Why do the Americans pad themselves up playing their football while the Brits play a similar game in Rugby?

Question

Are the Brits stronger than the Yanks or just plain dumb and don't mind the injuries? Or are the Yanks scared of hurting themselves that they were even helmets?

Answer 1

Hi. I've played both.

Rugby is a tough game. Don't get me wrong. But there's a monumental difference between the two. First, you need to consider the sheer velocity of the game. While rugby does require running, it does not operate at a full out sprint the way football does, especially when you're talking about receivers trying to catch the ball out in the secondary. In fact, padding became required in football n the early part of the 20th Century because of all the deaths and serious injuries that were becoming prevalent.

Second, the players in football tend to be much larger. IIf you're a 190-pound receiver, running 20-25 mph on a crossing pattern and have to make a leap for the ball while a 240-lb linebacker is zeroing in on your exposed rib cage....well, you do the physics. Further, in football, technique emphasizes hitting much more than rugby.

None of this really changes the fact that rugby is a tough sport. But if you took even the best rugby team and had them play football without pads, then half the team would be in the emergency room by halftime.

Answer 2

it could never been done as they are completely different sports. When they had rugby union vs league games, league players struggled with the extra skills needed in union but were a lot fitter. American football players will be even more out of their depth with the skills needed for union and even though theere's probably more time and money put into conditioning in American football, they will not be used to the pace and intensity of a league game. Plus there is no tackling in American football, they just throw their bodies at each other so without the padding they will not be able to make a tackle without some nasty injuries. American football is a very tactical game with every move planned for months in advance, which rugby players may get lost with, as their sport is far more spontanious. Blocking and forward passes aren't allowed in rugby (even with a Scottish ref) so there's rugby players won't be used to doing this.

Answer 3

American Football is played by superior athletes and superior physical specimins. The hits those guys can deliver are far more powerful than the hits being delivered on a consistent basis in rugby. If you ever get a chance, go somewhere where you can stand next to a defensive end or tackle, or an o-lineman. They are enormous.

Answer 4

Most American football players are twice the size of the average rugby player. If an American football player tackled a rugby player with or without pads, chances are the rugby player wouldn't get back up.

Answer 5

the Brits have been playing rugby long before the Americans began playing their game yea I guess the Brits are stronger

Answer 6

American football is a collision sport. The potential to get seriously hurt is very high. Does rugby have 300+ lb linemen smashing into each other?

Answer 7

You use the word similar, not the same. Football (not "Americans ... playing their football ") is a sport that has more violent collisions than does rugby (I've seen plenty of both), therefore the necessity of pads.

Answer 8

Common sense (something Americans will have long after it has been knocked out of unprotected Brits)

Answer 9

American Football has more HEAVY contact, I think Rugby has more contact, but it's not as harmful as the stuff the Americans pull.

Answer 10

lol. my dad always says that rugby is just football without padding and without rules!