Football or Rugby

Fitba' crazy, fitba' mad. But mostly mad. And angry

Well...?

Football
13
62%
Rugby
6
29%
Footy
2
10%
 
Total votes: 21

User avatar
Pansy Puff
Posts: 8266
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 21:10
Location: Under the watchful eye of the Clive police

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby Pansy Puff » 13 Mar 2017, 13:54

I think there's still a massive difference between England and Europe with this.
Would Silva, Messi or Iniesta made it through the English systems of the 90s?
At least now with under 7 and under 8 football there is a focus on 5 a side, on teamwork and on skill even if strong players can still bash their way through in a match situation.
“He’s got the memory of an elephant ... and the trophy cabinet of one too.”

User avatar
fange
Posts: 12232
Joined: 20 Jan 2010, 11:30
Location: 香港

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby fange » 13 Mar 2017, 14:15

Australian Rules Football
Soccer

American Football






Rugby
Jonny Spencer wrote:
fange wrote:I've got my quad pants on and i'm ready for some Cock.


By CHRIST you're a man after my own sideways sausage, Ange!

User avatar
trans-chigley express
Posts: 17189
Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 01:50
Location: Asia's WC

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby trans-chigley express » 14 Mar 2017, 03:23

K wrote: but hopefully we'll get some posts about soft footballers diving and how well rugby players respect the ref and how their fans are so friendly etc etc.


I get this a LOT from my rugby-loving friends who bang on about these positive elements of rugby/negative elements of football that are supposed to make Rugby the superior sport and while I agree that these things are true, at the end of the day (did you see what I did there) football is still the better sport. It just is.

User avatar
trans-chigley express
Posts: 17189
Joined: 11 Nov 2003, 01:50
Location: Asia's WC

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby trans-chigley express » 14 Mar 2017, 03:32

K wrote:And only in football could Troy Deeney become such a hero


Even though I don't support Man City that Aguero goal still made me jump out my seat and jump about like crazy. God knows what it was like for the actual fans :lol:

There should be a couple of Gerrard goals included (vs Olympiacos and West Ham) and, 'though it pains me, Arsenal's last minute title winner vs Liverpool in 1989

User avatar
The Red Heifer
Fucking Crackers
Posts: 14645
Joined: 31 Aug 2003, 01:28
Location: South Penriff
Contact:

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby The Red Heifer » 14 Mar 2017, 06:10

trans-chigley express wrote:
K wrote: but hopefully we'll get some posts about soft footballers diving and how well rugby players respect the ref and how their fans are so friendly etc etc.


I get this a LOT from my rugby-loving friends who bang on about these positive elements of rugby/negative elements of football that are supposed to make Rugby the superior sport and while I agree that these things are true, at the end of the day (did you see what I did there) football is still the better sport. It just is.


Union fans in Australia are, with a few exceptions, absolute fuckwits of the highest order. The bloke in the suit who threatened to shove my wife's cowbell (a common thing for fans of the Chiefs to carry) down her throat was a particular favourite. I'm sure in New Zealand, where RU is the sport of the common man as opposed to an "elite" class like here, they're much nicer.

Rugby League fans are just nice, I've never really felt threatened at a game, and nor do they rip flares and do other sorts of shit and hide behind "passion" like the homophobic pieces of shit who support the Western Sydney Wanderers.


But I suppose it's what you're born into I suppose. I wonder how many on this list listed their favourite here which they came to at a later date as opposed to being a part of their life since birth.

I always look a bit suspiciously on people who convert to a "new" favourite code :lol: :lol:
Wadesmith wrote:Why is it that when there's a 'What do you think of this?' post, it's always absolute cobblers?

User avatar
Pansy Puff
Posts: 8266
Joined: 22 Feb 2012, 21:10
Location: Under the watchful eye of the Clive police

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby Pansy Puff » 14 Mar 2017, 06:34

trans-chigley express wrote:
K wrote:And only in football could Troy Deeney become such a hero


Even though I don't support Man City that Aguero goal still made me jump out my seat and jump about like crazy. God knows what it was like for the actual fans :lol:


I wasn't there, I'd had to give up my season ticket a few years previously, but I remember watching it so so clearly. It is an incredible moment - just astonishing and the greatest end to a football league season that has ever been or ever will be.
“He’s got the memory of an elephant ... and the trophy cabinet of one too.”

