NationStates Jolt Archive

which is more hardcore? ;)

remember that American 'football' players wear shitloads of padding but the tackles are way harsh; while Rugby has rules about tackling but no padding and its pretty easy to get your ear ripped off in the scrum

for those not in the know: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_football


and for those in the know, League or Union?

Union pwns all. You don't need no wussy body-armour. Also you need to play tactically with the backpass rules.

Honestly, I know rugby is incredibly rough, but I seriously think that American Football is more violent. I would submit the number of catastrophic injuries that result from the game, even with the protections, as evidence.

I am a fan of Rugby though. Go All Blacks.

Eh, this isn't a very good question I don't think, because while a few Americans might actually answer "Rugby," no European on the planet would prefer American Football, at least not from what I've seen. It's a cultural thing, really. Football is hardly played beyond our borders.

Oh and by the way, I can't help but point out: PADS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE QUALITY OF A GAME!

Union pwns all. You don't need no wussy body-armour. Also you need to play tactically with the backpass rules.


Body-armour? hahaha. I invite you to put on the "body-armour" and join in a nice college level game as a running back. ;)

American Football. The Hits are vicious and the way the game goes depends on how well your strategy works. If your strategy fails, your in a crap load of trouble when you fall behind.

If you don't have a strategy, your not going to win games. Not to mention some of the catches are spectacular as well as some of the runbacks and the options are cool!

Gotta go with American football.

GO BRONCOS!

Ok Cheese. We'll put on the armour, and you can stand in the front row of a scrum.

Oh, and PM, why waste bandwidth even asking. Union, all the way, by miles, for eternity.

Rugby! leicester Tigers!

Rugby! leicester Tigers!

AY!!

Ok Cheese. We'll put on the armour, and you can stand in the front row of a scrum.

Getting hit by a 300lb lineman is not what I call a good time if your a running back. Especially if 2 of them hit ya! *shudders*

The better game is rugby union.

The toughest? League. Or more accurately, origin football. They have some of the heaviest tackles around and you have to get up and go again even harder after you get tackled. I've seen guys try 2 or 3 times to get back to their feet after a heavy tackle before running back and continuing with the game. It's something though that very, very few Americans will have ever witnessed.

Or you could just play rugby union and wait until you're on the end of a Jerry Collins special...

Getting hit by a 300lb lineman is not what I call a good time if your a running back. Especially if 2 of them hit ya! *shudders*

Real scrums are pretty harsh too mate. I'll take getting knocked on my ass over being a front-row any day.

go Wales!

god i'm looking forward to the six nations being back on tv soon... Rugby is such a good tactical game to watch.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1080000/images/_1084693_2312_gar_thom_300.jpg

Ok Cheese. We'll put on the armour, and you can stand in the front row of a scrum.

Oh, and PM, why waste bandwidth even asking. Union, all the way, by miles, for eternity.

Ok, suit me up. I was All-State back in HS.

BTW if this country boy could handle 300lb behemoths in college, I think I can handle some drunken Englishman. ;)

go Wales!

god i'm looking forward to the six nations being back on tv soon... Rugby is such a good tactical game to watch.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/1080000/images/_1084693_2312_gar_thom_300.jpg

Oh this is nothing. I"ve seen harder hits done in the National Football League.

Neither is as hardcore as UFC (http://www.ufc.tv). Ok, it's comparing apples to oranges, but it's true.

Ok, suit me up. I was All-State back in HS.

BTW if this country boy could handle 300lb behemoths in college, I think I can handle some drunken Englishman. ;)

You'll get your nose bitten off ;)

The better game is rugby union.

The toughest? League. Or more accurately, origin football. They have some of the heaviest tackles around and you have to get up and go again even harder after you get tackled. I've seen guys try 2 or 3 times to get back to their feet after a heavy tackle before running back and continuing with the game. It's something though that very, very few Americans will have ever witnessed.

Or you could just play rugby union and wait until you're on the end of a Jerry Collins special...

Or play League *shudder*, and wait for a 99 call.

