MLS 2018 (4 Viewers)

[JuveJay]

Isn't rugby more similar to soccer, just with hands?

Rugby (union) isn't like anything else, and often comes down to very minor and complex details. The differences with American Football are big, because you are talking about guys playing in constantly rolling phases of play across a field (kicking for territory, passing phases, mauls, rucks, scrums, lineouts) sometimes for minutes at a time. That is going to be different to a sport where plays come down to seconds and everything is about being explosive in short bursts around numerous breaks in play.

In rugby you get hurt and tested through sheer constant and exposed physical contact and aerobic endurance with guys ranging from 14-20 stone, mostly with body fat percentages below 20%, as opposed to getting stop-start monster hits from a 17-25 stone mountain in pads.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Seven]

To be fair, you could make a similar post out of non-Americans hating on American Football, when there's no real justification as to why one of these two sports should objectively be better than the other, at a professional level.

At an amateur/popular sport level I do believe football is superior though tbh, just due to its sheer simplicity. All you need is a round, approximately ball-sized object, a somewhat flat surface, perhaps 4 random objects for goalposts and you're good to go. For American Football, you need to have a very specific ball, and that's only the start.
Football can easily be argued to be more healthy and less dangerous phisically at an amateur level than its American counterpart as well.

You need no equipment at all for wrestling though.

 

[Knowah]

Rugby (union) isn't like anything else, and often comes down to very minor and complex details. The differences with American Football are big, because you are talking about guys playing in constantly rolling phases of play across a field (kicking for territory, passing phases, mauls, rucks, scrums, lineouts) sometimes for minutes at a time. That is going to be different to a sport where plays come down to seconds and everything is about being explosive in short bursts around numerous breaks in play.

In rugby you get hurt and tested through sheer constant and exposed physical contact and aerobic endurance with guys ranging from 14-20 stone, mostly with body fat percentages below 20%, as opposed to getting stop-start monster hits from a 17-25 stone mountain in pads.

As somebody who has played both rugby and American football extensively, I can say you have more "down" time in rugby than football. And even the huge "17-25 stone mountain in pads" gentlemen are usually very physically fit. The offensive/defensive linemen can usually lift huge amounts of weight with their arms and have insane massive upper body strength. When I played in college, those hulking offensive linemen who were 17-25 stone could run 6 second 40 yard dashes. And this brings me to the "armor" that American footballers wear. In American football, the tackles are actually really collisions at fast speeds.

Also, the complexity and discipline of American football just stands heads and shoulders above rugby. In college, my American football team had over 200 organized schemes and plays.

But it really comes down to personal preference and style. I prefer football over them both.

 

[Ocelot]

You need no equipment at all for wrestling though.

But it's much more dangerous, on an amateur level at least.

Plus the amount of people who find it enjoyable is rather limited, at any rate that's how I perceive it.

 

[JuveJay]

As somebody who has played both rugby and American football extensively, I can say you have more "down" time in rugby than football. And even the huge "17-25 stone mountain in pads" gentlemen are usually very physically fit. The offensive/defensive linemen can usually lift huge amounts of weight with their arms and have insane massive upper body strength. When I played in college, those hulking offensive linemen who were 17-25 stone could run 6 second 40 yard dashes. And this brings me to the "armor" that American footballers wear. In American football, the tackles are actually really collisions at fast speeds.

Also, the complexity and discipline of American football just stands heads and shoulders above rugby. In college, my American football team had over 200 organized schemes and plays.

But it really comes down to personal preference and style. I prefer football over them both.

What position did you play in both? As the average NFL game has about 10 minutes of actual play and switches between offensive and defensive set ups, compared to around 35 minutes in rugby union at the top level, I'd question the validity of your claim. Unless of course you were playing a particularly forwards or backs-biased or kicking game?

If you compare a rugby Test match there are between 200-300 tackles alone in a game, in the NFL there are about half that total plays per game.

Anyway, I'm not advocating one game over the other, just pointing out the considerable differences.

