Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Gameplay
      3. Missions
      4. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
      4. Frontier Pursuits
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. Diamond Casino & Resort
      2. DLC
      3. Find Lobbies & Players
      4. Guides & Strategies
      5. Vehicles
      6. Content Creator
      7. Help & Support
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA 6

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA IV Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA SA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA VC Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA III Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

All-Blacks

The tougher sport?

Recommended Posts

All-Blacks

I know I should of posted in the sports post, but as not many people go there i'd thought as this is a general chat it fits into the category.

 

Anyways, i'd like to hear your comments & reasons of what sport do you think is the more complete sport, Rugby or American Football. When I say complete, I mean all the skills & physicallity required for the sports eg-endurance, ball skills, tackling, strength etc.

I admit that American Football probably just pips Rugby in the physical aspect, but what about the other skills & attributes? Is fitness important in Football? Why? Why do need different players to do different skills in Football? Every rugby player needs a basic knowledge of everything eg-passing, tackling, kicking etc. while each player in Football has one task (practically).

 

So what is more complete sport to play, Football or Rugby?

 

PS-Please only comment if you know a basic knowledge of BOTH sports.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
anuj

Er... rugby. I played football for four years, and smacked/smacked around some of the larger people I've ever met. There's no way I'd ever step into a rugby match, though. I played four-five times as a club sport, and goddamn if I didn't hurt like a motherf*cker afterwards. I guess I got used to the shoulder padding/helmets.

 

Although your statement about football players needing to know one task is pretty much wrong for all levels of the game. Almost everyone plays both ways in high school, tons of players play more than one position, and even in the pros a few players play both ways. I know that I had to know how to play pretty much EVERYTHING back in high school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RMT

High school field hockey was nasty. NO-ONE ever swung for the ball. Rather each other's shins. Everyone hobbled off the pitch. Rugby got bad too. Especially when it went from touch rugby to full rugby. Oh, and the old favorite, Prison Rules Football (Soccer).

 

I'd say Rugby. Nice when you sprint past the fat kid for the 4th time. But on the 5th time when he mauls you, it aint so fun.

 

Quick edit: British bulldog can get nasty. Dunno if it counts as a sport though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Big Slow

Rugby. There is no comparison, I mean, do the even wear cups?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheRoper

 

Almost everyone plays both ways in high school...

Ewww, what high school did you go to? barf8bd.gif

 

 

 

I would also have to say rugby, though I enjoy American football more (Probably just 'cuz that's what I was raised on)... Although, while rugby players play without padding/helmets (cups?), they also don't weigh 250lbs like some football players, so sometimes football can hurt a lot more.

 

Still, I say rugby's gnarlier, but I still prefer football. smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mav.
Quick edit: British bulldog can get nasty. Dunno if it counts as a sport though.

Hell yeah. That game was/is the sh*t.

 

I remember back in the day people would end up with blood dripping from their faces and bruises all over. Damn it was fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moonshield
Rugby. There is no comparison, I mean, do the even wear cups?

Only f*cking pussies wear cups in football. We're not talking about peewee leagues.

 

I agree with anuj's second statement about playing both ways, like I said in the other Rugby vs American Football topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheRoper

 

Rugby. There is no comparison, I mean, do the even wear cups?

Only f*cking pussies wear cups in football. We're not talking about peewee leagues...

Yes because real men feel no pain after a swift kick to the nuts. sigh.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All-Blacks

 

Although, while rugby players play without padding/helmets (cups?), they also don't weigh 250lbs like some football players, so sometimes football can hurt a lot more

 

Where have you been playing rugby, Sri Lanka tounge.gif ? I can assure you that most rugby players (excluding the scrumhalf, flyhalf and some wings) weigh over 200 lbs/90-100+ kiligrams. I would say American Football players are about the same size as Rugby players. There are small players in both sports (quarter backs/scrumhalfs) and big players (offensive guards/props).

