NationStates Jolt Archive

I may not play sports, but when I do watch sports (which is about once every two years) rugby is my choice. Why? In soccer, you run around and that takes skill, but there's not enough violence. In football you have it, but everyone is dressed in pads, armor, and it's no fun. Rugby you have people kicking ass without all of the padding. They're as drunk as the Irish and as fierce as the Scots. It beats the hell out of baseball, basketball, hockey, checkers, and plastic surgery.

No, if you're going to force us to play a foreign game, have us play cricket.

We already have enough people from India over here who could start it off.

No, if you're going to force us to play a foreign game, have us play cricket.

We already have enough people from India over here who could start it off.
I wonder how you could advertise it.

As long as it was a league for rugby union, and not rugby league, then yes, yes you should.

No, if you're going to force us to play a foreign game, have us play cricket.

We already have enough people from India over here who could start it off.

I think some people already started a professional Cricket
League.

I think some people already started a professional Cricket
League.
Oh? Do tell.

Oh? Do tell.

SI has a story on it a while ago. I'll see if I can find a link.

EDIT: BBC Story on it. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/cricket/3766273.stm), and The League Site. (http://www.procricket.com/index.asp)

before we can have a professional rugby league we'd have to have people willing to pay to see it.

before we can have a professional rugby league we'd have to have people willing to pay to see it.

I'd pay. Rugby is a cool sport. I played it in High School.

Not a bad sport, but I like my Football just fine. Wouldn't pay to see Rugby, but I've gone to see college games. My buddy plays. The after game parties are the best part.

I may not play sports, but when I do watch sports (which is about once every two years) rugby is my choice. Why? In soccer, you run around and that takes skill, but there's not enough violence. In football you have it, but everyone is dressed in pads, armor, and it's no fun. Rugby you have people kicking ass without all of the padding. They're as drunk as the Irish and as fierce as the Scots. It beats the hell out of baseball, basketball, hockey, checkers, and plastic surgery.

People would try, get their asses kicked, and bitch over how hard it was and that we should "Americanize" it..which is pretty much football--soft rugby.

People would try, get their asses kicked, and bitch over how hard it was and that we should "Americanize" it..which is pretty much football--soft rugby.
Get off your little ego trip, dude. Football is just as rough a Rugby.

I believe another poster put it best a while bacl. Rugby is more contact, Football is more impact. Both hard, and judging from your lack of understanding, your probably not good at either.

Try it before you judge it.

As long as it was a league for rugby union, and not rugby league, then yes, yes you should.

I agree completely play Union,

American football is just a bastadised version of Rugby League anyway (or vice versa)... with padding (LMAO)

Oh? Do tell.

I thinkk I heard about this, in Los Angeles or Oakland they have a Cricket team

There is a wheelchair rugby team. Which sorta counts. www.quadrugby.com

'Tis the National Rugby team for quadrapolegics. (I'm not sure if I spelled that right.

I play rugby. However, if you Americans started doing it properly, you'd have to surrender that longing for padding and helmets that you seem to have and brave the elements.

Also... try underwater rugby. Now that's physical.

Well I have tried both, and would say that rugby's a harder game (physically) or at least it hurts more,American Football is historically a spin-off from rugby as far as I know; but because of that it's too close to rugby for rugby to be very successful, not to mention the fact that American football is practically geared towards advertising breaks, while rugby isn't.

I play rugby. However, if you Americans started doing it properly, you'd have to surrender that longing for padding and helmets that you seem to have and brave the elements.

Also... try underwater rugby. Now that's physical.
Like I told the other poster. Try it before you proclaim it to be less violent or difficult than Rugby.

Like I told the other poster. Try it before you proclaim it to be less violent or difficult than Rugby.

I said neither.. I've played it and found it very testing
But the point remains, that you'll have give up the helmets etc.
I merely said that Underwater Rugby is physical... and it really is. I'm definately not doing it again. I almost drowned last time.

I said neither.. I've played it and found it very testing
But the point remains, that you'll have give up the helmets etc.
I merely said that Underwater Rugby is physical... and it really is. I'm definately not doing it again. I almost drowned last time.
I apologize. I seem to have over read your post. It was that last post that got me all riled up. I hate it when people talk shit about things just for the sake of it.

