Okay, fine, I think they lost to Brazil, the eventual winners)? As to the claim that we would lose 10 straight against European teams, it seems to me Portugal is in Europe. I mean, i think it is? Okay, good point, it is a little silly that CONCACAF gets 3 spots or whatever, but anyway, we'll just see what happens in 2006. I sure hope we get in a pool with England, so that we can see some 1950 all over again.

third, i read an interesting article about cricket in the states. it seems that we owe our independence to cricket:

http://sport.guardian.co.uk/cricket/comment/0,10070,1269611,00.html

finally, i think there has been some consensus that the reason that american football is so bad is because of the 2 minute breaks between plays. the good part about this is that it is a made-for-tv-sport. seriously, there is a guy on the sidelines with orange gloves that waves to the referee to call a tv timeout. now THAT'S a truly american sport.

-Dave

second, why is everyone trash-talking american soccer? i repeat. 1950: United States 1- England 0. 2002: World Cup quarterfinals (should have been semifinals on an obvious German handball). I mean, what, does someone want to argue that we were just lucky or something? Or that England is a better team even though they also only made it to the quarters (Okay, fine, I think they lost to Brazil, the eventual winners)? As to the claim that we would lose 10 straight against European teams, it seems to me Portugal is in Europe. I mean, i think it is? Okay, good point, it is a little silly that CONCACAF gets 3 spots or whatever, but anyway, we'll just see what happens in 2006. I sure hope we get in a pool with England, so that we can see some 1950 all over again.

Wow - the best example you could come up with of the USA's soccer prowess is 54 years old...dude, that's reaching, seriously! :p

Signed: a non-Englishman ;)

can someone explain to me how there is any strategy in cricket? it seems to me you just bowl and hit and run. in baseball, you might bunt, or steal a base, or hit and run, or try to hit a sacrifice fly to score a runner from thrid. you might intentionally walk a guy, you might try a suicide squeeze, you might bean a guy. cricket just seems like bowl and hit and run. for 5 days. maybe somebody can explain.
-Dave
In cricket each batsmen has to avoid getting out for a long time. Every time you hit the ball and take off for a run, you risk getting out. You can be more aggressive and thus run a higher risk of getting out but potentially score more runs. There are also a lot more ways of getting out and a lot more places that you can hit the ball. The bowler also has more area to aim for while still bowling a legal delivery and depending on where he bols it, it can make a huge difference to how the batsmen tries to hit it. Another point of difference is the match conditions. Because cricket bowlers bounce the ball off the ground most of the time, the different pitch conditions are hugely important to how players bat and bowl. Thats just the start of it but it sems clear that there is a bit more to cricket than there is to baseball.

This is just going on to prove how all yall non americans feel better than americans and im gettin fed up with all that crap!

And football (real american football) is the best, i don't care what yall say! last time i checked the super bowel of rugby wasn't the most watched event, or shown all over the world, but hey the NFL's Super Bowel was!

This is just going on to prove how all yall non americans feel better than americans and im gettin fed up with all that crap!

And football (real american football) is the best, i don't care what yall say! last time i checked the super bowel of rugby wasn't the most watched event, or shown all over the world, but hey the NFL's Super Bowel was!

I thought the Soccer world cup was the most watched sporting event?

This is just going on to prove how all yall non americans feel better than americans and im gettin fed up with all that crap!

And football (real american football) is the best, i don't care what yall say! last time i checked the super bowel of rugby wasn't the most watched event, or shown all over the world, but hey the NFL's Super Bowel was! Maybe you need something to help with these "super bowels" of yours...:p (j/k)

cricket is the most widely played sport after football. india, sri lanka, south africa, zimbabwe, australia, nz, kenya, west indies, barbados, jamaica, holland, england, ireland, pakistan etc. are just a few of the countries that have national teams and the US that has already been mentioned.

rugby was invented after gaelic football...we've been playing that since football was brought about...irish always have to have their own version. rules in gaelic football:

15 players including full forwards, midfielders, full backs, a goal keeper and various other positions.