 

Just out of curiosity, is rugby that popular in the USA? Do most schools have a 1st XV rugby team? I'm hoping USA gets to hold the Rugby World Cup in 2015 or 2019 to make it more popular like what the FIFA World Cup did in 1994. Of all the countries the IRB need to focus on for popularity, is the USA (& Japan).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TheRoper

 

Although, while rugby players play without padding/helmets (cups?), they also don't weigh 250lbs like some football players, so sometimes football can hurt a lot more

 

Where have you been playing rugby, Sri Lanka tounge.gif ? I can assure you that most rugby players (excluding the scrumhalf, flyhalf and some wings) weigh over 200 lbs/90-100+ kiligrams. I would say American Football players are about the same size as Rugby players. There are small players in both sports (quarter backs/scrumhalfs) and big players (offensive guards/props).

 

Just out of curiosity, is rugby that popular in the USA? Do most schools have a 1st XV rugby team? I'm hoping USA gets to hold the Rugby World Cup in 2015 or 2019 to make it more popular like what the FIFA World Cup did in 1994. Of all the countries the IRB need to focus on for popularity, is the USA (& Japan).

Hmm, didn't realize that about the size of the players, sorry. To be honest, I've only seen parts of a handful of games on ESPN2 as it's not televised very much here. But from what I remember, it was intense.

 

 

 

edit: lol, I meant 350lbs in my first post, but your point still stands. tounge.gif

Edited by TheRoper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Jay

I played rugby for a grand total of 20 minutes, until this happened. This was against people in an AFL state, so it is 10x worse on the east coast, and 10x worse in NZ.

 

Seriously man, as a Kiwi, you shouldnt second guess it. You were brought up around the burliest, roughest and most dangerous brand of rugby on the face of the earth.

 

user posted image

 

Tell me that isnt gnarly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ToyMachine
There are small players in both sports (quarter backs)

6'5 205 lbs is by no means small. That's the prototypical size for a quarterback nowdays.

 

Rugby is gnarlier and tougher. Mostly because of the padding used in football. One of my more distant cousins (grandma's sister's son) plays pro rugby in football and broke both his arms 3 months ago. I also heard a story about some guy who had his ballsack torn in rugby or a guy who got his face ripped off, stapled it back together and went out to play. You don't hear about stuff like that happening in football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
San Andreas Nut

Rugby. without a doubt, we play it every lunch time at school but lately we have been playing American football obviosly without the padding, we dont really know all the rules but we do the hikes and sh*t. we got told not to tackle now that a kid broke his collar bone. mad.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moonshield
Rugby. There is no comparison, I mean, do the even wear cups?

Only f*cking pussies wear cups in football. We're not talking about peewee leagues...

Yes because real men feel no pain after a swift kick to the nuts. sigh.gif

And that's a very common occurrence, let me tell you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All-Blacks

 

I also heard a story about some guy who had his ballsack torn in rugby or a guy who got his face ripped off, stapled it back together and went out to play. You don't hear about stuff like that happening in football.

 

YES a classic NZ rugby story. Wayne 'Buck' Shelford lost his left testicle on his test debut, and got it stictched back in, and played against France the following weekend.

 

 

Seriously man, as a Kiwi, you shouldnt second guess it. You were brought up around the burliest, roughest and most dangerous brand of rugby on the face of the earth.

 

Second guess what? I'm guessing you mean why ask what is tougher if i've been brought up around rugby in NZ, i'm just asking out of curiosity as I love American Football but have yet to play the sport. I know the basic knowledge of the skills & strength required by watching the NFL, but I am yet to learn how tough it is, that is why i've asked to hear a comparison of who has played both sports.

 

 

6'5 205 lbs is by no means small. That's the prototypical size for a quarterback nowdays.

 

Of all the professional quarterbacks I know of I have yet to see one of your description.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GTA3Rockstar

 

6'5 205 lbs is by no means small. That's the prototypical size for a quarterback nowdays.

 

Of all the professional quarterbacks I know of I have yet to see one of your description.

Drew Bledsoe, Tom Brady, Marc Bulger, David Carr etc.. Theres many more but I just dont want to list every football team!

 

 

@Ropsters - Its because they were removed! Cause they are pussies!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All-Blacks

 

6'5 205 lbs is by no means small. That's the prototypical size for a quarterback nowdays.

