Hear, hear! (football thread)

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Maquiladora
What makes you think an equally-heavy rugby player couldnt do the same speed, for longer? or faster without the padding.

I've seen rugby on Fox Sports World (including international matches). Quite simply they don't have the atheletic ability of American football players.

Well i imagine the blade of an ice skate is more dangerous than anything in american football. Also it doesnt hurt as much to get slammed into grass/articicial, than into glass or ice.

Getting slashed by a blade is extremely rare. And if you think getting slammed into ice hurts less than artificial turf, you obviously didn't see the turf at the former Veteran's Stadium, which has been described as many as 'green concrete'.

[Colon™]

Ice is cold, ice-hockey players need something to stay warm.

[Imran Siddiqui]

They can't afford sweaters?

[Maquiladora]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

I've seen rugby on Fox Sports World (including international matches). Quite simply they don't have the atheletic ability of American football players.

Ive seen the NFL, its the opposite. Big deal?

Getting slashed by a blade is extremely rare. And if you think getting slammed into ice hurts less than artificial turf, you obviously didn't see the turf at the former Veteran's Stadium, which has been described as many as 'green concrete'.

Because its rare they dont need the protection?

If i had the choice of getting slammed into one particularly hard artificial, or ice in every game, i know which id choose.

[Asher]

Re: Hear, hear! (football thread)

Originally posted by Colon
It's now scientifically proven that football is better.

Why does it make soccer better in that people are surprised when anything happens?

Jeez.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Maquiladora
Because its rare they dont need the protection?

If i had the choice of getting slammed into one particularly hard artificial, or ice in every game, i know which id choose.

Even with the padding, the injury rate in ice hockey is much higher, which is telling. These are tougher guys in general anyway, as they're willing to actually fight rather than do really gay dances in the end zone.

The speed is far higher, the surfaces are harder, and the hits are harder.

Also, I'm surprised no one mentioned blocking shots. That is extremely dangerous, you could not do that without the padding those guys where.

The padding for football players is funny in comparison. You're right, they wear the same pads, but ice hockey players have much more reason for them.

Somebody broke his ankle the other day blocking Kovalchuk's shot on goal.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Maquiladora

Well i imagine the blade of an ice skate is more dangerous than anything in american football. Also it doesnt hurt as much to get slammed into grass/articicial, than into glass or ice.

Then there's pucks (frozen rubber with the density near that of a rock) hitting people at 160 kph, or open ice hits where two bodies weighing 200+ pounds collide at a combined speed of 50 to 60 kph.

[MikeH]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I've seen rugby on Fox Sports World (including international matches). Quite simply they don't have the atheletic ability of American football players.

I remember when Jonah Lomu turned down the NFL. He is 6'5, 250 lbs and could run 100m in 10.8 seconds. Gregor Townsend went to play for the scottish team of the European American football league whatever that was called.

I think that the main apparent difference is that American football is ultra specialised and takes place in short bursts of activity. Rugby players have to be on the field performing for a continuous 40 minutes, and each player is more of an all rounder. You wouldn't expect a wide reciever to be making hits all game but a Rugby winger has to be able to run, catch, throw, kick and tackle. The training and physical demands for both sports are very different, that doesn't mean they are any less athletic.

Some players in some positions could do well if they switched to the other game, with some work. Others couldn't.

[notyoueither]

Players also don't hit in rugby the way they do in gridiron, by and large. The equipment also protects the hitter.

I've watched both, and you don't tend to see the same sort of hits play in and play out in rugby that you see in NFL or CFL football.

[MikeH]

The rugby tackling rules don't allow NFL/CFL style hits. And the padding makes a difference. Jokes about padding being girly aside, if you made that kind of hit without it people would be seriously injured all the time, as they used to be in the US when protection wasn't as good as the modern stuff, at least that's how I understand it.

And as I said, part of that is that NFL players can train up strength/power to the detriment of stamina work because the game requirements are different.

[Stuie]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui And if you think getting slammed into ice hurts less than artificial turf, you obviously didn't see the turf at the former Veteran's Stadium, which has been described as many as 'green concrete'.

Hey! That was before they put the NeXturf in - that stuff was much softer than concrete.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by MikeH
I think that the main apparent difference is that American football is ultra specialised and takes place in short bursts of activity. Rugby players have to be on the field performing for a continuous 40 minutes, and each player is more of an all rounder. You wouldn't expect a wide reciever to be making hits all game but a Rugby winger has to be able to run, catch, throw, kick and tackle. The training and physical demands for both sports are very different, that doesn't mean they are any less athletic.

Some players in some positions could do well if they switched to the other game, with some work. Others couldn't.

Well that's true. Rugby players are more all rounders and have to focus on stamina while American football players tend to focus on power and/or speed. Though plenty of positions do require some stamina, it's not nearly as important.