a h-frame goal (like rugby) with a net in the bottom bit.

the game starts with a kick off by the goal keeper on one side. you are allowed to catch the ball but to be able to dribble you have to "solo" this is when you kick the ball off your foot and back into your hands as you run. then you are allowed to bounce it but you cant bounce twice in a row you have to solo again. to pass the ball in any direction you have to do a hand pass (punch it). if you dont pass the ball or bounce it or solo it then there is a free to the other side.

you're only allowed to tackle with one hand at a time.

you're allowed to kick the ball without picking it up...but its easier to be tackled that way.

if you score a goal (ie kick the ball, not hand pass, into the bottom of the h-frame) you get 3 points.

if you do kick or hand pass the ball over the bar of the h-frame you get one point.

the equivalent of a corner in football is the 45 yard free kick.


rounders is like baseball....but we use completely different bats and different scoring and different rules. the only similarity is that you have to run around bases. i also think that rounders is harder than baseball but i'm sure thats just my opinion.

and brits dont play rounders...it is a totally irish game and is in the same league as gaelic football and hurling.

can someone explain to me how there is any strategy in cricket? it seems to me you just bowl and hit and run. in baseball, you might bunt, or steal a base, or hit and run, or try to hit a sacrifice fly to score a runner from thrid. you might intentionally walk a guy, you might try a suicide squeeze, you might bean a guy. cricket just seems like bowl and hit and run. for 5 days. maybe somebody can explain.



Same as baseball has it's strategies, cricket does too, but they're difficult to comprehend to the casual observer. To a lot of people in this part of the world, all there is to baseball is chucking a ball past a batter, and the batter in return trying to hit the ball as hard as he can. There's none of the understanding as to where to place the field, where and how to pitch to the batsman, where to hit to, how to hit, to steal or not to steal, loading up the bases or the count, saccrifice plays, why left handed and right handed batters don't perform the same against the same pitcher, the art of closing a game...

in cricket: Do you know the difference between an opening batsman's technique and that of a top order player? Or a middle order batsman? What's the role of a lower order batsman in a partnership? It the batsman succeptible to edging the ball to slip? Is he uncomfortable in the face of short picthed bowling? Can he read a spinner's leg break? Does he have a weakness to the ball moving in the air? Will he go for the big shot, or is it better to protect the singles? Will he go after a spinner, and in what direction? Will a bowler extract more spin, bounce or swing bowling from a certain end? Is the batsman a bat/pad chance? Is this a bat first or bowl first pitch? Which end should the fielder throw to? What if the bowler goes around the wicket and changes the angles? Which fielder can you risk running on his arm?

There are so many variables in both games, it probably takes a lifetime to understand either.

And football (real american football) is the best, i don't care what yall say! last time i checked the super bowel of rugby wasn't the most watched event, or shown all over the world, but hey the NFL's Super Bowel was!

1. Rugby doesn't have a superbowl, it has a world cup.
2. The Rugby world cup was shown all over the world.
3. The superbowl isn't the most watched event, the football (soccer if you must call it that) world cup is (although I hate to say it).

Sorry, the image of a super bowel is really confusing me.


I agree with Lawnmowerville, cricket has a lot of strategy involved, field placement, choice of bowler, style of delivery, choice of batsment at times (night watchmen for example).

yes, i agree with lawnmowerville. cricket may have its strategies, but, right, to a casual observer, i just don't see them. baseball definitely has a lot of strategy. the pitcher isn't just trying to "throw it as hard as he can" nor is the batter always trying to "hit it as hard as he can." the pitcher will use a combination of fastballs, curveballs, changeups, sliders, sinkers, knuckle fastballs, and others to pitch to the batter. the pitch thrown will depend on a lot of factors including the batter, and the count. for example, on a 0-2 count, the pitcher will likely throw something out of the strike zone, hoping the batter will chase it. meanwhile, the batter might lay down a bunt, or just try to get a single.

and of course baseball has field positioning, based on where a batter is likely to hit. but there is also situational field positioning (i.e., bringing the outfield in to prevent a run in later innings). also, the defensive team might use intentional walks to make a fielding situation better (i.e.- can get a double play or a force out -- at the risk of putting more runs in scoring position (2nd base or 3rd base.)

