2006-09-15 04:00:13 · 28 answers · asked by skoobyg69 1 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
Compared to Australian Rugby League players, yep.
Aussie guys don't need helmets and padding. They are real blokes lol
I doubt whether Americans have watched rugby anyway, Scooby. If it aint American it just aint to them.
2006-09-15 04:11:16 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋
if you have played both sports you would know that neither should have the word wimp next to it.it's not the sport that's wimpy, it would be the people. Both sports are great and involve serious ******* consequences. The point of the matter is that you will have scars from both, and the reason football isn't wimpier is because in football, people make more gutsy tackles. There is a lot finesse to hitting in rugby without getting killed....there are reasons why some players are just better.
2006-09-15 04:31:14 · answer #2 · answered by thebestodb 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is little similarity between American Football and Rugby Football.
2006-09-15 04:16:37 · answer #3 · answered by Gone 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Not really... there is more stamina involved in rugby. The players fatigue and therefore can't hit as hard. There are few full pelt tackles in a match. There is also a greater respect in tackling with technique, to bring the other player down with the least amount of effort and risk to the opposing player (Kiwi's spear tackling excluded).
In American football, you get to rest for ages, then run head to head with someone as fast as you can... launch yourself at them and make sure they stay down. Hence the protective equipment. I know my body in it's current state wouldn't last many plays of US Football, but I could probably still manage a couple of rugby games before attending the hospital.
2006-09-15 04:27:59 · answer #4 · answered by Dave 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Rugby is a plenty extra durable game and takes alot of balls to play. The tackles are brutal. i like it!! Ive performed yankee soccer at an American severe college and it grew to become into truthfully a comedian tale. I recommend there have been vast adult men interior the group yet that padding basically made each thing no longer harm. i discovered myself going into stressful circumstances that frequently i could think of two times approximately. to sum up American soccer is for whimps and rugby is for adult men!
2016-12-18 10:41:51 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Aye
Anyone who thinks that there are no 'big hits' in rugby...has never seen Jason White take someone down.
No contest between the two.
Gridiron (it doesn't deserve the tag of 'football')
wear lots and lots of padding
run around for about 30 seconds.
Stop.
Go off the field if you lose the ball, because being able to attack AND defend is too tricky
Rugby
The only padding is muscle
If you lose the ball, tough. Now go get it back.
2006-09-15 04:01:17 · answer #6 · answered by Morgy 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Why waste time comparing two distinctly different sports? Football is football, rugby is rugby. And why give a damn over the names?
2006-09-15 08:08:06 · answer #7 · answered by Awesome Bill 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
American football is a lot more wimpy,
I once had a Friend who said this was the Futuristic Rugby, which made sense with all the polished helmets (lol@ the innuendo) and cheerleaders, massive crowds and glam etc..rugby is crap though, and no where near as good as football.
2006-09-15 04:20:02 · answer #8 · answered by Paul M 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Pretty much...I love the American football to death...no way in hell it compares to the Brutality of Rugby. You guys are plain crazy! :)
2006-09-15 04:01:46 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
American football is American football and rugby is rugby. Two different sports. Why do you want to to put them together?
2006-09-15 04:15:17 · answer #10 · answered by elgil 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