User avatar
Darkness_Fish
Posts: 5317
Joined: 27 Jul 2015, 09:58

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby Darkness_Fish » 14 Mar 2017, 09:41

Brutal Kangaroo wrote:Rugby League fans are just nice, I've never really felt threatened at a game, and nor do they rip flares and do other sorts of shit and hide behind "passion" like the homophobic pieces of shit who support the Western Sydney Wanderers.

I find rugby league crowds weird. At Wigan, at least, the crowd's constant chattering amongst themselves gets really annoying, it's like some kind of social occasion with a rugby match occurring in the background. The vehemence with which they then criticise the ref is properly startling, it changes from a tea party to a lynching. The video ref ruins everything on televised games, too, I'd hate for football ever to bring that in. No-one knows what's happening, half the crowd can't see the screen, the game stops for an age, and then the video ref makes an incomprehensible decision, and no-one's happy.
Like fast-moving clouds casting shadows against a hillside, the melody-loop shuddered with a sense of the sublime, the awful unknowable majesty of the world.

User avatar
Nikki Gradual
nasty, brutish and short
Posts: 20713
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:59
Location: Marineville

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby Nikki Gradual » 15 Mar 2017, 07:49

Toby wrote:Jonah Lomu, generally seen as the finest Rugby player of all time


"Generally seen" only by people who know absolutely nothing about rugby. Jonah Lomu was a phenomenon, but not even the best winger let alone the best player. If you state it simply, and ignore his weakness on the turn and poor tackling, his one job was to score tries and he amassed 37 in 60 international tests while having the advantage of playing for the best team in the world. That gives him 0.587 tries per cap, which means he isn't even in the top 5 Kiwis. Julian Savea is currently on 45 tries from 51 tests and is a far better all-round winger than Lomu. And we are just talking wingers here, not full backs, fly halves or back rows (the positions most likely to offer up the greatest player of all time, though rugby positions are so incomparable that it is a ridiculous concept in the first place). Just to emphasise how silly your point is, Shane Williams, all 5ft 7in of him, scored 60 tries in 91 tests (0.659) while playing for a far less dominant top tier team. Yes, size and strength are factors in rugby, but they are not everything.
"He's thrown a kettle over a pub; what have you done?"

User avatar
Nikki Gradual
nasty, brutish and short
Posts: 20713
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:59
Location: Marineville

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby Nikki Gradual » 15 Mar 2017, 07:59

Brutal Kangaroo wrote:Rugby League fans are just nice


:D I follow you on Twitter you know. :D
"He's thrown a kettle over a pub; what have you done?"

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 65851
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby Diamond Dog » 15 Mar 2017, 08:40

Nikki Gradual wrote:
Toby wrote:Jonah Lomu, generally seen as the finest Rugby player of all time


"Generally seen" only by people who know absolutely nothing about rugby. Jonah Lomu was a phenomenon, but not even the best winger let alone the best player. If you state it simply, and ignore his weakness on the turn and poor tackling, his one job was to score tries and he amassed 37 in 60 international tests while having the advantage of playing for the best team in the world. That gives him 0.587 tries per cap, which means he isn't even in the top 5 Kiwis. Julian Savea is currently on 45 tries from 51 tests and is a far better all-round winger than Lomu. And we are just talking wingers here, not full backs, fly halves or back rows (the positions most likely to offer up the greatest player of all time, though rugby positions are so incomparable that it is a ridiculous concept in the first place). Just to emphasise how silly your point is, Shane Williams, all 5ft 7in of him, scored 60 tries in 91 tests (0.659) while playing for a far less dominant top tier team. Yes, size and strength are factors in rugby, but they are not everything.


Thank you James - you explained that perfectly.

It's a bit like American Football - size and strength is important but the best wide recivers (for instance) are rarely the quickest (generally considered the greatest of all time, Jerry Rice, was like a tractor compared to others around him throughout his career), neither Tom Brady nor Joe Montana (both generally considered the greatest quartebacks of all time) were in any way the greatest physical specimens at the position and one of the greatest offensive lines (Denver 97 & 98) were midgets compared to others. I could find similar comparisons throughout the positions.

Where size and strength and speed is an advantage is in getting drafted... that's pretty much undeniable (Montana was drafted 82nd and Brady 199th in their years.... )... but, once you are picked, it's down to how you are as a player that counts.
In other words an extended look into *******’s head, and it seems to have some pretty good things in it (who among us is totally free of mental garbage?) It’s nice to see that he is confident enough so he can play some blues again,I’d like to hear more.