-Dave

Well in the USA's first official ODI cricket game, its not looking too good but it hasn't been all bad. New Zealand batted first and put up 348 runs, which for those who don't know is in the top 20 all time team scores out of the thousands of one day matches there have been.

The US bowlers did quite well to start off with, none of them were any faster than the bowlers on my second XI school team last year (I'm serious) but they still put the ball in the right place and got it to swing. The wheels fell off towards the end and the US were smashed all over the park. They've started ok with their innings, getting to 31 without loss so far. They're still a long, long way from winning (they'll probably make 200, max) but they're being positive with their batting. New Zealand aren't doing themselves any favours with the way they're bowling though.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, WELCOME TO THE 2005 SUPER BOWEL - I'M YOUR HOST, COLON FRASER!

http://byandlarge.net/scuttlebutt/images/bowel.gif

Baseball Rules!

To think i started all this, i stand by my original comments but think that it all depends on where you were brought up and what sport they play there. I'm looking foward to the start of the cricket season and two series with the aussies, a win in the champions trophey and an awesome day out at the boxing day ODI(who is nz playing?).

So the US are enjoying the ICC Champions Trophee.
NZ v. USA (http://live.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2004/OD_TOURNEYS/ICCCT/SCORECARDS/NZ_USA_ICCCT_ODI2_10SEP2004.html)

Today the US are playing the Mighty Oz, and be beat again. Follow the killing live.

Oz v. USA live scorecard (http://usa.cricinfo.com/link_to_database/NEW/LIVE/frames/AUS_USA_ICCCT_ODI5_13SEP2004.html)

In rugby, you don't have 300+ pound defensive tackles trying to flatten you as you try to throw a egg-shaped ball 40 yards to hit a running target. You don't have to execute one of a large number of plays based on a seemingly random sequence of numbers somebody yells out. The breaks in the action are so the guys can figure out what play they'll use next.

And if cricket is better than baseball, then blue and yellow is better than red. Why? Because I say so. And because I hate Stanford and strongly dislike USC.

In rugby, you don't have 300+ pound defensive tackles trying to flatten you as you try to throw a egg-shaped ball 40 yards to hit a running target. You don't have to execute one of a large number of plays based on a seemingly random sequence of numbers somebody yells out. The breaks in the action are so the guys can figure out what play they'll use next.

And if cricket is better than baseball, then blue and yellow is better than red. Why? Because I say so. And because I hate Stanford and strongly dislike USC.
No the players on a rugby team are expected to be able to figure out what is happening as it unfolds and react accordingly. They are expected to think on thier feet not wait for someone to tell them exactly what to do.

In rugby, you don't have 300+ pound defensive tackles trying to flatten you as you try to throw a egg-shaped ball 40 yards to hit a running target. You don't have to execute one of a large number of plays based on a seemingly random sequence of numbers somebody yells out. The breaks in the action are so the guys can figure out what play they'll use next.



A top rugby team will have about 40 calls, that all 22 men including the subs are expected to know. They don't stop to figure it out, someone calls it on the fly and they go. The only long breaks in rugby are halftime, injury breaks and checking upstairs to see if a try was scored..

No the players on a rugby team are expected to be able to figure out what is happening as it unfolds and react accordingly. They are expected to think on thier feet not wait for someone to tell them exactly what to do.
Of course people think on their feet when they play football. It's just you decide on a plan before you line up. Otherwise, QB's would never scramble, and would always throw to one reciever whether he was open or not. Option plays would never work, and if I did a draw or a play action, I'd score every single time. I'm not trying to say that Rugby is a wussy game, or anything like that.

And ESPN tried to figure out scientifically what was the hardest sport around. They figured boxing was the hardest, with ice hockey second, and American Football third.