 

Of all the professional quarterbacks I know of I have yet to see one of your description.

Drew Bledsoe, Tom Brady, Marc Bulger, David Carr etc.. Theres many more but I just dont want to list every football team!

Are you sure the majority of quarter backs are that size? Obviously there would be a few who are oddly big, like with scrumhalves in rugby eg-Mike Philips, Piri Weepu, Byron Kelleher (might be short, but one muscular dude!) etc. but most aren't that big surely? Whats the typical size of punters & goal kickers?

Edited by All-Blacks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GTA3Rockstar

 

6'5 205 lbs is by no means small. That's the prototypical size for a quarterback nowdays.

 

Of all the professional quarterbacks I know of I have yet to see one of your description.

Drew Bledsoe, Tom Brady, Marc Bulger, David Carr etc.. Theres many more but I just dont want to list every football team!

Are you sure the majority of quarter backs are that size? Obviously there would be a few who are oddly big, like with scrumhalves in rugby eg-Mike Philips, Piri Weepu, Byron Kelleher (might be short, but one muscular dude!) etc. but most aren't that big surely? Whats the typical size of punters & goal kickers?

Im f*ckin confused, I guess you were talking about rugby quarter backs! I was on about NFL lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
darthYENIK

I'd say (American) football, as I did in the other topic of the exact origin.

 

As for who's bigger. William Perry (AKA 'the refrigerator'), weighed almost 400lbs. And the fridge probably is not the biggest (only in popularity).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All-Blacks
I'd say (American) football, as I did in the other topic of the exact origin.

 

As for who's bigger. William Perry (AKA 'the refrigerator'), weighed almost 400lbs. And the fridge probably is not the biggest (only in popularity).

Korey Stringer is the heaviest NFL player weighing at 359 lbs/162.8 kg. Bill Cavubati of Fiji is the heaviest international rugby player in the world, weighing around about 353 lbs/160kg. Theres not much in it, so stop going on about whos bigger because both sports have huge players! cookie.gif

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Seddo

Rugby by far. All that padding the yanks wear nice and cushiony impact confused.gif

 

Also Brittish bulldog FTW especially on concreate playgrounds lol.gif almost certain death dozingoff.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moonshield
Rugby by far. All that padding the yanks wear nice and cushiony impact confused.gif

 

Also Brittish bulldog FTW especially on concreate playgrounds lol.gif almost certain death dozingoff.gif

Yeah, you're right. It doesn't hurt at all since they wear all that padding. Good point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
.sticks.

Rugby. Football is an awesome sport, but it just can't compete with the incredible savageness of rugby. The best part of Rugby? After a match, I get this light-headed feeling of wanting to keep playing (like when I'm driving home). It combines the hits and tackling of football with the heavy finesse and running of soccer.

 

Oh, and in regards to American Football wearing pads, it is because of the fact that since there is forward passing receivers have to look for the ball and therefore make themselves vulnerable, and quarterbacks while passing can't look at their back (e.g. blind) side, leaving them vulnerable to big hits. If a few people must imperatively wear pads, you have to also give pads to everyone else.

Edited by .sticks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All-Blacks

 

Oh, and in regards to American Football wearing pads, it is because of the fact that since there is forward passing receivers have to look for the ball and therefore make themselves vulnerable, and quarterbacks while passing can't look at their back (e.g. blind) side, leaving them vulnerable to big hits. If a few people must imperatively wear pads, you have to also give pads to everyone else.

 

And? Players are vulnerable at some point in any sport, doesn't mean they wear a lot of pads. Yes the quarterbacks and wide receivers might get a little bit of short term pain from a tackle from behind without pads, but do the pads really help that much? If they have pads, howcome they still have a lot of serious injuries (especially spinal injuries). I've played a bit of football during lunch at school(we try to keep it as proper as possible) without pads obviously, and it doesn't hurt that much. I'd like to see NFL play without pads as an experiment, and see if there were more or less injuries previously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kingzing

 

Im f*ckin confused, I guess you were talking about rugby quarter backs! I was on about NFL lol

 

Sorry to correct you, but there aren't quarterbacks in union. But I'd have to agree that quarterbacks are generally quite big.

