|
Post by Neko Bazu on Dec 18, 2007 15:36:58 GMT -1
what's wrong with you people - move over to the cricket board!!!! Another game you yanks will never understand ;D
|
|
|
Post by officergroyman on Dec 18, 2007 15:38:21 GMT -1
what's wrong with you people - move over to the cricket board!!!! Another game you yanks will never understand ;D thank God for that. ;D
|
|
|
Post by HURLOCK on Dec 18, 2007 15:39:30 GMT -1
what's wrong with you people - move over to the cricket board!!!! Cricket is shite!
|
|
|
Post by Neko Bazu on Dec 18, 2007 15:40:17 GMT -1
That statement alone shows your ignorance on the topic ;D my arse! i went to a boys school and you could tell the rugby players via a simple checklist: - Can you play cricket? no-next
- Can you play football? no-next
- Do you become out of breathe after running less than 100 metres? Yes - next
- Do you have "relaxed muscle"? yes-next
- Do the above factors make you want to take part in a game which puts up the pretence of being manly, inspite of its numerous homo-erotic tendancies, as away of compensating for the above factors? yes? - RUGBY'S THE GAME FOR YOU!
This list of course excludes the occasional jock that could play cricket, football and rugby - but those were rare.
The fact that you went to a boys school says enough ;D Seriously, though, there's still a lot of skill in it when you play at a decent level - accurate passing and not fumbling, especially in the wet, requires a lot of concentration, you have to be aware of 29 other players on the field, accurate kicking (out of hand or penalties/conversions) is an art in and of itself, stepping out of/rolling off tackles takes skill and dexterity, as does making decent tackles, and keeping on your feet requires excellent balance at times too. The fact that the players are generally so big makes it look far less graceful, but there's a lot of effort involved!
|
|
|
Post by officergroyman on Dec 18, 2007 15:40:30 GMT -1
what's wrong with you people - move over to the cricket board!!!! Cricket is shite! Just ask Hulsey.
|
|
|
Post by Neko Bazu on Dec 18, 2007 15:41:32 GMT -1
Another game you yanks will never understand ;D thank God for that. ;D Yeah - not like you haven't already butchered rugby, rounders, netball...
|
|
|
Post by HURLOCK on Dec 18, 2007 15:42:50 GMT -1
Seriously mate I can't stand the game, I've been to a few matches and simply spent m time at the bar. I have concluded that it's simply an excuse to get pissed all day!
|
|
|
Post by Neko Bazu on Dec 18, 2007 15:43:48 GMT -1
Seriously mate I can't stand the game, I've been to a few matches and simply spent m time at the bar. I have concluded that it's simply an excuse to get pissed all day! That is it in part... ;D
|
|
|
Post by mortontheblade on Dec 18, 2007 15:46:20 GMT -1
my arse! i went to a boys school and you could tell the rugby players via a simple checklist: - Can you play cricket? no-next
- Can you play football? no-next
- Do you become out of breathe after running less than 100 metres? Yes - next
- Do you have "relaxed muscle"? yes-next
- Do the above factors make you want to take part in a game which puts up the pretence of being manly, inspite of its numerous homo-erotic tendancies, as away of compensating for the above factors? yes? - RUGBY'S THE GAME FOR YOU!
This list of course excludes the occasional jock that could play cricket, football and rugby - but those were rare.
The fact that you went to a boys school says enough ;D Seriously, though, there's still a lot of skill in it when you play at a decent level - accurate passing and not fumbling, especially in the wet, requires a lot of concentration, you have to be aware of 29 other players on the field, accurate kicking (out of hand or penalties/conversions) is an art in and of itself, stepping out of/rolling off tackles takes skill and dexterity, as does making decent tackles, and keeping on your feet requires excellent balance at times too. The fact that the players are generally so big makes it look far less graceful, but there's a lot of effort involved! to reference part of that - any footballer worth the name should be able to kick rugby conversions from 70 odd yards or further. what i'm pointing to more, and to avoid a lengthy debate, is that most people in this country with nature assets such as required at the top level of rugby will in general player football..... in places such as new zealand however this maybe different.