See for yourself:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/sportSkills

I don't agree with the list totally (Any full contact sport where they will willingly sacrifice a modicum of protection for a fractional gain in speed and gives people 6 foot metal poles to hit you with while you're trying to throw around a 8 inch diameter solid rubber ball deserves a higher placing than 14th), but it does provide some basis for discussion.

I'd say rugby and waterpolo should be higher.

I just want to say

CRICKET ROCKS OHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH YEAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH


If you are wondering, yes i am australian.

*walks off chanting oo ah glenn mcgrath*

USA all out for 65 vs Australia. Not a record as some thought it would be, only the 12th worst score ever...

David V Goliath score update (aka Australia V the US)
What a flogging!

US all out for 65 from 24 overs.
Highest scorer: SJ Massiah, out for 23.
Second highst: Extras, 14 n.o

Bowling:
Bowling O M R W
Lee 5 0 21 1 (3nb, 3w)
McGrath 6 1 13 0 (1w)
Kasprowicz 7 1 14 4 (1nb, 1w)
Gillespie 6 1 15 4 (1nb, 2w)

Australia 1/66 from 7.5 overs.

Gilchrist just smashed a six on the ball of the over. He scored 24 n.o, Ponting 8 n.o, Hayden out for23. Dismissed by H.R Johnson.

Baseball sucks
Cricket sucks
Golf is not even a sport
Neither is Hunting (Unless with Bare hands)

Nuff Said

David V Goliath score update (aka Australia V the US)
What a flogging!

US all out for 65 from 24 overs.
Highest scorer: SJ Massiah, out for 23.
Second highst: Extras, 14 n.o

Bowling:
Bowling O M R W
Lee 5 0 21 1 (3nb, 3w)
McGrath 6 1 13 0 (1w)
Kasprowicz 7 1 14 4 (1nb, 1w)
Gillespie 6 1 15 4 (1nb, 2w)

Australia 1/66 from 7.5 overs.

Gilchrist just smashed a six on the ball of the over. He scored 24 n.o, Ponting 8 n.o, Hayden out for23. Dismissed by H.R Johnson.

Sucks that Oz didn't bat first. Anyway, bring on the real game...

In rugby, you don't have 300+ pound defensive tackles trying to flatten you as you try to throw a egg-shaped ball 40 yards to hit a running target. You don't have to execute one of a large number of plays based on a seemingly random sequence of numbers somebody yells out. The breaks in the action are so the guys can figure out what play they'll use next.


I'd like to see how long a quarterback would last playing first five eighth in rugby... Can't chicken out by sliding feet first if a rampant flanker is heading for ya, gotta be able to pass both directions, kick with both feet, run when needed...

Yeah, I guess that's the other thing. American Football is super specialized. Not that QB's don't run and catch the ball (sneaks/scrambles and options, trick halfback pass plays), not that wideouts don't occasionally take the ball in the backfield, not that tackles/linemen don't occasionally carry or intercept the ball, but for the most part QB's pass, call plays, and give the running backs the ball. Wide Recievers run and catch. Tackles/linemen charge into each other.

And unless you've played it, you've got no right calling any sport "unathletic." Basketball sure looks easy when you're watching NBA players run up and down the court hundreds of times over the course of a game. Driving looks easy too - after all, nearly everybody drives to work everyday, how hard can that be? Nevermind that they're dealing with cars which can accelerate and decelerate several times more than yours, they're just stepping on the gas pedal and brake! Or shooting, you just point and pull the trigger. Nevermind that you're aiming at a target the size of a dime at 50 yards. Or breathing or even your pulse can ruin your score.

Well, not golf, unless you're one of those darned traditionalists who insist on walking everywhere. Then it's a good walk with some swinging.

That ESPN list is shite, they didn't even take cricket into account. Someone tell me that batting for 5 hours, in full padding, in 40 degrees C. heat, fighting dehydration, drunk Australian fans and a rock hard leather ball comming at your face at 150 kmph an hour does not deserve to be on that list.

hear hear!

american football may be technical but you still have the same amount of impact as rugby yet you wear a load of padding!

u cant call hitting the gas and hitting the brake driving...ever hear of a gear stick? automatic cars are for wusses.

