|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rugby vs American Football
  |
| read 446 reaction(s) |
|---|
@ 13-04-2005 21:52 AirGuitarDale | 72 posts
| Ok first off, I know more or less nothing about American football (I live in the UK).
But which sport do you think is "tougher"? American football may look bad but they wear so much padding! And the have bloody helmets! And I also think rugby is a better game because it has less pauses in play. And I like rugby because I'm Welsh. 
Let's have some opinions of some American peeps! |
| Showing posts 426-446 of 446 | Page 18 of 18 |
| Discussion |
|---|
 0  @ 22-05-2008 08:31 Pop_killer | 
6,729 posts
| Then maybe they should prove it by actually winning something against other places on earth, d'yathink?
And wow, the biggest and wealthiest league has the best players in it...
...didn't see that coming. *dieinshock*
The English Premiership generally has most of the best football players in it, but we havent won the world cup (and this is a real world cup, not just all the premiership teams playing each other for the sake of looking down on the rest of the world) since 1966. Italy won the last one, which makes them the best in the world right now, even though it was one of the weakest Italian teams for some time. It doesn't mean anything if the "best" players are from your nation. If they never win against other nations, they are not the best. Period. And since the olympics is the only thing we have to go by, yes it does matter. It's funny how whenever America fails at something it "doesn't matter", huh?
You're arguments aren't actually saying anything beyond the blatently obvious. | | 0 @ 22-05-2008 08:57 Killmode | 
101 posts
|
And wow, the biggest and wealthiest league has the best players in it...
Then what are you arguing here? I guess you're admitting I'm right... The NBA and MLB have the world's best players, so I think it is great they call it the WORLD championships.
Then maybe they should prove it by actually winning something against other places on earth, d'yathink?
LOL....and who exactly would the MLB or NBA play? | | 0 @ 22-05-2008 09:01 Killmode |
101 posts
| Well obviously the olympics aren't very important or all of the bes tplayers would actually play lol. Even if the USA dominated (They still kill almost everyone), it still wouldn't really be important. Hell, there's been guys on the olympic team who are right out of college and never even played in the NBA.
| | 0 @ 22-05-2008 17:00 Pop_killer |
6,729 posts
| Then what are you arguing here? I guess you're admitting I'm right... The NBA and MLB have the world's best players, so I think it is great they call it the WORLD championships.
I love how you ignore everything I write after that to put it into context.
Having the best individual players doesn't mean you have the best team, that goes for any sport. I don't care if you dont think the plympics are important, that fact is it is the only measurement there is to see how the USA copes with teams from other countries.
And I can't believe that you think just because the best players reside in your league it should be called the world series. Maybe we should make the football World Cup be played by nothing but Brazilian teams then, since they're the only country to have won it 5 times. Tiger Woods has won the world tours in golf more than anyone else in recent years, so maybe he should play himself and see which mood he's in plays the best? British fighters are usually at the top of the Tae Kwon Do world championships, so by your logic we should just have those British fighters in it, y'know, cut out all the dead-weight, as it were. Lets just ignore the fact it came from Korea, it's not like they can compete after all, why bother?
But hey, why don't we take this mentality further? I mean, countries like, say... Sri Lanka, just to pull a name out of the hat. It's not a particularly big country. Economically, it isn't anywhere near the likes of the USA and Germany, why don't we just scrub it off the map? Because clearly any country which can't easily match those that are ahead of it isn't worth a second thought, right?
* offtopic :
This post is in no way disrespecting the Sri Lankan people or any other nation, i'm merely attacking the American mentality.
I dont give a damn if "America would win anyway". They probably would, so long as they can actually be bothered to play as a team anyway. The problem I have is it so horrifically ignorant to see your own country as the only thing that matters in the world. I don't care how far ahead they are. Just because you're supposedly the best doesn't mean no-one else has a right to challenge that perception and it doesn't give you the right to alienate the rest of the world, and say whenever the rest of the world win anything oh but that didn't count.
Pig Ignorance.
Now why don't you try coming up with a real reason why it is excusable to call an American tournament the World Series other than oooohs but we're the bessst anywai!!!! . | | 0 @ 22-05-2008 19:44 Killmode |
101 posts
| I think the fact that the MLB and NBA has the best players in the world is reason enough. It's more obvious than ever that you don't understand how those leagues or the Olympics work. Same for Tim.
Because you keep bringing up the Olympics. I know you aren't American, and I'm guessing you're just very ignorant to American sports...but do you realize that in the Olympics, just Americans playh for the USA. But in the NBA, there are more than just Americans playing.. Foreigners have recently won MVPs (Nash and Nowitzki)...So how do the Olympics mean anything in this arguement? You act like only Americans play in these leagues.
