I've played both
I like both
But I think Rugby requres each player learn to do more different things (both offence and defence for example)
For example have you ever seen what it looks like when the average Defensive lineman tries to run with a football.
I do believe the whole pads argument is foolish because those pads don't keep you from feelong the pain and although a helmet may protect your head it also makes a great weapon when attached to one - you have to get hit by a helmet to understand.
Really they are different.
FOOTBALL - running backs run, receivers catch, quarterbacks throw, and stick to what they do and get off the field for other things.
Rugby everyone needs to be able to ren - to takle (people of all sizes) - to kick - and to pass
That is what I believe to be the real advantage and what makes the sport more fun although football does get all of the american media hype and some of the best commercials - not to mention some of the best atheletes in the world -
2006-08-01 03:56:34
·
answer #1
·
answered by wadecrptrng 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Rugby is is the better sport.
Rugby is a true team sport. Football is a bunch of overgrown crybabies bent on nothing but personal gain and glory at the expense of the team.
Football players try to injure the opposing players any chance they get. This is taught at an early age. Under the age of ten. Rugby is rough, but is designed not to need armor, and the players have respect for other players. Cheap shots are dealt with quickly and effectively. Either removed from game for ten minutes or for the remainder match.
Plus there is the third half. Nothing like that in football or any other sport.
2006-08-03 12:39:42
·
answer #2
·
answered by Stefano 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I play both (Right Lock for Rugby, Quarterback/Linebacker for Football).
Rugby is easily the harder sport, even with Pads, I never tore my ACL playing football, but during a Ruck in Rugby, I managed to tear my ACL when one of the opposition fell on the back of my leg at an awkward angle.
Now I'm in my second month of rehab, and it isn't fun.
Rugby is also harder because you are forced to play a solid hour (hour and a half if you play 3 halves depending on what level of play it is) in Football, you spend 5 minutes on the field constructing an offensive drive, that results in maybe 15 tackles the entire drive if you're lucky.
In Rugby, we have 15 tackles a minute, with no stoppage except for lineouts and scrums.
Rugby is the better sport.
2006-08-01 09:09:26
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Rugby, baby! I despised touch football in gym class and I never played tackle football, but I sure as hell played rugby and even though I got super-hurt, I'd do it again if I had it to do over. There's nothing like that nervous look that people get when you say you play rugby (especially for a girl like me.) Rugby commands respect--and ruggers work hard for it, so they deserve it!
2006-07-31 12:33:45
·
answer #4
·
answered by SlowClap 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
No they are no longer the comparable. Rugby is the 'unique' game, and rugby league and American soccer are derivatives of it. AF is now so some distance developed that it extremely is extraordinarily much unrecognisable as an analogous activity. American soccer is performed in lots of international locations, and is ruled via the IFAF. There are standard worldwide fits between member worldwide places and a worldwide cup each and every 4 years. ahead of the final WC, Germany, Japan and Mexico have been the worldwide powerhouses, however the rustic despatched a team this final time around and, predictably, gained extremely. the game is likewise performed in Australia, New Zealand, Denmark, Scotland, eire, England that i recognize of, plus others in all probability. examine the IFAF internet site.
2016-12-14 17:01:57
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Its a bit annoying to see people who haven't played one sport or the other diss something they have no experiance of. I've played both sports, and absolutely love them both. Rugby undoubtedly requires the more complete player... every player must be able to catch, pass, run, tackle, ruck, and keep doing it for 80 minutes... which is no small feat. Football, on the other hand, is a more explosive, more strategic, game, but is as exciting as any other sport. and you can't say its not a team game. for a play to work, it takes a whole team effort (linemen protecting or taking blockers, percise routes, effective play action fakes)
Football is my first love, and a slight favorite, but rugby deserves much respect too.
2006-08-03 17:44:28
·
answer #6
·
answered by lsquad70 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I like football alot more! Every rugby player talks abotu how rough they are because they dont wear equipment. If you treid playing football or hockey without equipment you would last 2 seconds. Rugby is a sport thats designed so that you can play without equipment. So if rugby players thing there so tuff, they come on the football field with me, without any equipment and ill show them that they aint so tuff.
2006-07-31 09:10:51
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Rugby.
2006-08-01 07:54:12
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Rugby. Football is for over-padded, over paid pu**ies who can't run further than fifty feet without stopping for a five minute rest!
2006-07-31 09:11:23
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
hmmm. so you hate american football. its obvious that you are a freaking 3rd word native you looser. how many rugby people have you seen win espy awards. LOOSER
oh i like rugby, but they don't show it on any channels
2006-08-01 11:29:26
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