Hockey is better :)

I meant for real... In what ways are those rugby-variants different?

i only just saw this reply...rugby isn't as old as gaelic football thats why most sports like canadian football and aussie rules stem from gaelic.

i only just saw this reply...rugby isn't as old as gaelic football thats why most sports like canadian football and aussie rules stem from gaelic.

They all come from the same unruly type of game where the aim is to kick a ball between some posts. Everything after that is just technicalities.

Hockey is better :)

hockey rules......let me get this right in cricket it's called bowling[ the pitch?]
your saying that the ball reaches speeds of 150? what ya useing a cannon...
in baseball the pitcher who throws fastballs which there are quite a few the speed ranges from the low 90's to 101...... oh yeah try hitting an 85 mph curve ball....split finger fastball or a sinker...... rugby awesome game. same with soccer......american football the best what can i say gotta watch it to
like it.......as far as golf it sucks and i have played it on many occasions fairly well too but just can't get into it.....now blasting down the quater mile on a nitro burning harley well it's a rush.............. e.t. 6.94 193.40 mph.......

cricket measures ball speed in kph not mph. The fastest bowlers reach speeds of 160 kph which is almost exactly 100mph.

Try hitting a 155km in-swinging yorker ;) I remember when Shane Bond bowled an absolutely flawless ball like that against oz a few years back. Adam Gilchrist, one of the best batsmen in the world and he didn't stand a shitshow of anything but having his poles knocked over when that ball came his way....

I actually think that baseball is better. I've watched both games and cricket is boring.
Anyone who says that football is the new rugby is a damn lier! Football is way fun and rugby is all about...what is it all about anyways? It just looks like americanfootball for posh people to me.

I actually think that baseball is better. I've watched both games and cricket is boring.
Anyone who says that football is the new rugby is a damn lier! Football is way fun and rugby is all about...what is it all about anyways? It just looks like americanfootball for posh people to me.

To be honest I find both cricket and baseball boring.

People say that American football is the new rugby simply because it evolved from rugby. I don't understand where you got the ideas that rugby is for posh people and that it's anything like American football (except for both of them being contact sports).

"Football is way fun and rugby is all about...what is it all about anyways"
I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

As a product of the education system with an enforced sports curriculum, not unakin to being tortured on a frequent and regular basis; I can solidly give HUMAN opinions of each sport, unfettered with "rules", "facts" and mostly "actual knowledge". This is how these sports are played in the real world (i.e. outside of the whole Professional angle, by a majority of the people)

Cricket: Ahhhh, the game of the English. The sport that takes up whole channels for hours at a time, when Wimbledon isn't on. Cricket can be a fun sport to play if you happen to be fielding somewhere near the edge of your designated "pitch", because you usually have time to go off and grab a cup of Darjeeling, check your e-mails and watch a short movie before getting back in time for the tea break, safe in the knowledge that you have not been missed.

Rugby: Our school was fanatical about a sport that up until recently in England was mainly the preserve of Eton Boys who jog and snatch cigarettes of Eggy in Dorm 4 or some such awful "tosh". It's painful to play, and painful to watch, unless you're name is Edwina and you were the obese girlfriend of the fly-half, standing around in his spare Rugby top with the collar turned up and thinking "What a jolly jape this is!"

Football: Football is football. Always has been, always will be. The only reason the English are uppity about it is because we invented a great and simple sport, then enforced a quarter of the world to play and let them discover that they were actually BETTER than us. The England team is usually either a) injured or b) drunk, and often deserves the Quarterfinal crushing it gets every two years (Euro, and World Cup).

Playground Football: Like football, played on tarmac, with no rules and no team limit. The objective is mainly to break as many people in half as possible. 20 people in my year ended up in hostpital in one month due to this short lived, wide spread English Sport.

Aussie Rules: Like the above, but not actually a sport. It's a kicking contest. You find out who's god at kicking the ball through those wide poles, and then you get your team to kick him. This is what I've gathered from watching. A Professional American Football player would probably get internal bleeding from WATCHING, let alone participating.