My bad. And underwater Rugby? Yeah, I'd probably drown too!

No, if you're going to force us to play a foreign game, have us play cricket.

My Anglo-Irish History teacher attempted to explain the rules of cricket to my class. After forty-five minutes, he had only confused us further.

If it's so inane that it literally cannot be explained, seems to me like it must be fun.

Cricket, I say! Give us cricket!

How about that Japanese sport thats kinda like a mix between hacky sack and vollyball? That seems really cool. (even thoguh there's no fuckin way I could ever do it)

Like I told the other poster. Try it before you proclaim it to be less violent or difficult than Rugby.

I've played both. What they call in the US "football" is kind of like Rugby... but Rugby is the version for the grown-ups.

I've played both. What they call in the US "football" is kind of like Rugby... but Rugby is the version for the grown-ups.
You've obviously never played real football if your saying that. Come on, just admit it. No one will make fun of you, man. Promise! x

You've obviously never played real football if your saying that. Come on, just admit it. No one will make fun of you, man. Promise! x

MIB just for the record have you ever played Rugby Union, Also the Rugby Match you saw was it Union or League. why not watch the VI Nations this year.

There is a good reason why American Football is not so popular in Europe, We Play Rugby! Far more entertaining.

Rugby Rules!!!!


Played it in Middle School, I wasn't public schooled so we had pretty much everything, it was much better then football.

You've obviously never played real football if your saying that. Come on, just admit it. No one will make fun of you, man. Promise! x

Okay, whatever. I have nothing to prove.

Surely, you realise that the same thing can be said right back at you?

I've played both... and Rugby was by far the more physically challenging, and, I thought, required more skill, and better teamwork.

But, whatever.

Play your 'football' if you want to.

Oh? Do tell.
Not sure about professional leagues, but most large consulting firms in this area have teams of Indian cricket players.

I find it a more interesting game than rugby. More strategy and psychological factors involved.

How about that Japanese sport thats kinda like a mix between hacky sack and vollyball? That seems really cool. (even thoguh there's no fuckin way I could ever do it)

The Japanese have already given us MXC, so they don't owe us anything for another decade or two.

With regards to the continually ridiculous issue of soccer/rugby/football supremacy, keep in mind that these games have different goals and different tactics. Soccer is more akin to planning and speed. Rugby focuses on opposing forces and continual motion. Football is more like war than sport, due to higher specialization of players and plays. Anyone who says a football player or a rugby player is wimpy is obviously insane, and any difference between the two types is more likley to be a player-by-player difference, or at least position-by-position. Any rugby player could likely knock over any number of quarterbacks, but the linesmen and others who do the more gritty work would provide a definite challenge.

Also, Hockey is better anyways.

I doubt rugby would do well in a nation where popular sports include those that favor the tall and fast(Basketball), hitting(baseball. Boxing also has a large following), and people getting tackled by several hundred pounds of armored opponents(American football). Although it is violent enough, it just isn't the same as people having dislocated everything. I mean, in American football, the helmet does more damage than protection. It's just something that multiplies force and keeps your head intact. Medeival armor may have decreased slicing deaths, but it has increased impact death. So no, American football isn't for wussies. It's just rugby that utilizes armor for maximum bodily damage. Something normal rugby can't compete with.

I doubt rugby would do well in a nation where popular sports include those that favor the tall and fast(Basketball), hitting(baseball. Boxing also has a large following), and people getting tackled by several hundred pounds of armored opponents(American football). Although it is violent enough, it just isn't the same as people having dislocated everything. I mean, in American football, the helmet does more damage than protection. It's just something that multiplies force and keeps your head intact. Medeival armor may have decreased slicing deaths, but it has increased impact death. So no, American football isn't for wussies. It's just rugby that utilizes armor for maximum bodily damage. Something normal rugby can't compete with.
...nor should it! :eek:

if it were rugby union, yes (as has already been said many times)

rugby is a great game - far more intricate than soccer (calling it that just for you yanks so be happy), and has a great sense of tactics... i love how its so fluid - far more so than american football which - from what i have seen (infrequently and not much) seems to involve getting the ball, running, tackling and stopping the game again. man that annoyed the hell out of me when i'm used to rugby just going on and on (only stops for serious injury or if the scrum/maul collapses/isn't going anywhere)

in short: yes you americans should play rugby more. just don't call it "rugger" like my old headmaster did...



that said, i don't know if you've got the build for it: short, wide and stocky welsh and irish celts are so the best for rugby! :p

We'll take rugby if you all take American Football.