And Wurzels right, scrums are bad. Problem is, I'm too slow to play anywhere else on the pitch, so I get a choice of prop or lock. Either way, its gonna hurt.

Oh this is nothing. I"ve seen harder hits done in the National Football League.

Thats not really a hit, just a good technically sound 'cheek to cheek' tackle.

Thats not really a hit, just a good technically sound 'cheek to cheek' tackle.

I've still seen harder hits in the NFL than I have in Rugby.

Ok, suit me up. I was All-State back in HS.

BTW if this country boy could handle 300lb behemoths in college, I think I can handle some drunken Englishman. ;)

Suit you up? In shorts and a shirt? Ok. See that tall Kiwi over there? His name's Jonah. Call him a poof, go on.

Football. Back in the day padding was added because even the biggest pussies in America would hit each other so hard in the original american derivative of rugby that they would kill and paralyze each other with some regularity. Ultimately, an ultimatum from Teddy Roosevelt caused the foreward pass to be invented, a lo' there was Football, and it was good.

Oddly, as protection got more effective, the hits got more vicious (hey it won't hurt me as much if we colide at 45mph or better, we've both got tons of protection, and I get to pick where and how I hit.) That professional football was a side job for blue collar workers and basically one step removed from a criminal organization probably didn't hurt.

The explosion of American media transformed it into a billionairs and millionairs club that it is today, and that gave the athletes the time, and created the demand, to achive the condition they're in today.

Or play League *shudder*, and wait for a 99 call.

And Wurzels right, scrums are bad. Problem is, I'm too slow to play anywhere else on the pitch, so I get a choice of prop or lock. Either way, its gonna hurt.
heh same here - had to be in the scrum at school just cos i was bigger than the other kids :P
there were two fat kids in our year: me and this other dude Alex. no matter what teams we were put on we always swapped players round so we were on the same side in the scrum... it was either that or a scrum that went round in circles every time :p

American Football. Both are fun to watch, but the level of strategy and depth involved in American Football makes it that much more interesting.

NFL games are decent... College games are where it's at. Every game is interesting, and nothing beats a rivalry game (Michigan vs. Ohio State, Pittsburgh vs. West Virginia in the "Backyard Brawl").

Rugby Union is tougher than American Football. Im not gonna comment on which game I prefer but the body takes more damaging hits because of the lack of padding. The American Football tackles are probably harder because of the padding but less damaging, other than the reckless tackles.

Union is tougher than league as well. By a long way

I took my work experiance at R.A.F Cotesmore in the Photography section whare one day it was necesery for me to go out and take photos of a Rugby match between R.A.F cottesmore and R.A.F Digby (two rival sporting stations) and after watching that (which was considerably more violent than when i saw a tigers match against glocester) and then comparing it to when i say the atlanta city AFB team against .....i dont remember but i saw the match it atlanta 2 years ago..i think rugby is better..seems more strategic and violent.. :)

Rugby Union is tougher than American Football. Im not gonna comment on which game I prefer but the body takes more damaging hits because of the lack of padding. The American Football tackles are probably harder because of the padding but less damaging, other than the reckless tackles.

Union is tougher than league as well. By a long way
I know what Ed McCaffery's bones look like when they're poking through his skin.

I know what Ed McCaffery's bones look like when they're poking through his skin.

and i know what tim stimsons leg looks like with the leg the other round from the knee :)

American Football. Both are fun to watch, but the level of strategy and depth involved in American Football makes it that much more interesting.

NFL games are decent... College games are where it's at. Every game is interesting, and nothing beats a rivalry game (Michigan vs. Ohio State, Pittsburgh vs. West Virginia in the "Backyard Brawl").

Rugby has a lot of strategy, although it might take a while of watching to notice it. The difference is that in rugby it generally has to be done on the fly, you don't get to stop and set up for it. You have more room to be purely strategical in Football, but rugby still has a lot to it.

I know what Ed McCaffery's bones look like when they're poking through his skin.

I'll have a medal made up especially.