User avatar
PENK
Midnight to Six Man
Posts: 34387
Joined: 07 Aug 2004, 20:12
Location: Stockholm

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby PENK » 15 Mar 2017, 09:15

Diamond Dog wrote:Where size and strength and speed is an advantage is in getting drafted... but, once you are picked, it's down to how you are as a player that counts.


That's true in (association) football too.

A while ago I went to watch my girlfriend's nephew playing for his U-14 team against Hammarby, the youth team of a Swedish Premier league side. The boys on both teams were very talented, but what was really noticeable was how the Hammarby players, those affiliated to the professional side, dwarfed the opposition: all eleven on the team could have passed for adults.
Copehead wrote:I have met Gruff Rhys - although he claimed he wasn't and that he couldn't speak Welsh, as I spoke to him in Welsh, but it was him lying bastard.

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 65851
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby Diamond Dog » 15 Mar 2017, 09:33

PENK wrote:
Diamond Dog wrote:Where size and strength and speed is an advantage is in getting drafted... but, once you are picked, it's down to how you are as a player that counts.


That's true in (association) football too.

A while ago I went to watch my girlfriend's nephew playing for his U-14 team against Hammarby, the youth team of a Swedish Premier league side. The boys on both teams were very talented, but what was really noticeable was how the Hammarby players, those affiliated to the professional side, dwarfed the opposition: all eleven on the team could have passed for adults.


It's one of the major changes in Arsenal's 'drafting/scouting' policy over the past ten years too...... A very good friend of a friend told me that one of the first things Wenger did was change the emphasis from skill to athleticism in their scouting...(sadly he didn't also make 'staying injury free' as part of that equation, seemingly) which could well be one of the reasons Arsenal really don't get the quality of youngsters that you'd assume a club with their 'footballling' ethos should have.

In the end, athleticism will always push you to the front of the queue (even more so in this country, I'd suggest, where we place such great emphasis on ability to run as opposed to ability to control the ball) but, once you're there, skill and savvy will generally win out eventually.
In other words an extended look into *******’s head, and it seems to have some pretty good things in it (who among us is totally free of mental garbage?) It’s nice to see that he is confident enough so he can play some blues again,I’d like to hear more.

User avatar
Toby
Arsehole all Erect
Posts: 23057
Joined: 28 Jul 2003, 23:13
Contact:

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby Toby » 15 Mar 2017, 09:45

Nikki Gradual wrote:
"Generally seen" only by people who know absolutely nothing about rugby. Jonah Lomu was a phenomenon, but not even the best winger let alone the best player. If you state it simply, and ignore his weakness on the turn and poor tackling, his one job was to score tries and he amassed 37 in 60 international tests while having the advantage of playing for the best team in the world. That gives him 0.587 tries per cap, which means he isn't even in the top 5 Kiwis. Julian Savea is currently on 45 tries from 51 tests and is a far better all-round winger than Lomu. And we are just talking wingers here, not full backs, fly halves or back rows (the positions most likely to offer up the greatest player of all time, though rugby positions are so incomparable that it is a ridiculous concept in the first place). Just to emphasise how silly your point is, Shane Williams, all 5ft 7in of him, scored 60 tries in 91 tests (0.659) while playing for a far less dominant top tier team. Yes, size and strength are factors in rugby, but they are not everything.


Fair enough guv'nor.

User avatar
Goat Boy
Bogarting the joint
Posts: 31958
Joined: 20 Mar 2007, 12:11
Location: In the perfumed garden

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby Goat Boy » 15 Mar 2017, 10:12

Toby wrote:The ability to run around the pitch for 90 minutes has always been there. That's why Ray Parlour had a semblance of an international career, because he could run around non-stop.

I don't doubt that fitness is becoming supra-important - I have a friend who has worked at some of the top clubs as a conditioning coach, and it is only recently that footballers are starting to reach the levels that Rugby players have.

But my point still remains - as someone who was "small" as a child (I shot up from 5' 4" to 6' in 2 years between the ages of 16 - 18), football remains a sport where "classical" fitness attributes aren't as necessary to success as other sports. See Cricket as well (the greatest batsmen of all time were all under 5' 8") for that. That's why it appeals to me. Someone like the late Jonah Lomu, generally seen as the finest Rugby player of all time, was a physical beast, but that to me is just genetics shining (albeit in a tragically brief way) for him at the right time.



It’s a fair point.

Part of footballs appeal to me was that it was more egalitarian than other sports. You could have the 5ft 1 player who was godlike but also the lanky midfielder who smoked 40 a day (hello Socrates). Of course the smaller footballer with a lower centre of balance sometimes has a physical advantage too depending on their position i.e. Maradona.

