[All-Blacks]

I know I should of posted in the sports post, but as not many people go there i'd thought as this is a general chat it fits into the category.

Anyways, i'd like to hear your comments & reasons of what sport do you think is the more complete sport, Rugby or American Football. When I say complete, I mean all the skills & physicallity required for the sports eg-endurance, ball skills, tackling, strength etc.
I admit that American Football probably just pips Rugby in the physical aspect, but what about the other skills & attributes? Is fitness important in Football? Why? Why do need different players to do different skills in Football? Every rugby player needs a basic knowledge of everything eg-passing, tackling, kicking etc. while each player in Football has one task (practically).

So what is more complete sport to play, Football or Rugby?

PS-Please only comment if you know a basic knowledge of BOTH sports.

[anuj]

Er... rugby. I played football for four years, and smacked/smacked around some of the larger people I've ever met. There's no way I'd ever step into a rugby match, though. I played four-five times as a club sport, and goddamn if I didn't hurt like a motherf*cker afterwards. I guess I got used to the shoulder padding/helmets.

Although your statement about football players needing to know one task is pretty much wrong for all levels of the game. Almost everyone plays both ways in high school, tons of players play more than one position, and even in the pros a few players play both ways. I know that I had to know how to play pretty much EVERYTHING back in high school.

[RMT]

High school field hockey was nasty. NO-ONE ever swung for the ball. Rather each other's shins. Everyone hobbled off the pitch. Rugby got bad too. Especially when it went from touch rugby to full rugby. Oh, and the old favorite, Prison Rules Football (Soccer).

I'd say Rugby. Nice when you sprint past the fat kid for the 4th time. But on the 5th time when he mauls you, it aint so fun.

Quick edit: British bulldog can get nasty. Dunno if it counts as a sport though.

[Big Slow]

Rugby. There is no comparison, I mean, do the even wear cups?

[TheRoper]

QUOTE (anuj @ Dec 23 2006, 18:50)

Almost everyone plays both ways in high school...

Ewww, what high school did you go to?



I would also have to say rugby, though I enjoy American football more (Probably just 'cuz that's what I was raised on)... Although, while rugby players play without padding/helmets (cups?), they also don't weigh 250lbs like some football players, so sometimes football can hurt a lot more.

Still, I say rugby's gnarlier, but I still prefer football.

[Maverick.]

QUOTE (RMT @ Dec 24 2006, 13:18)

Quick edit: British bulldog can get nasty. Dunno if it counts as a sport though.

Hell yeah. That game was/is the sh*t.

I remember back in the day people would end up with blood dripping from their faces and bruises all over. Damn it was fun.

[Moonshield]

QUOTE (Big Slow @ Dec 23 2006, 21:41)

Rugby. There is no comparison, I mean, do the even wear cups?

Only f*cking pussies wear cups in football. We're not talking about peewee leagues.

I agree with anuj's second statement about playing both ways, like I said in the other Rugby vs American Football topic.

[TheRoper]

QUOTE (Moonshield @ Dec 23 2006, 20:08)

QUOTE (Big Slow @ Dec 23 2006, 21:41) Rugby. There is no comparison, I mean, do the even wear cups? Only f*cking pussies wear cups in football. We're not talking about peewee leagues...

Yes because real men feel no pain after a swift kick to the nuts.

[All-Blacks]

QUOTE

Although, while rugby players play without padding/helmets (cups?), they also don't weigh 250lbs like some football players, so sometimes football can hurt a lot more

Where have you been playing rugby, Sri Lanka ? I can assure you that most rugby players (excluding the scrumhalf, flyhalf and some wings) weigh over 200 lbs/90-100+ kiligrams. I would say American Football players are about the same size as Rugby players. There are small players in both sports (quarter backs/scrumhalfs) and big players (offensive guards/props).

Just out of curiosity, is rugby that popular in the USA? Do most schools have a 1st XV rugby team? I'm hoping USA gets to hold the Rugby World Cup in 2015 or 2019 to make it more popular like what the FIFA World Cup did in 1994. Of all the countries the IRB need to focus on for popularity, is the USA (& Japan).

[TheRoper]

QUOTE (All-Blacks @ Dec 23 2006, 20:24)

QUOTE Although, while rugby players play without padding/helmets (cups?), they also don't weigh 250lbs like some football players, so sometimes football can hurt a lot more Where have you been playing rugby, Sri Lanka ? I can assure you that most rugby players (excluding the scrumhalf, flyhalf and some wings) weigh over 200 lbs/90-100+ kiligrams. I would say American Football players are about the same size as Rugby players. There are small players in both sports (quarter backs/scrumhalfs) and big players (offensive guards/props). Just out of curiosity, is rugby that popular in the USA? Do most schools have a 1st XV rugby team? I'm hoping USA gets to hold the Rugby World Cup in 2015 or 2019 to make it more popular like what the FIFA World Cup did in 1994. Of all the countries the IRB need to focus on for popularity, is the USA (& Japan).

Hmm, didn't realize that about the size of the players, sorry. To be honest, I've only seen parts of a handful of games on ESPN2 as it's not televised very much here. But from what I remember, it was intense.



edit: lol, I meant 350lbs in my first post, but your point still stands.

This post has been edited by TheRoper on Sunday, Dec 24 2006, 04:49

[Jay]

I played rugby for a grand total of 20 minutes, until this happened. This was against people in an AFL state, so it is 10x worse on the east coast, and 10x worse in NZ.