I'm not sure where you're going with all of those examples.. I'm not sure why you just can't think reasonably... First off, who would these American leagues play in a "world" competition? And who is to say other leagues would even want to waste their time competing? I am sure they wouldn't. Their leagues are probably financially suffering in comparison anyways and Im sure they don't the embarrasment of getting destroyed.
If the MLBs best played the Japan league, it wouldn't solve anything. I'm sure any Japanese baseball fan would even admit the MLB is better. There's guys here who suck and can go to Japan and dominate. Hmmm, gee, maybe thats because the competition is far better here than anywhere else on Earth.
So I see no reason to not call it "world" champions. Best league in the world, best players in the world...So yeah, that kinda makes sense. | | 0 @ 22-05-2008 21:06 Pop_killer |
6,729 posts
| You are talking about a completely different thing to what I am. World championships, in the real world sense, have single nationality teams. We don't send Manchester United to play in the world cup; we send ENGLAND to play in the world cup. The argument you're coming up with about how foreign players play in this so called world series is completely meaningless, it's still American teams playing other American teams.
You're right about how I don't know much about American leagues. I dont care either. I'm not concerned with them. I have said time and time again, it doesn't matter how good the players in those leagues are, it is still ignorant and arrogant to call it the world series. Because it isn't the world series. It's an American series. I dread to think of the controversy it would cause if the English FA (football assosciation) cup was renamed the World Cup, purely because the Premier League draws most of the world talent (it does, btw, at the latest world cup Chelsea had 33 of their players involved) and the world cup was given some trivial name instead. It sounds completely ridiculous, and that's because it is completely ridiculous.
I don't know for sure, but i'm guessing every single team in the basketball world series of whateverthehellit'scalled is in the NBA, right? So why not call it the NBA cup/NBA trophy/NBA series/whatever, and stop alienating everyone else? Because what is probably a big factor in why other countries don't give a dam about these sports is because they cannot put up with the American arrogance that surrounds them.
I believe there is an NHL world series over there as well? I think. So what about English (ice) Hockey teams? There's one in my city, i've been to see them a few times. In fact, three guys from a family at my school/6th form are professional hockey players, yet they will probably never be able to represent their nation. Why? because the "world series" only lets in American teams (I think Canadian too i cant remember). How is England/Britain even supposed to gauge itself against international opposition if there's nowhere to do it?
Oh I know. How about the Olympics.
I really don't care if you or the NBA players or whoever the hell else thinks the Olympics don't mean anything; you tell me where else teams can guage themselves internationally. And that DOES NOT mean American league teams playing league teams from other countries. That's what in football we call the champions league, not the world cup. What that means is an American International team plays a foreign international team, and right now the only place that happens, thanks to the ridiculous mentality there is in America, is at the Olympics. So yes, they do matter. If your players cant be arsed, good for them.
| | 0 @ 23-05-2008 05:50 Killmode |
101 posts
|
You're right about how I don't know much about American leagues. I dont care either. I'm not concerned with them. I have said time and time again, it doesn't matter how good the players in those leagues are, it is still ignorant and arrogant to call it the world series. Because it isn't the world series. It's an American series.
Wow, that's great you're arguing about American leagues then, especially consider you admit you don't know much about them... And while all the teams are American, the players are not. The best players in the world pley here. I don't think that's arrogant. If a league has all of the world's best players, then I think it's absolutely perfect to call it a World championship or Series.
I don't know for sure, but i'm guessing every single team in the basketball world series of whateverthehellit'scalled is in the NBA, right?
LOL what? Ummm, the teams in the NBA compete for the World Championship.
So why not call it the NBA cup/NBA trophy/NBA series/whatever, and stop alienating everyone else? Because what is probably a big factor in why other countries don't give a dam about these sports is because they cannot put up with the American arrogance that surrounds them.
I doubt it. Again, the best players on Earth play basketball here, and since the best players in the world are in the best league in the world, I don't see why they shouldn't be considered world champions.
I believe there is an NHL world series over there as well? I think. So what about English (ice) Hockey teams? There's one in my city, i've been to see them a few times. In fact, three guys from a family at my school/6th form are professional hockey players, yet they will probably never be able to represent their nation. Why? because the "world series" only lets in American teams (I think Canadian too i cant remember). How is England/Britain even supposed to gauge itself against international opposition if there's nowhere to do it?
I'm not a huge hockey fan, so I can't really tell you how many overseas players there are, but I'm sure none of those European players you watch could hold the jock of a lot of guys in the NHL. If they'd like to test their skill, come on over and try your luck.
Oh I know. How about the Olympics.
I really don't care if you or the NBA players or whoever the hell else thinks the Olympics don't mean anything; you tell me where else teams can guage themselves internationally. And that DOES NOT mean American league teams playing league teams from other countries. That's what in football we call the champions league, not the world cup. What that means is an American International team plays a foreign international team, and right now the only place that happens, thanks to the ridiculous mentality there is in America, is at the Olympics. So yes, they do matter. If your players cant be arsed, good for them.