Not sure about professional leagues, but most large consulting firms in this area have teams of Indian cricket players.

I find it a more interesting game than rugby. More strategy and psychological factors involved.

The US has an international team too, although I think only one of them was actually born in the US. They've played a total of two official one day internationals, against the teams that were ranked 1st and 2nd in the world at the time.

vs New Zealand (http://nz.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2004/OD_TOURNEYS/ICCCT/SCORECARDS/NZ_USA_ICCCT_ODI2_10SEP2004.html)

vs australia (http://nz.cricinfo.com/db/ARCHIVE/2004/OD_TOURNEYS/ICCCT/SCORECARDS/AUS_USA_ICCCT_ODI5_13SEP2004.html)


if that means anything.

Soccer hasn't really caught on here as a spectator sport, so I highly doubt rugby would have any chance of success. That being said, I think it would be amusing to have it as a school sport.

Soccer hasn't really caught on here as a spectator sport, so I highly doubt rugby would have any chance of success. That being said, I think it would be amusing to have it as a school sport.

It might have something to do with ad breaks, and attention spans.

The US might be more willing to accept Rugby League rather than union, due to its 5 tackle & turnover (hmm 4 downs & turnover) scoring (please if you do adopt rugby the word is "Try" not touchdown) conversions etc and they could take a break inbetween turnovers, which of course would mean that they would die of exhaustion on the intl stage.

If it adopted Union, well what can I say but hahahaha, player payment rules (PMS :D ), and also forwards would probably be afraid to tackle incase they got prosecuted, anyone who has ever played as a back and been tackled by a 120kg+ gorilla (Prop or hooker) knows that enough damage is caused without a helmet, it is the skill of the tackled player to minimise injury to himself not to rely on protective equip. (have broken both collar bones multiple times, Humerus and Ulna all my fingers, 6 ribs and tibia and a hell of a lot of teeth, luckily not in the same game longest I have played with injury was 74 minutes with a broken collar bone and 2 broken ribs) We won 33-7.

Well I am 15 and I live in Australia, NSW. We love Rugby League here, its like the greatest game of all time. Its real rough and tumble but also requires a lot of strategy and you have to run fast.

Oh and btw.. when I said 'We love rugby league', I was referring to NSW. The damn Victorians and Northern Territorians are all into AFL which is short for 'Kick the ball, so you don't get tackled league' or 'Wearing tight shorts and shirts with no sleeves league'.

I noticed that America does have an NRL side.. but its only international or is it? I can't be bothered to read the website. So.. if it is only international then.. You SO should start ones for just a couple of states or something, its great fun to watch.

Site for American National Rugby League: http://www.amnrl.com/

EDIT: Spelling Mistake

We'll take rugby if you all take American Football.

We have Quite a few American Football teams here, most Rugby Grounds also host American Football teams, so hows about adopting Rugby, Go on think of the enjoyment as you beat us... (the Aussies and scots do all the time)

Still love those ears just makes me want to scritch behind them

Rugby in the states?Can't imagine a commentator saying that a 'hooker' has been 'speared' by a 'scrumb half' & NOT breaking into fits of laughter.

Rugby in the states?Can't imagine a commentator saying that a 'hooker' has been 'speared' by a 'scrumb half' & NOT breaking into fits of laughter.

I don't think the FCC will allow that.

I don't think the FCC will allow that.
Loose head prop takes down hooker while scrumb half mauls back row??:p

Rugby in the states?Can't imagine a commentator saying that a 'hooker' has been 'speared' by a 'scrumb half' & NOT breaking into fits of laughter.