Seriously man, as a Kiwi, you shouldnt second guess it. You were brought up around the burliest, roughest and most dangerous brand of rugby on the face of the earth.



Tell me that isnt gnarly.

[ToyMachine]

QUOTE (All-Blacks @ Dec 23 2006, 23:24)

There are small players in both sports (quarter backs)

6'5 205 lbs is by no means small. That's the prototypical size for a quarterback nowdays.

Rugby is gnarlier and tougher. Mostly because of the padding used in football. One of my more distant cousins (grandma's sister's son) plays pro rugby in football and broke both his arms 3 months ago. I also heard a story about some guy who had his ballsack torn in rugby or a guy who got his face ripped off, stapled it back together and went out to play. You don't hear about stuff like that happening in football.

[San Andreas Nut]

Rugby. without a doubt, we play it every lunch time at school but lately we have been playing American football obviosly without the padding, we dont really know all the rules but we do the hikes and sh*t. we got told not to tackle now that a kid broke his collar bone.

[Moonshield]

QUOTE (TheRoper @ Dec 23 2006, 22:19)

QUOTE (Moonshield @ Dec 23 2006, 20:08) QUOTE (Big Slow @ Dec 23 2006, 21:41) Rugby. There is no comparison, I mean, do the even wear cups? Only f*cking pussies wear cups in football. We're not talking about peewee leagues... Yes because real men feel no pain after a swift kick to the nuts.

And that's a very common occurrence, let me tell you.

[All-Blacks]

QUOTE

I also heard a story about some guy who had his ballsack torn in rugby or a guy who got his face ripped off, stapled it back together and went out to play. You don't hear about stuff like that happening in football.

YES a classic NZ rugby story. Wayne 'Buck' Shelford lost his left testicle on his test debut, and got it stictched back in, and played against France the following weekend.

QUOTE

Seriously man, as a Kiwi, you shouldnt second guess it. You were brought up around the burliest, roughest and most dangerous brand of rugby on the face of the earth.

Second guess what? I'm guessing you mean why ask what is tougher if i've been brought up around rugby in NZ, i'm just asking out of curiosity as I love American Football but have yet to play the sport. I know the basic knowledge of the skills & strength required by watching the NFL, but I am yet to learn how tough it is, that is why i've asked to hear a comparison of who has played both sports.

QUOTE

6'5 205 lbs is by no means small. That's the prototypical size for a quarterback nowdays.

Of all the professional quarterbacks I know of I have yet to see one of your description.

[GTA3Rockstar]

QUOTE (All-Blacks @ Dec 23 2006, 23:06)

QUOTE 6'5 205 lbs is by no means small. That's the prototypical size for a quarterback nowdays. Of all the professional quarterbacks I know of I have yet to see one of your description.

Drew Bledsoe, Tom Brady, Marc Bulger, David Carr etc.. Theres many more but I just dont want to list every football team!


@Ropsters - Its because they were removed! Cause they are pussies!

[All-Blacks]

QUOTE (GTA3Rockstar @ Dec 24 2006, 17:08)

QUOTE (All-Blacks @ Dec 23 2006, 23:06) QUOTE 6'5 205 lbs is by no means small. That's the prototypical size for a quarterback nowdays. Of all the professional quarterbacks I know of I have yet to see one of your description. Drew Bledsoe, Tom Brady, Marc Bulger, David Carr etc.. Theres many more but I just dont want to list every football team!

Are you sure the majority of quarter backs are that size? Obviously there would be a few who are oddly big, like with scrumhalves in rugby eg-Mike Philips, Piri Weepu, Byron Kelleher (might be short, but one muscular dude!) etc. but most aren't that big surely? Whats the typical size of punters & goal kickers?

This post has been edited by All-Blacks on Sunday, Dec 24 2006, 05:16

[GTA3Rockstar]

QUOTE (All-Blacks @ Dec 23 2006, 23:14)

QUOTE (GTA3Rockstar @ Dec 24 2006, 17:08) QUOTE (All-Blacks @ Dec 23 2006, 23:06) QUOTE 6'5 205 lbs is by no means small. That's the prototypical size for a quarterback nowdays. Of all the professional quarterbacks I know of I have yet to see one of your description. Drew Bledsoe, Tom Brady, Marc Bulger, David Carr etc.. Theres many more but I just dont want to list every football team! Are you sure the majority of quarter backs are that size? Obviously there would be a few who are oddly big, like with scrumhalves in rugby eg-Mike Philips, Piri Weepu, Byron Kelleher (might be short, but one muscular dude!) etc. but most aren't that big surely? Whats the typical size of punters & goal kickers?

Im f*ckin confused, I guess you were talking about rugby quarter backs! I was on about NFL lol

[darthYENIK]

I'd say (American) football, as I did in the other topic of the exact origin.

As for who's bigger. William Perry (AKA 'the refrigerator'), weighed almost 400lbs. And the fridge probably is not the biggest (only in popularity).

[All-Blacks]

QUOTE (darthYENIK @ Dec 24 2006, 19:41)

I'd say (American) football, as I did in the other topic of the exact origin. As for who's bigger. William Perry (AKA 'the refrigerator'), weighed almost 400lbs. And the fridge probably is not the biggest (only in popularity).

Korey Stringer is the heaviest NFL player weighing at 359 lbs/162.8 kg. Bill Cavubati of Fiji is the heaviest international rugby player in the world, weighing around about 353 lbs/160kg. Theres not much in it, so stop going on about whos bigger because both sports have huge players!