The scrum is a very dangerous place in rugby. You wont get anything like it in american football. If the scrum collapses - and its generally not very far from it - necks could be broken. Not to mention all of the hits taken away from the vision of the ref.

Ok, arms and legs are unprotected in both but the body and head arent in rugby and they're the most vital areas to protect

Rugby has a lot of strategy, although it might take a while of watching to notice it. The difference is that in rugby it generally has to be done on the fly, you don't get to stop and set up for it. You have more room to be purely strategical in Football, but rugby still has a lot to it.

I take then you never seen a desperation strategy in the NFL? Normally done at the QB's descretion. Those make for an even more interesting game.

Rugby Union is tougher than American Football. Im not gonna comment on which game I prefer but the body takes more damaging hits because of the lack of padding. The American Football tackles are probably harder because of the padding but less damaging, other than the reckless tackles.

Union is tougher than league as well. By a long way

I take it you haven't played League then.

You are right when you say Union is a better game, but League is another level above it in terms of physicallity. It's not until you look at International / Premiership Union compared with Super League / SOO / International League that the games are comparable.

I take it you haven't played League then.

You are right when you say Union is a better game, but League is another level above it in terms of physicallity. It's not until you look at International / Premiership Union compared with Super League / SOO / International League that the games are comparable.


I think the level of physicality in Union is higher....the scrum and the hits would appear to be harder. But i think League players have a better level of fitness

League is tougher in the hits because they aren't trying to tackle them in a way to make it easier to get up and get their hands on the ball. They're just trying to smash them.

Just trying to flatten them in either code isn't always the best way anyway. I remember several players trying to put big hits on Christian Cullen, and they'd look like plonkers when they tackled air.

I'll have a medal made up especially.

The scrum is a very dangerous place in rugby. You wont get anything like it in american football. If the scrum collapses - and its generally not very far from it - necks could be broken. Not to mention all of the hits taken away from the vision of the ref.

Ok, arms and legs are unprotected in both but the body and head arent in rugby and they're the most vital areas to protect

I've heard of a few players, especially in the lower grades, who have severely damaged their neck when a scrum has collapsed. Anyone at a professinal level has too gooder positioning for that to happen though.

I take then you never seen a desperation strategy in the NFL? Normally done at the QB's descretion. Those make for an even more interesting game.

Especially when you've got a Quarterback like Dan Marino, John Elway, or Tom Brady.

John Elway is still the most exciting to watch. He was the fucking master.

American Football requires you to wear really tight shorts so its gotta be far more painful

I think the level of physicality in Union is higher....the scrum and the hits would appear to be harder. But i think League players have a better level of fitness

Agreed. After union turned pro in 95 lots of league players went off to make a bit of money blaying union. When they came back, it was well noted how unfit they had become

American Football requires you to wear really tight shorts so its gotta be far more painful

Eh? Those are actually very flexible/stretchable pants. They feel quite good.

I've heard of a few players, especially in the lower grades, who have severely damaged their neck when a scrum has collapsed. Anyone at a professinal level has too gooder positioning for that to happen though.
I've seen that happen on a televised NFL game too. But as you say, Rugby is so hardcore at the professional level that that kind of thing doesn't happen. Then there was that kid who was flat out killed in a high school football game a while back too.

But seeing the bone pop through the skin is a little more visceral, and not quite as sad (particularly because I hate the Broncos).

As for the hits that refs don't see, that's just part of football. One of the more notorious players would dive into piles of guys, such as during a fumble, and bite people. That's just crazy.

I like Rugby more.

American Football is fun to watch, but I don't know, Rugby's got that 'zazz' of some sort.

It's beautiful.

plus it's more hardcore. :D

Especially when you've got a Quarterback like Dan Marino, John Elway, or Tom Brady.

Hell yea

John Elway is still the most exciting to watch. He was the fucking master.

And my favorite football player of all time and the best quarterback to watch if you want my opinion. Glad we agree on this Potaria :)

But seeing the bone pop through the skin is a little more visceral, and not quite as sad (particularly because I hate the Broncos).

Are you talking about the Denver Broncos?

