why do english people care so much that american football players wear padding and helmets?

Question

they're always being accussed of being soft, tennis players never get this treatment.

football without helmets and padding would be a bloodbath.

rugby and football are both very tough sports. but if you watch both you realise the collisions are bigger in football.

one more thing : if you have time take a look at this clip :

http://youtube.com/watch?v=eM6EauZ_LV4

from the very recent n.o/philly playoff game. if i was gonna take a lick like that i would opt for the padding.

Answer 1

I'm an American living in England. I played (real) football in high school. You're right, without pads, bones would be broken more readily. They think rugby is a real man's sport. The hitting is poor at best. I love to see a real snot-bubbler applied to a running back or, better yet, a quarterback. Rugby players wouldn't stand up in a football game, literally. It's a softer sport than football.

Answer 2

They where helmets and padding, because players hit harder and the collision is huge. Back and the day football players only wore leather helmets, but they were not big compared to guys now. Seriously, these guys back in the day and players now would be in the hospital because of the high impact nowadays. Rugby is tough sport, but the guys playing them would not last long without helmets or pads against NFL players. While rugby players are pretty big, they don't even compare to the measurable of NFL players. Ronnie Brown for Miami is 235 lbs and runs a 4.44 40. How would like that collision. Linebackers at 250 lbs are running high 4.5s. Julious Peppers at 278 or so runs that speed, and Jason Taylor, Shawn Merriman is really fast as well. Vernon Davis a TE in last years draft weighs about 270 lbs and he ran 4.38 40. Now that is rediculous. That is fast really fast for players half his size let alone his muscle mass. So you add all this raw muscle mass, raw power and strength with athletes who are zipping through like torpedos creates quite a collision with that velocity and size.

Answer 3

First off, American football is called that becase the ball is one foot long. And the forward pass (chucking it) was not part of the original game, and QBs weren't all that important back in the day.

My cousin, who is 47, still plays rugby in Ireland. He is about 5'6", and 150 lbs - not a big guy. As was pointed out, american players are huge (even Dawkins, who's not massive, is over 200 lbs) and are laying major hits on people. I've watched rugby, and it's lots of chasing guys who are running, and if the other team gets close, you can toss teh ball, thereby protecting yourself. There are some pileups, but not the bone-crunching stuff you see in the US. My cousin doesn't appear to be suffering any major ills because of rugby. However, look at guys like Johnny Unitas who are almost crippled. Now tell me which is the rougher sport.

Answer 4

I think it's very neccessary for American football players to wear protection.However the majority of English critics have never played the sport and are ignorant of just how brutal it actually is.My brother was a Quarterback for a few years and would have received some very nasty injuries (far more severe than you receive in Soccer & Rugby) it was only his pads that saved him from permanent injury. (I'm English by the way-and a girl but know more about the sport than most of the morons who criticise it!).Big Fan!!!

Answer 5

There are a lot more than one complaint i have against american football. The first is this. Why the hell do you call it football? A guy pics the ball up, chucks it, another guy catches it, the ball goes nowhere near the ground and you call it a touchdown. Where does kicking the ball with your foot (i.e FOOTball) come in to this?
The second point i have to make is more relevant to the question - The sport is called rugby. Joey, i have a comeback to your statement about the number of injuries in Ameican Throwball. This season, Sale Sharks, one of Englands best rugby clubs, were left without 20 (thats the 15 starting players and 5 subs) players. Why? Because of injuries. Now to make a comeback to Gomez Addams' comment. You said the hits in rugby are poor. They arent. Ask anyone that was at the QEGS Wakefield v St Ambrose schools match at u13 level. In a tackle, WITHOUT PADDING, I ended up breaking my rib, my arm, and earlier, i nearly broke my leg. is that not hard tackling? Or do you want the example of one of our centres who did break his leg in that match? Did any of our players wear big, puffed out padding or wimpy helmets? No. And to answer 2 more parts of this question. ennis players don;t get this treatment for one reason. If you watch a tennis match, how many players do you see wearing pads? None. And that tackle on the video. If you watch the Six Nations tournament that is on at the moment, watch an Ireland match. They tackle like that all the time.

Answer 6

They care because the sport of rugby is popular in England. Rugby is very similar to football and includes tackling, but the players do not use padding or helmets.

Answer 7

Lets face facts, Yanks are the weaker race that's why they feel the need to wear all that padding when playing " football " Rugby players are naturally tough, I'd like to see any American football team take on the might of the All Blacks without their padding, they would be annihilated

Answer 8

They're just being ignorant homers. It's the same with all bullying, they have to make fun of others to make themselves feel better. I'd like to see Shawne Merriman lay a hit on a rubgy player and then we'll see who's tougher.

oh, and I don't mean to be picky but Vernon Davis (mentioned earlier) is 253lbs, no 270 --but a 4.38 is still very impressive for that size. (What's crazy is Dwight Freeney, 6'1" 268lbs supposedly runs it in 4.39!!)

Answer 9

I know its needed - you have 200 - 350 pound men charging directly into each other. It would be a bloodbath without the padding. The tackles in rugby usually involve dragging someone down and there is not the direct hitting with shoulders down charging. Rugby is rough as hell without the padding and takes guts to play and take the pain. Rugby is more like skirmishing and infantry with air cover. Football is a direct armour assault against fortified positions - looking to exploit a breakthrough with the offensive tackle.

Answer 10

Yeah the hits are way bigger in football. See how many people get injured in football every year. That number would be tripled if we played without padding.