The players can't be arsed, the owners can't be arsed, even the fans can't be arsed. Ridiculous mentality? Ummm, it's the best league in the world with all of the bes tplayers. What is so ridiculous? Nobody argues tha thte best leagues are in America because anyone with sports knowledge recognizes that America by far has the best baseball and basketball leagues.
Bottomline, I don't think you're arguing that American leagues have the best players...It;s just a difference of opinions I guess. I think that since the USA by FAR has the best leagues with the best players that it is great to call them World Champions. You don't. | | 0 @ 23-05-2008 12:18 Pop_killer |
6,729 posts
| Wow, you manage to ignore the whole point of my post. Well done.
Do you even know what an international team is?
In the world cup in football, the English team is made up of English players, not players from english teams, English Players. That is how world championships usually work.
The same goes for rugby, cricket, every single team sport at the olympics, relay athletics and so on. Every single sport you can possibly think of. The ONLY sports that don't do this are the American ones, which have a "world series" containing nothing but American teams.
Now, do I have to spell that out any more simply for you or do you actually get the point yet? | | 0 @ 27-05-2008 07:23 Killmode |
101 posts
| I understand, but didn't think acknowledgment was necessary since I already talked about that ten trillion times.
DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THAT WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE?
And how can I get that through your brain? There's gotta be an easier way. | | 0 @ 27-05-2008 10:00 Pop_killer |
6,729 posts
| It's not possible to get a team of American players together and play against a team of players from another country?
...
What are they scared of flying or something?
Of course it's possible. | | 0 @ 27-05-2008 10:14 Bucephalus | 
2,103 posts
| We already have that. It's called the Olympics.
But the Olympics do not relate to the NBA or MLB since talented members of those leagues are not American.
Those leagues are based in the USA and have the best players in the world. Therefore, I am very satisfied with the decision to call them World Champions. It is not a big fuss anywhere because everyone knows that it is true that the greatest players play in the USA. | | 0 @ 27-05-2008 17:14 Pop_killer |
6,729 posts
| The olympics are the closest thing we have to that, yes.
Maybe you should also do your research and see what the rest of the world calls the world championships rather than what the arrogant American leagues do. The English Premiership in football has arguably got far better players and definately generates a hell of alot more revenue than any other football league, but as i've said about 90 times, calling the English FA cup the world championships would still be seriously pathetic, because England fares pretty poorly in the world cup.
Now i'll stop so i dont repeat myself, again. Try to remember that there are countries in the world that don't begin with a U, yeah? | | 0 @ 04-06-2008 08:17 Bucephalus |
2,103 posts
| Oh, I know of other countries. That really isn't the issue. The issue is pretty simple. It isn't even arguable that the best baseball and basketball are played here. It is known worldwide and any intelligent sports fan would not hesitate to tell you that. The way the soccer leagues are set up is different than these leagues, so the comparison isn't really accurate | | 0 @ 04-06-2008 10:45 Pop_killer |
6,729 posts
| What do I have to do to get through to people on here...
For the last time, I do not care if it is the best league, World Championships are when National teams player other National teams, not when clubs play other clubs. In football you don't see Manchester United player Barcelona in the world cup, for example. In rugby, you don't see Northampton saints playing an Australian club in the world cup. You see England play Spain or England play Australia and so on. That is what a world championship is.
Since only American teams go into your so called "world series," it all comes down to nothing more than pure arrogance, because you instantly asume the American players are better than everyone else. And don't give me the "foreign players play here" crap for the 90th time; only local players play in National teams. Thierry Henry doesn't play for England, because he's French. Bit of a no-brainer really. And anyway, within your "world series," I seriously doubt any American basketball fan places Foreign players in higher esteem than their own home grown players, from what I've seen, so it's pretty much the whole "USA! USA!" over-patriotic bulls--- again.
I'm not arguing that the NBA or whatever isn't the best league in the world for basketball, because it is (although it's virtually the only big one...) I am arguing against there being a "world series" which isnt a proper world championship. It doesnt matter if the best players are there, that is not how it works. At least not anywhere else on the planet. End of story.
How many times has someone other than America won the "world series"? Hmm? | | 0 @ 04-06-2008 11:43 Bucephalus |
2,103 posts
| America doesn't win the world series...lol
...and yeah, a ton of American place foreign players in higher regards. That's why they have won MVPs which is the most prestigous award, voted on by Americans.
I don't care how soccer leagues are run. All I know is that it is a fact that America has the best leagues of the sports we are discussing, the best players, and in my opinion it is fine for them to call teams world champions because of the two things I just stated. | | 0 @ 04-06-2008 13:20 Deadly_Rose | 
1,387 posts
| There is no way to figure out
"which is the best"
because this entire "debate"
is based on opinions.
