americans and football?

Question

Can any Americans out there who UNDERSTAND Rugby Union, Rugby League or Australian Rules tell me what they think and how it compares to Gridiron? I find gridiron very slow, and don't understand why they have so much padding (i understand the need in ice hockey, cricket etc.). I know it is an elite sport and they are very fit/strong etc. but I am just asking for an American (who knows the other games) opinions. I have found that most people in Australia that understand gridiron prefer another code.

The same question with cricket and baseball too, I personally prefer cricket, and most people i know who have played baseball as well prefer cricket. What do Americans who have played cricket before think?

I am after educated answers here please as I am hopeing to see what you see so great about your sports. And if you don't know the other spots don't answer, as I, once playing Aussie Rules, had to stand underneath a high kicked ball ready to mark(catch) it. It was very high so I

need to wait for it to come down. Anyway, some 100kg bloke came running through and gave me the big elbow to the back of my head. I was gone. So don't tell me how much tougher NFL is as it is a very ignorant opinion.

If I ask someone if the prefer Rugby League or Rugby Union or whatever, I get an answer that I can understand and accept, as it acknowledges the strengths that one has over the other. To say I won't understand because I'm not american, just like americans don't understand the other sports makes us both sound like idiots. Have you even seen the other sports before, or understand how they are played?

damnit! i said experience in the other sport! it doesn't sound like you know anything about cricket! allan border hit a 6 over the gabba and onto my family car, over the stadium yes! And the fastest bowl in cricket is very very similar to the fastest pitch in baseball. they are all proffessionals so i think they can throw just as far.

Answer 1

I've watched a good bit of club rugby and think that it would be very popular if shown and understood in the US. It took a bit of watching and explaining before I got the nuances of the game. (There isn't much subtlety!) However, with that said, to me the NFL is a better game to watch. Before anybody gets angry, remember that I grew up with American football and know the game very well.

As for the padding the players wear it is due to the tremendous size of the players, their speed, and the huge potential for injury.

For example:
Offensive linemen move at about 8 feet per second as they collide with the defensive line. Assuming that the average size of the offensive lineman is 290 lbs., then each player hits the enemy with an average kinetic energy of 313lbm ft2/s. Multiply this by the number of linemen, and you have more force exerted than you would get by firing 6 shots from a 357 Magnum handgun. I know that physics isn't everyone's favorite, but it shows a good comparison.

Answer 2

Almost every single NFL played is permently disabled after they retire which could be just one season. Imagine getting hit by a guy on a motorcycle going 20 KMH 16 times a day. People get seriously injured in college and high school as well. I didn't see the speed build up in the rugby games I saw so the hits were minor.

American football is all about strategy. A coach's play calling can lose a game (and it happens often). I don't think any other sport besides baseball gives the coach that much influence.

An American Football games lasts about 3 hours including halftime and their quarter breaks. The Australian game I saw in Melbourne lasted three hours too. I didn't see much strategy besides screening. Austalian football players have to be much more agile (not very many American football players can actually kick the ball) and have more stamina than American football players.

I don't like watching baseball and cricket is also too slow for me (come on, tea time?).

Answer 3

Cricket is like bowling compared to Baseball I do not think the skill levels needed are anywhere near equal. I doubt even the best cricket player could reach the cut off man with a throw from deep left field or hit a ball 395 ft. (left field wall at Yankee stadium) As a kid there was nothing better than to play catch with a mit and a ball. I do not see cricket holding the same fascination. In college the rugby team we had was more like a club than a school team . They existed solely to have and excuse to have a beer keg on the field. My roommate played women's rugby for a semester My other roommates and I tried hard to be supportive but that was insane.
I have actually seen cricket played it was painful to sit there and feign interest.
As far a as rugby and football they are not even close in how to score or advance the ball. American football is much more structured but for the life of me I do not understand the interest in either. Both needlessly violent. Rugby the goal is violence in football the goal is to avoid getting pounced on. Not that it works out that way.

Answer 4

American Football

Answer 5

If your not an American you won't get it. The same way we don't get soccer, rugby, cricket, or any other of those sports. It's like explaining how good a chick is to a gay guy. They are wired different and will never understand. Much like you and American football.