 

 

Are you sure the majority of quarter backs are that size?

 

The majority of quarterbacks are taller than six foot. (They need to be able to see over the line of scrimmage). I think the only positions where players are generally of a "smaller" stature are the wide receivers, safeties, cornerbacks and a few running backs (mostly halfbacks).

 

 

And? Players are vulnerable at some point in any sport, doesn't mean they wear a lot of pads. Yes the quarterbacks and wide receivers might get a little bit of short term pain from a tackle from behind without pads, but do the pads really help that much? If they have pads, howcome they still have a lot of serious injuries (especially spinal injuries). I've played a bit of football during lunch at school(we try to keep it as proper as possible) without pads obviously, and it doesn't hurt that much. I'd like to see NFL play without pads as an experiment, and see if there were more or less injuries previously.

 

I would think that if pads were taken out of the sport, there would be alot more collarbone/shoulder and rib injuries. The spine is a delicate area, and is hard to protect without hindering movement. Lots of ankle and leg injuries happen from playing on the fake turf stuff you find in some American football stadiums. But does that mean they should introduce leg pads and/or leg braces? Probably not...

Edited by kingzing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All-Blacks

Im f*ckin confused, I guess you were talking about rugby quarter backs! I was on about NFL lol

 

Sorry to correct you, but there aren't quarterbacks in union. But I'd have to agree that quarterbacks are generally quite big.

 

 

Are you sure the majority of quarter backs are that size?

 

The majority of quarterbacks are taller than six foot. (They need to be able to see over the line of scrimmage). I think the only positions where players are generally of a "smaller" stature are the wide receivers, safeties, cornerbacks and a few running backs (mostly halfbacks).

 

 

And? Players are vulnerable at some point in any sport, doesn't mean they wear a lot of pads. Yes the quarterbacks and wide receivers might get a little bit of short term pain from a tackle from behind without pads, but do the pads really help that much? If they have pads, howcome they still have a lot of serious injuries (especially spinal injuries). I've played a bit of football during lunch at school(we try to keep it as proper as possible) without pads obviously, and it doesn't hurt that much. I'd like to see NFL play without pads as an experiment, and see if there were more or less injuries previously.

 

I would think that if pads were taken out of the sport, there would be alot more collarbone/shoulder and rib injuries. The spine is a delicate area, and is hard to protect without hindering movement. Lots of ankle and leg injuries happen from playing on the fake turf stuff you find in some American football stadiums. But does that mean they should introduce leg pads and/or leg braces? Probably not...

Well I just don't understand howcome they NEED pads. Well it is a dangerous game, no doubt about it, but I think there needs to be some experiment to see if pads actually really help that much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FuLL_CLiP

depends... on the pro level id say american football because it has the best athletes, no offense but if you take the pads off some of the guys in the NFL and stick em in rugby heads would be rolling.

 

4.4 40 and 250lbs=american fooltball>rugby

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moonshield

Im f*ckin confused, I guess you were talking about rugby quarter backs! I was on about NFL lol

 

Sorry to correct you, but there aren't quarterbacks in union. But I'd have to agree that quarterbacks are generally quite big.

 

 

Are you sure the majority of quarter backs are that size?

 

The majority of quarterbacks are taller than six foot. (They need to be able to see over the line of scrimmage). I think the only positions where players are generally of a "smaller" stature are the wide receivers, safeties, cornerbacks and a few running backs (mostly halfbacks).

 

 

And? Players are vulnerable at some point in any sport, doesn't mean they wear a lot of pads. Yes the quarterbacks and wide receivers might get a little bit of short term pain from a tackle from behind without pads, but do the pads really help that much? If they have pads, howcome they still have a lot of serious injuries (especially spinal injuries). I've played a bit of football during lunch at school(we try to keep it as proper as possible) without pads obviously, and it doesn't hurt that much. I'd like to see NFL play without pads as an experiment, and see if there were more or less injuries previously.