Most Americans will say that
footbal is the best, while
people in other countries where rugby
is popular will say that it is the best.
You're just wasting time trying
to prove that one sport is better
than the other.
| | -1 @ 19-06-2008 05:44 rhcps | 
233 posts
| i say American football. i play it and its no walk in the park. i bet rugby isn't either. but i believe american football is tougher
| | +1 @ 24-07-2008 22:48 xballaholicx | 
325 posts
| american football is lame >_> | | 0 @ 07-08-2008 15:34 Killmode |
101 posts
| You're lame | | +1 @ 11-08-2008 04:55 xballaholicx |
325 posts
| you're picture is lame >_>
*suck it!
american football doesn't excite me! | | 0 @ 23-08-2008 16:43 soonerj | 1 posts
| First, for the "world champions" claims, as an American I even find it a little annoying.
I do want to defend the MLB term "World Series" though. This term has been around for well over 100 years and at this point is is simply the name of the series and it is not going to change. It was probably a marketing thing back in the 1800's when MLB was in its infancy.
If you want to complain about that then your complaint lies with people who lived over a 100 years ago. Now it is tradition and the name will not change just because some find it arrogant.
I do wish the various US champions would stop calling themselves "world champs" but I would guess that is also a marketing ploy and I don't doubt that the league leaders ask the players to continue to use the term.
Now on to American football vs rugby. It all depends on what you like. Americans like American football for the reasons that others dislike it. We have plenty of continuous action sports. Football is different because of the strategic element. I don't expect others to appreciate this aspect as it is so different than other sports they may be used to. Furthermore, the start/stop brings in guys who are more like 100m sprinters than 10km runners. That's an oversimplification but the point is that in American football guys are expected to play as hard as possible every second that the ball is live and they're on the field. There is no saving energy - or shouldn't be. It's like respecting both 100m sprinter and marathon runners.
It is true that American football players wear down by the end of the game. That may seem strange to rugby fans but 100m runners wear down after just a couple of races and wrestlers/boxers wear down after a few minutes of extreme exertion. Just because a rugby player can play for an hour doesn't mean he would not be physically exhausted after playing an American football game. The games require different types of stamina.
As for which sport is tougher, it is simply not productive to argue it.
I do want to defend the use of padding in American football. By the way the game is played and the rules of the game, padding is absolutely necessary. Because of the first down rules, in American football you don't just tackle to get a guy down. You attempt to tackle and yield not an inch to your opponent. Tackling reuires more of a collision technique. You simply have to bury your face into their sternum and attempt to stop them in their tracks. Methods of tackling are and must be totally different in the two sports. If you use rugby technique in American football you will find yourself giving up first down after first down....
Also in American football you have "blocking" which is not allowed in rugby. This means that 11 guys are hitting each other on every single play. It also means that guys are constantly blindsided. Not to mention that an American football quarterback is expected to hang in completely exposed and deliver a pass with a linebacker ready to bury his helmet into the quarterbacks mid section. One would be killed trying to do that without pads.
Maybe many would argue that the a play of American football requiring pads is a deficiency in the game. Maybe so but you simply can't argue that that the game could or should be played without pads. It's just not possible.
We all played playground American football without pads. It generally did not have first downs and resembled rugby with passing. It is not true American football.
Also the padding does not provide the level of protection that most believe. It's like taking a punch from a heavyweight boxer; Gloves might look big but it still hurts like you would not believe to be hit and the gloves protecter the hitter as much as the receiver. As big as the helmets are in American football, concussions are still an everyday occurances. Many, many football player's careers have been ended by repeated concussions. |
| |
|
|
|
TOP ARTISTS:
Jonas Brothers, Rihanna, Coldplay, Miley Cyrus, Jason Mraz, Katy Perry, Lil Wayne, Leona Lewis, Avril Lavigne, Pussycat Dolls, The, Chris Brown, Paramore, Taylor Swift, Linkin Park, Secondhand Serenade, Jordin Sparks, Mariah Carey, Britney Spears, Akon, Eminem, Ne-Yo, Abba, Lifehouse, Lars Winnerbäck, Nickelback, Lady Gaga, Evanescence, Colbie Caillat, Takida, M.I.A., Carrie Underwood, Christina Aguilera, Kanye West, Simple Plan, Avenged Sevenfold, Metro Station, Celine Dion, Slipknot, Håkan Hellström, Boys Like Girls, Usher, Kelly Clarkson, Blink-182, John Mayer, Alanis Morissette, Beatles, The, Metallica, Jesse McCartney, Aerosmith, Alicia Keys |
| Copyright © 1998-2008 LetsSingIt | add to bookmarks | disclaimer | privacy policy | advertise on this site |
|
|