If a halfback speared a hooker, I would be very surprised.

Loose head prop takes down hooker while scrumb half mauls back row??:p

Yeah, the FCC (i.e. American Censorship Bureau) would lock you up with Howard Stern and Janet Jackson for that one.

If a halfback speared a hooker, I would be very surprised.

Full back had to peeled off the hooker more likely. (damn you Byrne you big Irish Blimp you crushed my throat again)

gosh all that physical contact and a good tight rucking. Rugby has been open to so many homosexual jokes throughout, espescially if you happen to be a number 8.

Mind you the have a tight end in American football,
the could always refer to the hooker as the coalface,

In soccer, you run around and that takes skill, but there's not enough violence.

You need vilonece in your sport?

You are very sad for that.

If a halfback speared a hooker, I would be very surprised.
Was going for a funny 'quote' not accuracy.Thinking about it though I'd be kinda surprised too.Spearing= ouch and much pain!!!

The Russell Crowe Gladiatorial award: Lewis Moody, not for the fight itself, but the blond sweaty hair, bleeding nose, and eyes of death at the opposition thereafter. Fit for any and every Ridley Scott movie.-- http://www.planet-rugby.com/Teams/Ireland/story_47736.shtml

I play both. Without padding.

My friends and I have been for years in the same cow pasture. and I have discovered unique advantages and disadvantages to each:

Rugby needs more people. We can play football with as few as six people, but with rugby, a decent game needs at least twelve.

Football is more strategic. Let me elaborate so I don't offend anybody: In football, there is time to consider different plays and to even radically shift a strategy on the fly. Each play in Football is potentially different. The playbooks of most major NFL teams are quite complex. Rugby needs more fluidic and long-term strategy, but there are fewr opportunities to plan and consider approaches during play.

Rugby is easier to keep playing when you're inured, because you're too hyped up on adrenaline and sweat to feel it. Footaball gives you too long between plays to realize howfucked up you are. However, ootball is better to play if you're already starting the gme injured because you have some control over your level of involvement in the game.

Of course, all this applies to recreational rugby.

As far as professional rugby goes, I suspect that rugby(union) is too short for american television. I also suspect that the big-money sports like football will absorb too much of the potential talent from rugby.

You can most definately play Rugby with 7 a side (http://www.rugby7.com)...

Rugby is an 80 minute Game, or do you mean would be too short as no breaks etc, anyway that gives you more time to sing and go to the pub (an integral part of watching rugby).

Just as a thought I don't think I have ever heard singing at an American football match when watching on TV, whereas there is very much a lot of singing at football(soccer) and I think it is written in the rules in Rugby :D

I have to say what I prefer about Rugby is that there is more opportunity for individual flair in it, in American football, every play is so calculated that they're becoming almost machine-like, they run where they're supposed to, block who they're told to and everything's orchestrated like a dance, just seems with all that pre-planning, there's less chance for an individual player to pull off a great bit of skill or pull something out of the hat in an instant.

I have to say what I prefer about Rugby is that there is more opportunity for individual flair in it, in American football, every play is so calculated that they're becoming almost machine-like, they run where they're supposed to, block who they're told to and everything's orchestrated like a dance, just seems with all that pre-planning, there's less chance for an individual player to pull off a great bit of skill or pull something out of the hat in an instant.


Read: C.M. Cullen.

Football is more strategic. Let me elaborate so I don't offend anybody: In football, there is time to consider different plays and to even radically shift a strategy on the fly.

Taking a little time-out to catch your breath, every time someone moves? it IS a strategy, I suppose...

We need a North American Rugby League. Not that it matters... I've already begun touring the world playing Rugby.

Just as a thought I don't think I have ever heard singing at an American football match when watching on TV, whereas there is very much a lot of singing at football(soccer) and I think it is written in the rules in Rugby :D

Not too many songs get heard at the arena, but they're usually classic oldies. You'll hear a great deal of "Na Na Hey Hey Goodbye" during the playoffs, along with "We Are the Champions" and a few other victory-associated tunes. I also recall one night at a Saint John Flames game where three of our sections broke into "Burning Down thr House" during a four-nothing lead.