 

I would think that if pads were taken out of the sport, there would be alot more collarbone/shoulder and rib injuries. The spine is a delicate area, and is hard to protect without hindering movement. Lots of ankle and leg injuries happen from playing on the fake turf stuff you find in some American football stadiums. But does that mean they should introduce leg pads and/or leg braces? Probably not...

Well I just don't understand howcome they NEED pads. Well it is a dangerous game, no doubt about it, but I think there needs to be some experiment to see if pads actually really help that much.

You do realize that these pads weren't there when the game first stated out, right? The equipment has evolved into what they are today from the Harvard-Yale game in the late 1800s to today. The helmets you see now weren't around until around the 50s, and even then, the face masks you see today (other than the newest ones) weren't invented until the 70s. This equipment didn't evolve because it just seemed logical; it was necessary. In 1905, one year alone, there were 18 deaths during football games. The game was f*cking banned because it was too brutal. And the fact that you're comparing your lunch-time football session to playing a real game is hilarious, you really don't understand how bad it is to get blindsided from behind from a 270 lb. defensive end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All-Blacks

 

Im f*ckin confused, I guess you were talking about rugby quarter backs! I was on about NFL lol

 

Sorry to correct you, but there aren't quarterbacks in union. But I'd have to agree that quarterbacks are generally quite big.

 

 

Are you sure the majority of quarter backs are that size?

 

The majority of quarterbacks are taller than six foot. (They need to be able to see over the line of scrimmage). I think the only positions where players are generally of a "smaller" stature are the wide receivers, safeties, cornerbacks and a few running backs (mostly halfbacks).

 

 

And? Players are vulnerable at some point in any sport, doesn't mean they wear a lot of pads. Yes the quarterbacks and wide receivers might get a little bit of short term pain from a tackle from behind without pads, but do the pads really help that much? If they have pads, howcome they still have a lot of serious injuries (especially spinal injuries). I've played a bit of football during lunch at school(we try to keep it as proper as possible) without pads obviously, and it doesn't hurt that much. I'd like to see NFL play without pads as an experiment, and see if there were more or less injuries previously.

 

I would think that if pads were taken out of the sport, there would be alot more collarbone/shoulder and rib injuries. The spine is a delicate area, and is hard to protect without hindering movement. Lots of ankle and leg injuries happen from playing on the fake turf stuff you find in some American football stadiums. But does that mean they should introduce leg pads and/or leg braces? Probably not...

Well I just don't understand howcome they NEED pads. Well it is a dangerous game, no doubt about it, but I think there needs to be some experiment to see if pads actually really help that much.

You do realize that these pads weren't there when the game first stated out, right? The equipment has evolved into what they are today from the Harvard-Yale game in the late 1800s to today. The helmets you see now weren't around until around the 50s, and even then, the face masks you see today (other than the newest ones) weren't invented until the 70s. This equipment didn't evolve because it just seemed logical; it was necessary. In 1905, one year alone, there were 18 deaths during football games. The game was f*cking banned because it was too brutal. And the fact that you're comparing your lunch-time football session to playing a real game is hilarious, you really don't understand how bad it is to get blindsided from behind from a 270 lb. defensive end.

You do realise rugby has had more deaths in the first 5 years than American Football has ever since it was first played? And still rugby doesn't go over board with padding. Rugby had about 200 deaths in the first year alone when it was first played (1830 something?). There are still deaths (5 South African club players have died this year) & very serious injuries (a 19 year old got a stroke after a high tackle 5 months ago in NZ) today! So don't give me that bullsh*t they need pads, they need to put a dress on more than anything.

Edited by All-Blacks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
darthYENIK
I'd say (American) football, as I did in the other topic of the exact origin.

 

As for who's bigger.  William Perry (AKA 'the refrigerator'), weighed almost 400lbs.  And the fridge probably is not the biggest (only in popularity).

Korey Stringer is the heaviest NFL player weighing at 359 lbs/162.8 kg. Bill Cavubati of Fiji is the heaviest international rugby player in the world, weighing around about 353 lbs/160kg. Theres not much in it, so stop going on about whos bigger because both sports have huge players! cookie.gif

I wasn't talking currently the biggest. The Fridge retired in 93' or 94'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.