Hell yea



And my favorite football player of all time and the best quarterback to watch if you want my opinion. Glad we agree on this Potaria :)

Damn right. Marino was the better "pure" Quarterback, but Elway was the better athlete. Both of equal ability, though in different ways.

Marino was fun to watch, because he ruthlessly picked his opponents apart. Elway was fun to watch, just because he could beat you in any way he wanted. And nobody, NOBODY can throw the ball as hard as he can. Wow.

I say American football is tougher and harsher. You put on loads and loads of padding and still manage to dislocate something or break a few bones, then we'll talk. Plus, it's America's real favorite pasttime. Why do you think it costs so much to put comercials on during the superbowl? Only big corporate companies with millions of dollars to blow can afford even 30 seconds.

Damn right. Marino was the better "pure" Quarterback, but Elway was the better athlete. Both of equal ability, though in different ways.

Marino was fun to watch, because he ruthlessly picked his opponents apart. Elway was fun to watch, just because he could beat you in any way he wanted. And nobody, NOBODY can throw the ball as hard as he can. Wow.

Can't argue with a single word you just said because it is all true :)

Plus, it's America's real favorite pasttime. Why do you think it costs so much to put comercials on during the superbowl? Only big corporate companies with millions of dollars to blow can afford even 30 seconds.

Oh well that proves it then :rolleyes: :D

One of the more notorious players would dive into piles of guys, such as during a fumble, and bite people. That's just crazy.

Thats not quite as crazy as Rugby League player John Hopoate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hopoate) who scored a 12 week suspension from the NRL a while back for...... poking his finger up various players backsides.

http://wesclark.com/rrr/hopoates_finger.jpg


One of the reason's why Rugby Union is better than rugby league (that pic is league if you're wondering)

Can't argue with a single word you just said because it is all true :)

You're damn right it is.

86 miles per hour is fast for a football. F-A-S-T.

Thats not quite as crazy as Rugby League player John Hopoate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hopoate) who scored a 12 week suspension from the NRL a while back for...... poking his finger up various players backsides.

http://wesclark.com/rrr/hopoates_finger.jpg


One of the reason's why Rugby Union is better than rugby league (that pic is league if you're wondering)

LMAO!

Rugby Union is poetry, fluid, beautiful, flowing movement. The gods of the game are not the big crunching tacklers (although there is a certain beauty about seeing some impressive run stopped by as though the runner had hit a brick wall), but the passers and runners, the ones who see that space and move into it. In American football you can pass FORWARD for godsakes? NO! Thats just too easy.

Compare Barry John or Gareth Edwards with any of your American football players. Compare the swerve, the verve, the style, the motherf*cking elan they show. THATS why rugby union wins and will always win in my eyes. It's not about the blood and thunder, but the grace.

Rugby League is Rugby Union with most of the grace taken out, and more broken teeth. Likeable enough sport, but...really? It's like South Park to Unions The Simpsons.

*NB the above was written about a style of rugby union primarily played by all teams in the sixties and seventies, then the Celtic Nations, the French and the All Blacks thereon. Not the thuggish percentage game of the England World Cup squad.

You're damn right it is.

86 miles per hour is fast for a football. F-A-S-T.

Yes it is. And Elway had pinpoint accuracy, even if he was under pressure (which he was alot most of the time :p)

I say American football is tougher and harsher. You put on loads and loads of padding and still manage to dislocate something or break a few bones, then we'll talk. Plus, it's America's real favorite pasttime. Why do you think it costs so much to put comercials on during the superbowl? Only big corporate companies with millions of dollars to blow can afford even 30 seconds.

Rugby is tougher, mainly cos theres no long breaks in play after one hit. In football you can take a real tough hit, but then youve got time to recover, in rugby you can take a (maybe) not as tough hit, but then straight after youve got to pick yourself up and maybe tackle another player. Rugby is more intense.

Yes it is. And Elway had pinpoint accuracy, even if he was under pressure (which he was alot most of the time :p)

His accuracy was uncanny, and how *high* he could throw the ball was just incredible. He could throw it higher and farther than any punter could kick!