It has changed significantly of course and athleticism plays an increasing role now. Watching Chelsea v Man Utd the other night I was struck by how powerful looking Antonio Valencia was and he was playing full back ffs. He looked like a rugby league player.
LeBaron wrote:
Jimbo wrote:I will read your link but it seems you only read my poor synopsis and not the article, otherwise you''d say more than just insult my cred


I read the article, which was nonsense.

User avatar
PresMuffley
Posts: 1047
Joined: 06 Feb 2017, 12:00

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby PresMuffley » 16 Mar 2017, 05:17

As an American who has probably never watched a proper Rugby match the choice is easy: soccer / football

I don't know what a proper Rugby match would consist of, but I find the term 'scrum' very off-putting.

American football is shit. I keep up with the college game only out of habit.

Would rather watch singles tennis than anything. Teammates suck.
Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room.

User avatar
The Red Heifer
Fucking Crackers
Posts: 14645
Joined: 31 Aug 2003, 01:28
Location: South Penriff
Contact:

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby The Red Heifer » 16 Mar 2017, 07:00

Nikki Gradual wrote:
Brutal Kangaroo wrote:Rugby League fans are just nice


:D I follow you on Twitter you know. :D



:lol: :lol: I am one of the exceptions to the rule!
Wadesmith wrote:Why is it that when there's a 'What do you think of this?' post, it's always absolute cobblers?

User avatar
northernsky
Posts: 2272
Joined: 08 Aug 2005, 10:18
Location: East of Sweden

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby northernsky » 16 Mar 2017, 08:38

PENK wrote:
Diamond Dog wrote:Where size and strength and speed is an advantage is in getting drafted... but, once you are picked, it's down to how you are as a player that counts.


That's true in (association) football too.

A while ago I went to watch my girlfriend's nephew playing for his U-14 team against Hammarby, the youth team of a Swedish Premier league side. The boys on both teams were very talented, but what was really noticeable was how the Hammarby players, those affiliated to the professional side, dwarfed the opposition: all eleven on the team could have passed for adults.


Some years ago, Offside presented statistics on players who've represented the Swedish national team and those born in the first half of the year were remarkably overrepresented. I can't find the reference now, but here's a list of 15 year olds selected for the annual elite training camp in Halmstad from 2001-2011, sorted by birth in each quarter of the year:

boys:
1st quarter: 42%
2nd quarter : 30%
3rd quarter: 18%
4th quarter: 10%

girls:
1st quarter: 35%
2nd quarter: 30%
3rd quarter: 21%
4th quarter: 14%

And, Swedish-born players currently in the top Swedish division:
1st quarter: 85
2nd quarter: 74
3rd quarter: 63
4th quarter: 36

I doubt Sweden is alone in this, by the way.
My eldest is born at the end of November and small for his age. Also, he's of an age when many of his peers have hit puberty. If I say so myself, he's one of the 2-3 most technically gifted in his team. He only ever gets to play fullback or wing.

User avatar
Diamond Dog
"Self Quoter" Extraordinaire.
Posts: 65851
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 21:04
Location: High On Poachers Hill

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby Diamond Dog » 16 Mar 2017, 09:06

There is an astonishing stat that something like 90% of all American Football, Basketball, Baseball & Ice Hockey players drafted in the first round are born in January (that's not it exactly, but there was a programme re the phenomenom that really did make you go "Wow"). It's a huge advantage in a draft system.
In other words an extended look into *******’s head, and it seems to have some pretty good things in it (who among us is totally free of mental garbage?) It’s nice to see that he is confident enough so he can play some blues again,I’d like to hear more.

User avatar
Shaun
Posts: 4758
Joined: 25 Nov 2003, 09:23
Location: Not round the corner from Jimbo anymore

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby Shaun » 08 Jan 2018, 12:39

Rugby league
Don't fight the hypothetical

User avatar
The Modernist
2018 BCB Cup Champ!
Posts: 11264
Joined: 13 Apr 2014, 20:42

Re: Football or Rugby

Postby The Modernist » 08 Jan 2018, 17:58

Toby wrote:Football wins because it doesn't rely on strength. Messi, Xavi or Iniesta would be flattened on a rugby pitch, but in football they are the Emperors.


There's been any number of small scrum halves, even now they tend to be fairly diminutive.

Football for me obviously, but I do really enjoy a good game of rugby too (and obviously here I'm talking about union), but I only really follow the internationals.

They're the only two team sports that interest me..you can keep the rest.