American Football: Rugby, with massive padding, massive egos, massive cars and commercial breaks, a bunch of lines on the ground, too many rules, and too little actual playing; the main section of time dedicated to thinking up what to do, and then not doing it. Similar to Rugby in that respect, except there's less thinking involved in Rugby.

Baseball: Like rounders, but again with much over the top complication. And helmets.

Rounders: Like baseball, but with rules that are far too simple, and usually played with sticks for bats, and jumpers for bases. I was good at rounders in school, until I found out it was a sport intended for girls.

Basketball: See Netball. But with guys.

Netball: See Basketball. But with girls.

Please let me know of anything I have forgotten. Anyone offended, please understand; as an ignoramus I know not what I do.

Aussie Rules is the best game on the planet. Its rough, its hard and its fast. The players aren't sissys and padded up like Shermans, they dont cry when they fall over (like in soccer) and they are the fastest sports players around.

Cricket is second only to Footy. Whilst its slow, you don't actually go to test matches for the Cricket, you go for the atmosphere.

Anyways Baseballs Ok but not as good as cricket

Aussie Rules is the best game on the planet. Its rough, its hard and its fast. The players aren't sissys and padded up like Shermans, they dont cry when they fall over (like in soccer) and they are the fastest sports players around.

Cricket is second only to Footy. Whilst its slow, you don't actually go to test matches for the Cricket, you go for the atmosphere.

Anyways Baseballs Ok but not as good as cricket

go the power, Treders for PM :)

"Football is way fun and rugby is all about...what is it all about anyways"
I don't understand what you're trying to say here.
I was saying that I find football fun to watch and even beter to play. Rugby, I never really understood Rugby. To me it's just american football for posh people(and yeah, the minority of people who aren't posh and are willing to loose all their teeth just for that single game).

Jugulumian: Basketball is for girls and boys(there a womens team in the USA). Netball isreally for girls(though boys in primary school are somtimes forced to play by PE teachers). Strangely enough I had never heard of Aussierules prior to this discussion. And rounders isn't just for girls.

Maybe I'm just weird but, I've played both cricket and baseball, and I find baseball more entertaining.

Football-fantastic
Rugby L and U-Great
Cricket-good
Baseball-Boooooooorrrrrrrrrrriiiiiinnnnnnnnnnngggggggg :( :( :(

this is of course just my humble opinion, but its right

I have never thought of rugby as the preserve of the public school educated.Maybe thats just cos i am?

I was saying that I find football fun to watch and even beter to play. Rugby, I never really understood Rugby. To me it's just american football for posh people(and yeah, the minority of people who aren't posh and are willing to loose all their teeth just for that single game).


I can see why you might not understand rugby, it's one of those sports that generally you can't understand unless you've played it (or watched it for a long time). I quite enjoy American football too but unfortunately I usually don't get the chance to see it because its very rarely shown here.

and actually, while rugby used to be a sport played by posh people, now the majority of players aren't. By the way, teeth generally aren't lost that much either.

Really? Cauz my year 4 teacher said that here husband used to play rugby and that he'd always come home battered and bruised, occassinally with a tooth missing(BTW Mr Trethewey wasn't really one to joke).

American football and rugby just find different ways of hurting people. I assure you, playing both football and rugby for club teams at my college, that hits in both game hurt a HELL of alot. In American football, you're wearing body armor, which lessens the amount of impact you take, but that just frees people up to just try even harder to kill you. Getting blindsided by a 230 lbs. linebacker hurts plenty good. In rugby you have less reckless abandon in trying to murder the other team, but that's offset by the no pads thing. When you get hit, you take all of that hit. There aren't any pads to absorb any of that damage; it's all you.

So, in conclusion, neither is more painful than the other. Getting hit in either is just as painful as the other. That, and baseball sucks. Fucking Red Sox.

Really? Cauz my year 4 teacher said that here husband used to play rugby and that he'd always come home battered and bruised, occassinally with a tooth missing(BTW Mr Trethewey wasn't really one to joke).