And, to complement all this, he could *run* (4.70 on the 40-yard dash). While not as fast as Michael Vick, he was faster than Donovan McNabb, who's quite fast for a Quarterback.

Rugby Union is poetry, fluid, beautiful, flowing movement. The gods of the game are not the big crunching tacklers (although there is a certain beauty about seeing some impressive run stopped by as though the runner had hit a brick wall), but the passers and runners, the ones who see that space and move into it. In American football you can pass FORWARD for godsakes? NO! Thats just too easy.

Compare Barry John or Gareth Edwards with any of your American football players. Compare the swerve, the verve, the style, the motherf*cking elan they show. THATS why rugby union wins and will always win in my eyes. It's not about the blood and thunder, but the grace.

Rugby League is Rugby Union with most of the grace taken out, and more broken teeth. Likeable enough sport, but...really? It's like South Park to Unions The Simpsons.

*NB the above was written about a style of rugby union primarily played by all teams in the sixties and seventies, then the Celtic Nations, the French and the All Blacks thereon. Not the thuggish percentage game of the England World Cup squad.

Thats why Christian Cullen will always be my favourite player :) Although he didn't pass enough, he ran better than anyone I've seen in rugby. Too bad injuries slowed him down.

American Football, all the way (Go Giants!)

Yah, so what if we use padding. Wouldn't YOU want padding, if you were about to get tackled by several 300 + lbs guys? I played football in high school, and I played football in college for my first three years. Trust me, even with the padding, you are still hurting at the end of the day.

Thats why Christian Cullen will always be my favourite player :) Although he didn't pass enough, he ran better than anyone I've seen in rugby. Too bad injuries slowed him down.

Oh Cullen was good, yeah, really good. But for me, i still hark back to those glorious days of the 70s where there was a patch in the corner of the Cardiff Arms Park that Gareth Edwards seemed to be magnetically drawn to. The fantastic try - i hope you've seen - the Barbarians scored against the All Blacks in the mid 70s, which featured about a dozen players running the ball from virtually their own try line, and finished off by the Welsh wizard with his usual aplomb.

*sighs* Happy days!

And, judging by the last Six Nations, they may well be on their way back :)

ya well atleast american football players don't hold back in finesse. because of that, it is the tougher sport. AND I'VE PLAYED BOTH. Rugby is more fun though.

Oh Cullen was good, yeah, really good. But for me, i still hark back to those glorious days of the 70s where there was a patch in the corner of the Cardiff Arms Park that Gareth Edwards seemed to be magnetically drawn to. The fantastic try - i hope you've seen - the Barbarians scored against the All Blacks in the mid 70s, which featured about a dozen players running the ball from virtually their own try line, and finished off by the Welsh wizard with his usual aplomb.

*sighs* Happy days!

And, judging by the last Six Nations, they may well be on their way back :)

Bernie Fraser had a similar corner at the southern end of the old Athletic Park in Wellington. There was always the famous 'Bernie's corner' sign hanging there :)

I saw that try a bunch of times during the lions tour, but I'm only 19 so I grew up watching rugby during the 90's.. Cullen, Lomu, Jeff Wilson et al. I remeber seeing a bit of the great Australian winger David Campese play too when I was really young.

Rugby is tougher, mainly cos theres no long breaks in play after one hit. In football you can take a real tough hit, but then youve got time to recover, in rugby you can take a (maybe) not as tough hit, but then straight after youve got to pick yourself up and maybe tackle another player. Rugby is more intense.
My point exactly american football players don't have to play with finesse like rugby guys do. That way they hit more often and much harder most of the time than rugby players.

Bernie Fraser had a similar corner at the southern end of the old Athletic Park in Wellington. There was always the famous 'Bernie's corner' sign hanging there :)

I saw that try a bunch of times during the lions tour, but I'm only 19 so I grew up watching rugby during the 90's.. Cullen, Lomu, Jeff Wilson et al. I remeber seeing a bit of the great Australian winger David Campese play too when I was really young.