 

[Hust]

As somebody who has played both rugby and American football extensively, I can say you have more "down" time in rugby than football. And even the huge "17-25 stone mountain in pads" gentlemen are usually very physically fit. The offensive/defensive linemen can usually lift huge amounts of weight with their arms and have insane massive upper body strength. When I played in college, those hulking offensive linemen who were 17-25 stone could run 6 second 40 yard dashes. And this brings me to the "armor" that American footballers wear. In American football, the tackles are actually really collisions at fast speeds.

Also, the complexity and discipline of American football just stands heads and shoulders above rugby. In college, my American football team had over 200 organized schemes and plays.

But it really comes down to personal preference and style. I prefer football over them both.

Ah, another fellow collegiate athlete.

 

[Knowah]

What position did you play in both? As the average NFL game has about 10 minutes of actual play and switches between offensive and defensive set ups, compared to around 35 minutes in rugby union at the top level, I'd question the validity of your claim. Unless of course you were playing a particularly forwards or backs-biased or kicking game?

I played Inside Center in college and afterwards for seven years in leagues around the Midwest, both when I lived in Chicago, Pennsylvania and Indiana. In American football, I played linebacker/running back as well as occasionally played free safety.

If you compare a rugby Test match there are between 200-300 tackles alone in a game, in the NFL there are about half that total plays per game.

Anyway, I'm not advocating one game over the other, just pointing out the considerable differences.

I agree there are considerable differences but I would also argue, though the terminology is the same, the concepts are different and that leads to misunderstandings. For example, what is considered a tackle in rugby isn't the same as a tackle in American football. In fac,t you could argue a rugby tackle occurs all the time in American football, not just on the ballcarrier's vicinity. For example, I think you could maybe argue a pancake block could be considered a tackle by rugby standards in most cases, removing the need of the ballcarrier being present. I enjoy both sports but I always find it interesting that people try to "manly" one over the other as if there's some kind of "manly man" competition between the two sports.

Like you said, they are very different for very different reasons.

 

[JuveJay]

Although I would say that the tackle stats I included are completed tackles (man stopped) rather than overall tackles. It's true what you say about a pancake, that's very close to a chest tackle or arm pin in rugby.

Interesting to see your positional choices. Being a centre goes well against a LB or RB, that you were an inside centre means you must understand the game well.

 

[alexjuventino]

What channel is galaxy vs chicago ?

 

[lgorTudor]

please let there be russian sopcasts. I am so in the mood for UDARRRRRRR

 

[alexjuventino]

Im watching it on Unimas but there is no english channel?

 

[Hust]

http://rivosport.net/ch2.html#www.rojadirecta.me

Landon Donovan speaking Spanish

- - - Updated - - -

Marcelo Balboa too.

This is weird. I'm tripping out

 

[lgorTudor]

wasn't the game supposed to start 5min ago?


e: they play weird football

- - - Updated - - -

After 45min I have to say that Giovinco is gonna destroy MLS

 

[TrezJuve]

DC one up, Bush got schooled. It's the 64th minute now, I guess that's a good moment to stop watching.

 

[alexjuventino]

Any links to watch Gio?

 

[Enron]

http://rivosport.net/ch2.html#www.rojadirecta.me

Landon Donovan speaking Spanish

- - - Updated - - -

Marcelo Balboa too.

This is weird. I'm tripping out

Dude, Marcelo always speaks spanish when he called games.

 

[lgorTudor]

Any links to watch Gio?

http://taima.tv/r/mls_tube
http://livetv.sx/eventinfo/293995_vancouver_toronto/#webplayer_ifr|262253|293995|262253|64|1|ru

 

[alexjuventino]

http://taima.tv/r/mls_tube
http://livetv.sx/eventinfo/293995_vancouver_toronto/#webplayer_ifr|262253|293995|262253|64|1|ru

Thanks but those are curling links lol. its showing curling instead

 

[lgorTudor]

Thanks but those are curling links lol. its showing curling instead

Yep the game was supposed come after curling but apparently it has started already and I still lack a stream.

I go look and post here if I find something

 

[alexjuventino]

Yep the game was supposed come after curling but apparently it has started already and I still lack a stream.

I go look and post here if I find something

thanks