Evidence for God from Science

There would hardly ever be blind hits in rugby like the ones shown in that clip. The games are different.

Alas, and you finally acknowlege the point! You are the one promoting the idea that Rugby is far superior than American Football. I'm just saying that although they are similar in that they both have big oblong looking balls, and there is a lot of tackling and running going on, the games are very different. Both enjoyable in there own ways.

btw, what's with the guy dressed up all in white that looks like a butler. Do they serve tea out there?

FFC wrote:

There would hardly ever be blind hits in rugby like the ones shown in that clip. The games are different.

Alas, and you finally acknowlege the point! You are the one promoting the idea that Rugby is far superior than American Football. I'm just saying that although they are similar in that they both have big oblong looking balls, and there is a lot of tackling and running going on, the games are very different. Both enjoyable in there own ways.

btw, what's with the guy dressed up all in white that looks like a butler. Do they serve tea out there?

Were we discussing their similarities or whether Am. football players are pansies for wearing battle gear in a ball game for "men"...
Remove the security of the pads and put them back in their same game...let's see what kind of "men" these guys are!

I suppose I'd rather see an official in a suit than in knickers, knee-high socks, and a candy cane blouse on.
.
.

BavarianWheels wrote:

FFC wrote:

There would hardly ever be blind hits in rugby like the ones shown in that clip. The games are different.

Alas, and you finally acknowlege the point! You are the one promoting the idea that Rugby is far superior than American Football. I'm just saying that although they are similar in that they both have big oblong looking balls, and there is a lot of tackling and running going on, the games are very different. Both enjoyable in there own ways.

btw, what's with the guy dressed up all in white that looks like a butler. Do they serve tea out there?

Were we discussing their similarities or whether Am. football players are pansies for wearing battle gear in a ball game for "men"...
Remove the security of the pads and put them back in their same game...let's see what kind of "men" these guys are!

I suppose I'd rather see an official in a suit than in knickers, knee-high socks, and a candy cane blouse on.
.
.

I would love to see Rugby players face american football players on the line of scrimmage...actually 3 seconds later would be even better, when they were lying on the grounds wishing they were back in Australia.

they don't even have the right colored ball. It looks like they snatched a buoy from the marina and decided to play with it.

I think I saw that guy with the white suit serving ice cream out of a truck last summer. I think he got lost and stumbled onto a field of starving "football" players.

BavarianWheels wrote:[Remove the security of the pads and put them back in their same game...let's see what kind of "men" these guys are!

Rugby players play football against an NFL team without the gear (for both) they'd better bring enough wheelchairs for the whole team. Their scrawny little necks will snap like twigs if they try to tackle with their heads. And when they get hit in the chest by a linebacker whose neck is the size of a large tree trunk, they won't need a wheelchair, just a breathing machine and a gurney.

E.g., Shaun O'Hara, Giants Center, 6'3'', 303lbs .

And when they get hit in the chest by a linebacker whose neck is the size of a large tree trunk, they won't need a wheelchair, just a breathing machine and a gurney.

Or maybe just a hearse. Hey Biblos, why did you choose a picture of one of the little ones?

FFC wrote:

And when they get hit in the chest by a linebacker whose neck is the size of a large tree trunk, they won't need a wheelchair, just a breathing machine and a gurney.

Or maybe just a hearse. Hey Biblos, why did you choose a picture of one of the little ones?

Well, he is a Giant but I didn't want to really scare him, I do have a heart.

.
.
At 6' 3" and 303 lbs...he's done playing 12 seconds into the game. The others would just orbit around him as he waves his chubby arms.
.
.

BavarianWheels wrote:.
.
At 6' 3" and 303 lbs...he's done playing 12 seconds into the game. The others would just orbit around him as he waves his chubby arms.
.
.

Well that would be every opposing teams dream until reality set in and they found themselves eating turf. Those little rugby boys wouldn't stand a chance. Do you know how many hours those chubby boys spend practicing in the hot sun in the summer. 12 seconds is nothing...but long enough to put a hurting on your boys.

FFC wrote:

BavarianWheels wrote:.
.
At 6' 3" and 303 lbs...he's done playing 12 seconds into the game. The others would just orbit around him as he waves his chubby arms.
.
.

Well that would be every opposing teams dream until reality set in and they found themselves eating turf. Those little rugby boys wouldn't stand a chance. Do you know how many hours those chubby boys spend practicing in the hot sun in the summer. 12 seconds is nothing...but long enough to put a hurting on your boys.

You know...there's a reason there's almost 70 players on an Am. football team...it's called lack of endurance.
.
.

Byblos wrote:

BavarianWheels wrote:Can't view youtube...but if they're wearing helmets...then what's so spectacular? It's like comparing walking over red-hot coals wearing protective shoes vs. walking over same hot-coals barefoot. Which is the true feat? (pun intended ).

Too bad you can't see that, try this one.

But you're still missing the point entirely. While the helmet protects the wearer from certain head and neck injury (not always) due to the head-on collision, which neverhappens in rugby, what does it say about the player absorbing the hit in his unprotected chest? There are 2 sides to a tackle you know.

Are you joking? I guess the link previously provided went unviewed: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mNDoCjQi5Nc

Again, while rugby union might be that way, rugby league, which is fairly unique to Australia, is much different. And games go for 80mins with head on collisions and what have you and no armour.

Kurieuo wrote:Again, while rugby union might be that way, rugby league, which is fairly unique to Australia, is much different. And games go for 80mins with head on collisions and what have you and no armour.

K, I'm sorry to tell you this man but there's not a single head-on to chest collision in that entire clip (and I saw it several times to make sure). They're mostly either arm or shoulder tackles to either the shoulders or the upper body. Take a look at the link I provided and you'll see the difference. Any one of these tackles even without the helmet will put a rugby player in the hospital (and that's the best case scenario). It's like getting hit by the A train (for those who are familiar with NY subway).

I thought this was pretty funny...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8AKhZP2T-xg

Byblos wrote:

Kurieuo wrote:Again, while rugby union might be that way, rugby league, which is fairly unique to Australia, is much different. And games go for 80mins with head on collisions and what have you and no armour.

K, I'm sorry to tell you this man but there's not a single head-on to chest collision in that entire clip (and I saw it several times to make sure). They're mostly either arm or shoulder tackles to either the shoulders or the upper body. Take a look at the link I provided and you'll see the difference. Any one of these tackles even without the helmet will put a rugby player in the hospital (and that's the best case scenario). It's like getting hit by the A train (for those who are familiar with NY subway).

I actually looked up the best hits of NFL the same time I looked up my own... really I can't tell the difference in tackles except for the armour and an occasional few harder hits where a player gets spun around (which one really ought to expect given all the armour). One guy lost his helmet, but really when in league they play without helmets and take the same kind of hits, this does not say much. The hit-ups seem to me just as hard - I can not tell much difference. I also get to see a lot more in my footy games. So at the end of the day I think league takes more guts.

Anyway, should we be really be advocating which is the more violent or prone to cause damage, and praising it because of this?

Anyway, should we be really be advocating which is the more violent or prone to cause damage, and praising it because of this?

FFC wrote:

Anyway, should we be really be advocating which is the more violent or prone to cause damage, and praising it because of this?

I guess this would be a bad time then to suggest that you suit up your Rugby and Football players and put them on a pair of skates and see how they do against my boys ........