Oh, i grew up with the gods and just as i hit puberty Wales went shite, dammit.

But, yeah, goddamn, JONAH LOMU. The time he walked THROUGH about four English players and didn't break sweat, contemptously tossing Rory Underwood to one side, beautiful.

Campese was something special as well...the Australian game was generally closer to the English percentage game, quite thuggish, but then Campo would start one of his lil jinking runs, class.

If only the Lions had been led by a manager who realised the only way to get close to beating the All Blacks was play a flowing game, they might have had a chance last tour. But nooooo, lets call up the already past it Englishmen and try and bore our way to victory again, WHY NOT?

Clive Woodward revealed himself to be a one trick pony on that tour. How that bodes for his new career in Football, who knows?

I'm an American, but I could care less about football, and I know nothing about rugby.

You can't really compare American football and rugby. Two very different sports, because football nowadays football is more about the pass than the run and because of defensive assignments/playcalling for offense. Now, I'm not saying it's better than one or the other because that is an opinion. What I do know, is that I wouldn't want to line up against someone like Robert Gallery. He's a monster. 6'7", 330 lbs, he can run a 40 in 4.8, his squat is 600 and his bench is 400. I'm a fan of college football, and the NFL has just introduced a couple of what I call "sissy rules" so I'm moving even further away from pro football. One of the rules is that you pretty much can't touch the kicker, and the other is that if someone is not going to make a play, you can't hit him. Here's a video with some highlights from a college game. (Iowa-Purdue) I had tickets to that game but I couldn't go because of a chorus concert. BOO!
(The picture quality is pretty low)Video (http://www.scothawk.com/flvswfpublish/2004highlights/2004purdue.swf)
My favorite part is at about 4 minutes when Roth jsut labels Purdue's kicker then their qb.

This whole debate is irrelevant. Everyone knows the toughest game is Hockey. Not only do you have to take brutal hits into the boards, you have to get right back up wearing ice skates.

Honestly, I know rugby is incredibly rough, but I seriously think that American Football is more violent. I would submit the number of catastrophic injuries that result from the game, even with the protections, as evidence.

I am a fan of Rugby though. Go All Blacks.

i too like rugby, but you are right in that football is more violent:

Wearing pads is a double-edged sword:

yes, they do protect the player in some ways, but they also allow the players to go at each other in ways that, if done in rugby, would end up with half the players being knocked out.

helmet-to-helmet hits end up in numerous concussions... players being driven into the ground ends up in shoulder dislocations... there are numerous knee injuries every week... serious ones, like torn ACLs.

part of it is that there are basically no tackling rules in football -- yes you can be called for spearing or a penalty if you go for a player's head, but it happens anyway. and the speed of the game is faster in the nfl than it is in top rugby leagues... NFL athletes are probably -- in terms of size, strength and speed -- the best athletes in the world. NFL players who are my size (about 190 pounds, or roughly 85 kilograms) can bench press 350-400 pounds (~160-180 KG). The arms, chests, and legs of even the smallest NFL players (barring kickers and punters) are impressively built.

Now imagine these huge, fast, immensely strong athletes running full-speed at each other, able to hit each other anywhere on the body. It is a vicious sport.

Rugby Union is poetry, fluid, beautiful, flowing movement. The gods of the game are not the big crunching tacklers (although there is a certain beauty about seeing some impressive run stopped by as though the runner had hit a brick wall), but the passers and runners, the ones who see that space and move into it. In American football you can pass FORWARD for godsakes? NO! Thats just too easy.

Compare Barry John or Gareth Edwards with any of your American football players. Compare the swerve, the verve, the style, the motherf*cking elan they show. THATS why rugby union wins and will always win in my eyes. It's not about the blood and thunder, but the grace.

Rugby League is Rugby Union with most of the grace taken out, and more broken teeth. Likeable enough sport, but...really? It's like South Park to Unions The Simpsons.