Battered and bruised doesn't surprise me, but certainly people at U19 level (where I am now) have to wear mouthguards which generally means no teeth lost.

When you get hit, you take all of that hit. There aren't any pads to absorb any of that damage; it's all you

Followed by the opposition forwards piling into you, but yes I agree with what you're saying about both sports being pretty much the same in terms of the hits, although I've never actually played American football from what i've seen it's definately true that they hit with a hell of a lot of force.

Playing against the French 1986... A sickening clash of heads loosened a few of Buck Shelford's teeth.

He played on.

He was rucked in a place most men would find sensitive.

He played on.

Finally, he was king hit and had to leave the field, one of only two occasions while wearing the black jersey.

OK, so I don't remember the ad properly, but Buck Shelford had his scrotum ripped open and one of his nuts was hanging out of his shorts. He got it taped up at half time and played on. How many gridiron players would carry on with their meat and two veg permanently rearranged?

I don't understand where you got the ideas that rugby is for posh peopleIsn't the saying something like:
"Football is a hooligan's game played by gentlemen; Rugby Union is a gentleman's game played by hooligans, and; Rugby League is a hooligan's game played by hooligans."

Isn't the saying something like:
"Football is a hooligan's game played by gentlemen; Rugby Union is a gentleman's game played by hooligans, and; Rugby League is a hooligan's game played by hooligans."

I think in that saying you got football and rugby union the wrong way around. Although, despite what it says about it being played by people, I think its actually supposed to be referring to the fans somehow.

I think in that saying you got football and rugby union the wrong way around. Although, despite what it says about it being played by people, I think its actually supposed to be referring to the fans somehow.
You might be right about the wrong way round, though if by "X's game played by Y" you have X as the spectators and Y as the players...

cricket measures ball speed in kph not mph. The fastest bowlers reach speeds of 160 kph which is almost exactly 100mph.


yes and those speeds are achieved while keeping the elbow straight!




Cricket: Ahhhh, the game of the English. The sport that takes up whole channels for hours at a time, when Wimbledon isn't on. Cricket can be a fun sport to play if you happen to be fielding somewhere near the edge of your designated "pitch", because you usually have time to go off and grab a cup of Darjeeling, check your e-mails and watch a short movie before getting back in time for the tea break, safe in the knowledge that you have not been missed.

you either have a really bad captain who put you in a bad position ALL the time OOOORRR your bowlers are really crap. if you're put in the right position you can see plenty of action



Rounders: Like baseball, but with rules that are far too simple, and usually played with sticks for bats, and jumpers for bases. I was good at rounders in school, until I found out it was a sport intended for girls.

rounders is not just for girls...its a gaelic game invented for boys and girls now play it too. remember girls couldn't play gaelic games until just recently with the introduction of camogie.

Aussie Rules: Like the above, but not actually a sport. It's a kicking contest. You find out who's god at kicking the ball through those wide poles, and then you get your team to kick him. This is what I've gathered from watching. A Professional American Football player would probably get internal bleeding from WATCHING, let alone participating.

Ahahahahaha! So very very true!

Plus, you were kind enough to imply that some thought goes into it (I suspect the truth is more along the 'kick everyone that's not wearing the same uniform as you' strain...)

Hmm, sudden urge to go read Terry Pratchett books. How odd (<- complimenting your humour there, in a very strange and round about way ;))

Anyway, as a girl who stands true to the 'you want me to participate in sports now? I think NOT' line of thought, I think I should leave this thread now

Woooooooo, cricket.
Seriously, watching cricket is the best pastime on a hot languid summer day. Even better if you're at the ground. I remember days in my youth watching the Boxing Day test at Kingsmead... And the great thing is you can do something else- like study (*shifty*) at the same time.
I wish the Australia/India series was on fee to air!!!!

And rugby gets a nod from me. Go the Boks!!! (Accidental Tri-nations champs :p )

And on netball- it is now a semi-contact sport. Trust me, I played in the open division for a club, it requires loads of fitness, flexibility and the ability to take a whack from many an opposite player. :p

Rugby is awesome to play too.