Style VS Style thread here! (Joke thread)

Posted by: Taison

Style VS Style thread here! (Joke thread) - 04/19/06 06:28 AM

One of the most important rules of this forum is that there shall be no discussion concerning style vs style. As this is the General forum, I am going to openly discuss this matter. . . Wait! Don't be hasty in your decision, this has nothing to do with MA, it's about;

Which one is better? American football or Rugby?

I vote for Rugby, being the Britishinized English Educated Eurasian with a love for chicken and chips. What's your vote?

-Taison out
Posted by: BuDoc

Re: Style VS Style thread here! (Joke thread) - 04/19/06 07:59 AM

Being a proud, free spirited American, I cast my vote strongly for...Rugby!

I know, it doesn't get alot of play in the states and not many Americans really understand the rules, but I love it!

I played on a recreational league team for my last 2 years of High School, walked on at University Freshman year and started(Tighthead Prop)and received a scholarship for my remaining years, and got to play in Australia, NZ, England, and South Africa!

Played in a mens league through the first half of med school, but had to stop when it got real tough(school I mean, Rugby is always tough)!

Rugby players are much tougher than American football players. Those sissies wear pads for christ's sake!

And the post game parties, with all of the Beer, Nakedness(some times even with women ) and debauchery, would rival any NFL party in existence!

If this forum had sound capability, I'd sing you my Rugby fight song! You guys are so lucky we don't have sound capability!!

Page
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Style VS Style thread here! (Joke thread) - 04/19/06 09:38 AM

American Football for sure. Grew up with the CFL (Canadian Football League) and played from the age of 11 to 17 years old. Then I also got hooked on the NFL and I am a die hard Steelers fan going back to the days of Terry Bradshaw. When I was 12 I not only wore my jersey as the #12 because of my age but also because of Terry.

Played rugby in school and it was enjoyable but nothing like putting on all of the equipment and trying to kill somebody if you are a Linebacker.
Posted by: Taison

Re: Style VS Style thread here! (Joke thread) - 04/20/06 05:01 AM

Well, I remember when I played rugby.

I've dabbled in both a bit but I can still remember when I got the rugby ball. Unlike the American version, in rugby as soon as you get the ball it's like having a big red sign ontop of your head that scream "KILL ME". It's real scary having the other team stare at you and then all at once just tackle you plus you don't wear any armor.

The skill in rugby lies in getting forward. You can't pass to people infront, so that's a great problem. Plus, these rugby dudes, they are real gentlemen. I remember, one guy got his nose broken, and he just got up and said "no problem, no offence taken". Had it been soccer, that dude would have just started a fight.

-Taison out
Posted by: funstick5000

Re: Style VS Style thread here! (Joke thread) - 04/20/06 12:51 PM

rugby all the way. i play scrum half - basically means i chase after the person in my team who has the ball, as well as some other things. rugby players raise your hand; who's been punched in the face during a scrum?

don't really understand american football, it looks a bit rougher in that the tackles seem to be higher but as taison said its different to have half a team ready to rip you apart for the ball.
Posted by: Stormdragon

Re: Style VS Style thread here! (Joke thread) - 04/20/06 11:38 PM

American football all the way. There's a reason they wear all those pads!
And there's a reason rugby players don't need to! And it aint because their tough!
Posted by: Taison

Re: Style VS Style thread here! (Joke thread) - 04/21/06 05:58 AM

The reason there is an armour for American Footballers is that you can basically tackle anyone on the opponent team. In rugby, you can only tackle the guy holding the ball.

Why don't rugby players wear armor? Well, there wasn't any armor during the medieval ages, so tradition just kept it that way. No armor. Although, many are sporting head-gear but not actually helmets, it's more like a pad on the back of your head.

Another thing I find fun with rugby is the faster pace of the game. In rugby, if you drop the ball, pick the ball and play on. Drop it three times, the other team gets the ball. In American football, it takes near to 50 years before you get the game going again (I was sarcastic, it takes around 2-3 minutes).

But there is one thing I don't like with rugby. I know who the guy is going to pass to, but I'm unable to touch him until he gets the ball. Had it been American football, I'd dropkicked the dude before he even sees the ball coming.

Another thing is that, in rugby it's so darn hard to advance forward unlike in American football. You can't pass to people who are infront of you so that means, if you are infront of your team, you're more or less useless. Thus, the teams moves in lines, with the guy infront moving to the back, and the guy at the back with the ball moving to the front and passing the ball back before he gets tackled. Strange rules, aye? In American football. See the big dude infront? Give him the ball!

-Taison out
Posted by: JoelM

Re: Style VS Style thread here! (Joke thread) - 04/21/06 09:46 AM

Quote:

But there is one thing I don't like with rugby. I know who the guy is going to pass to, but I'm unable to touch him until he gets the ball. Had it been American football, I'd dropkicked the dude before he even sees the ball coming.




Just to be clear, I haven't seen a league yet where you can hit the guy before they recieve the ball. That is a big penalty, usually 15+ yards.

That being said I've watched some rugby and it looks fun and great to watch. I'm going the PC route and saying I like both. Despite their similartiies, they are quite different games (to me).
Posted by: Dereck

Re: Style VS Style thread here! (Joke thread) - 04/21/06 10:22 AM

Played both and there are some minor similarities but two completely different games.