*NB the above was written about a style of rugby union primarily played by all teams in the sixties and seventies, then the Celtic Nations, the French and the All Blacks thereon. Not the thuggish percentage game of the England World Cup squad.
damn straight - Union is such a graceful, fluid game when played properly. its also not as stop-start as american football (something i just got annoyed at the few bits i've seen on tv). and as somebody's already said, the tactics and strategy in rugby have to be decided on the fly, in game, meaning each player both has to be smart(ish), have a real idea of appropriate tactics, and be properly on the ball not only to know what the opposition are doing, but the strategy his own team is adopting in the field.
while i don't want to dig or badmouth american football, i do say that this is far more interesting than just stopping play and being told what tactics/strategy to use...

edit: and yeah, what is with passing forward? thats too easy! :p

This whole debate is irrelevant. Everyone knows the toughest game is Hockey. Not only do you have to take brutal hits into the boards, you have to get right back up wearing ice skates.
hell yeah! ice hockey rules!
i just wish it was more popular in the UK :(
...and that we were better - i mean the Cardiff Devils s-u-c-k-e-d :p

then again thats compared to the only other team i've seen play: the new york rangers... possibly not a fair comparison even if the rangers aren't that good :p

American Football requires you to wear really tight shorts so its gotta be far more painful

Yeah, esp for the fans...The Fridge anyone? haha :p

My point exactly american football players don't have to play with finesse like rugby guys do. That way they hit more often and much harder most of the time than rugby players.

Now, now. Finesse is an important part of Football. You want to see finesse, just look at any ball carrying star in the NFL (RB,QB,WR,TE). Their footwork and sense of balance are awesome, Watch Jerry Rice clips and Barry Sanders clips for a demo. ;)

Now, now. Finesse is an important part of Football. You want to see finesse, just look at any ball carrying star in the NFL (RB,QB,WR,TE). Their footwork and sense of balance are awesome, Watch Jerry Rice clips and Barry Sanders clips for a demo. ;)

Can't wait to see Jerry Rice in a Broncos Uniform

Can't wait to see Jerry Rice in a Broncos Uniform

I wish Rice would just retire. He should have retired after the 49ers, you know just to go out on top. I know he is still in great shape and loves the game, but it's better to go out on top then watch your skills fading. I also thought Smith should have retired instead of being released by the Cowboys.

i've never seen american football, but can't be as good as Rugby. hm, league is probabli better to watch as the guys look better.

i've never seen american football, but can't be as good as Rugby. hm, league is probabli better to watch as the guys look better.

How would you know until you've seen American football?

How would you know until you've seen American football?
cos rugby is just that great? :confused:

Let's clear up a misconception amongst my non-football playing American colleagues. Linemen don't hit particularly hard. We've only got about 3 feet of momentum behind us when we hit the other line, so the only time a lineman lays a really vicious hit is when a D-lineman gets past the O-line and sacks the quarterback. Linemen are there to push the other team around, not maim, murder, or destroy them. What you're all thinking of are linebackers. They're the 240-250 pound guys that start five to eight yards off the line and charge in. They're the ones you see decapitating running backs, because they get a good 20 or 30 mph before the hit people. Just wanted to clear that up.

Anyone who has not taken a hit in pads is not qualified to say that it's "wussy" or "pussy" or anything else. I've played rugby and football on the competitive level, and they're both very different animals. I've noticed that in these discussions that the rugby fans are the only ones who feel it necessary to insult the other side's manhood.

I've noticed that in these discussions that the rugby fans are the only ones who feel it necessary to insult the other side's manhood.
perhaps some, but i think the real rugby fans are the ones who appreciate the grace and sublety of the game over any barbarics... they're just a fun extra :D

perhaps some, but i think the real rugby fans are the ones who appreciate the grace and sublety of the game over any barbarics... they're just a fun extra :D

Well you don't hear the football fans saying "rugby players are pussies because they're half the size and move half as fast as football players". It's really quite frustrating to watch, knowing those rugby fans have never taken anything resembling a football hit in their entire lives.

I've noticed that in these discussions that the rugby fans are the only ones who feel it necessary to insult the other side's manhood.

Not me, not in the slightest. I just think Rugby is far more graceful and - yes, sod it - beautiful a game.

Well you don't hear the football fans saying "rugby players are pussies because they're half the size and move half as fast as football players". It's really quite frustrating to watch, knowing those rugby fans have never taken anything resembling a football hit in their entire lives.
no you don't. i meant that the fanboys are the ones saying that BS but the real rugby fans are the ones leaving that alone and talking about whatever it was i just said

either way i'm tired, my cat is dead, and i'm going to sleep. night all

I'd have to say American football. The linemen are bred to be 300 pound freaking behemoths. Quarterbacks and recievers aren't very threatening, but the defensive teams or linemen are something to be reckoned with. I also personally have to say because I have seen much harder hits in football than I have seen in Rugby.

I know why football has padding. Without pads, players would be outright killed within a season.

Union all the way! American football is a collision sport while rugby is a contact sport. The fluidity of the rugby games surpasses the choppy nature of the American game. Further, try's are more impressive than touchdown when you factor in there are no blockers. The on and off the field camaraderie is much more evident in rugby. The athletes are fitter in rugby than in football plus we drink more beer! ;)

rugby is way tougher ive watched many players break, shatter , and dislocate many-a-bones

rugby is way tougher ive watched many players break, shatter , and dislocate many-a-bones

WOW! I see many players break, shatter, and dislocate many a bones in the National Football Leaque as well. The Injury reports are littered with them.

I wish Rice would just retire. He should have retired after the 49ers, you know just to go out on top. I know he is still in great shape and loves the game, but it's better to go out on top then watch your skills fading. I also thought Smith should have retired instead of being released by the Cowboys.
Yeah everyone says they'd go out on top, but they're all liars. To go out onto the field, to feel that warm embrace of the hometowm fans, to compete at the very highest physical level, to test yourself and measure up to exacting standards every damn day, I bet that's way better than crack. Especially, when you've achived the kinds of things Rice has, now with him being a less important player he probably has more time to absorb the atmosphere in a way and with a perspective that he just couldn't afford when he was at his peak.

So what if he can't play at the level he used to? There will come a day when he can't play in the NFL and can't deny it. Until them, he's earned every right to enjoy the time he's got left in his career as a player. I certainly haven't done so much that I feel qualified to deny him that.

This whole debate is irrelevant. Everyone knows the toughest game is Hockey. Not only do you have to take brutal hits into the boards, you have to get right back up wearing ice skates.

Amen!

As for Rugby vs Gridiron, I'm going with they are currently at approximately the same level of violence, but have seesawed back and forth historically.

For example, if you go back to pre-1905 gridiron, the age of no padding and the flying wedge, I'll say gridiron was more violent.

1905 was the year in which President Theodore Roosevelt treatened to outlaw the game due to the high numer of deaths and critical injuries.　The solution was rule changes that made trhe game safer. It was also around this time that more players began wearing pads.

Even after the rules changes were instituted, it was still quite dangerous - 33 deaths at the college leve in 1909. In 1910 the extremely dangerous flying wedge and other interlocking formations were outlawed.

Helmets were not required until 1941. Other rules cahnges have outlawed dangerous play since.

http://www.sportsknowhow.com/football/history/football-history-2.shtml
http://halife.com/books/history/football.html
http://www.footballresearch.com/articles/frpage.cfm?topic=rulesname

Thats not quite as crazy as Rugby League player John Hopoate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hopoate) who scored a 12 week suspension from the NRL

One of the reason's why Rugby Union is better than rugby league (that pic is league if you're wondering)
Dude.... < I'll come back and figure out what to write later.... > Aside from lending creedence to every comment any American has ever made about Rugby just being guys in shorts playing grab ass, I ... that was just not right. That is entirely the wrong kind of crazy. I initially thought he was just punching a guy in the nuts because he's a bastard. And in a way, I could have respected that more.

Yeah everyone says they'd go out on top, but they're all liars.

Oh brother. Elway said he wanted to go out on top and he did too. He retired after winning two straight superbowls. So no. Not all of them are liars.