|
|
|
Post by Neko Bazu on Dec 18, 2007 15:48:16 GMT -1
what i'm pointing to more, and to avoid a lengthy debate, is that most people in this country with nature assets such as required at the top level of rugby will in general player football..... in places such as new zealand however this maybe different. That's just a social thing, as opposed to the skill required for the game itself. It's the same in the US - the athletes with the major attributes for "soccer" will usually be found in other sports, 'cause they're the mainstream ones. Football vastly eclipses any other sport over here; it's where all the money and glory is - so of course people will go there first.
|
|
|
Post by ---------a on Dec 18, 2007 15:48:54 GMT -1
I'm going to generalise here: Girls i see who are fit, are usually either sluts, cynically boring or stupid. Girls i see who are pretty, usually have nice personalties.
|
|
|
Post by Neko Bazu on Dec 18, 2007 15:50:47 GMT -1
I'm going to generalise here: Girls i see who are fit, are usually either sluts, cynically boring or stupid. Girls i see who are pretty, usually have nice personalties. A very risky generalisation, but I think I'd largely agree, actually - plenty of room for exception, but in general, yeah.
|
|
|
Post by mortontheblade on Dec 18, 2007 15:54:28 GMT -1
what i'm pointing to more, and to avoid a lengthy debate, is that most people in this country with nature assets such as required at the top level of rugby will in general player football..... in places such as new zealand however this maybe different. That's just a social thing, as opposed to the skill required for the game itself. It's the same in the US - the athletes with the major attributes for "soccer" will usually be found in other sports, 'cause they're the mainstream ones. Football vastly eclipses any other sport over here; it's where all the money and glory is - so of course people will go there first. at this junction i'd like to point out humans as an animal were originally a persistence hunter such as wolves, and even certain tribes men in Africa which still hunt in that way. As such the essence of manly-ness is not strength or size but stamina and speed - so by defination rugby is not a more manly sport than football ;D *ducks and covers*
|
|
|
Post by mortontheblade on Dec 18, 2007 15:55:13 GMT -1
I'm going to generalise here: Girls i see who are fit, are usually either sluts, cynically boring or stupid. Girls i see who are pretty, usually have nice personalties. and when you're blindfolded?
|
|
|
Post by officergroyman on Dec 18, 2007 15:55:41 GMT -1
thank God for that. ;D Yeah - not like you haven't already butchered rugby, rounders, netball... nah, we just commercialized them!!! ;D
|
|
|
Post by HURLOCK on Dec 18, 2007 15:56:25 GMT -1
I'm going to generalise here: Girls i see who are fit, are usually either sluts, cynically boring or stupid. Girls i see who are pretty, usually have nice personalties. so fit girls are easy ;D
|
|
|
Post by Neko Bazu on Dec 18, 2007 15:57:15 GMT -1
That's just a social thing, as opposed to the skill required for the game itself. It's the same in the US - the athletes with the major attributes for "soccer" will usually be found in other sports, 'cause they're the mainstream ones. Football vastly eclipses any other sport over here; it's where all the money and glory is - so of course people will go there first. at this junction i'd like to point out humans as an animal were originally a persistence hunter such as wolves, and even certain tribes men in Africa which still hunt in that way. As such the essence of manly-ness is not strength or size but stamina and speed - so by defination rugby is not a more manly sport than football ;D *ducks and covers* Speed is about equal on both sides, and stamina probably is too - only footballers don't have men twatting 'em every so often! Rugby players, on the other hand, seem to be far less prone to injury or rolling about on the floor sobbing like a little girl... ;D
|
|
|
Post by mortontheblade on Dec 18, 2007 16:00:16 GMT -1
at this junction i'd like to point out humans as an animal were originally a persistence hunter such as wolves, and even certain tribes men in Africa which still hunt in that way. As such the essence of manly-ness is not strength or size but stamina and speed - so by defination rugby is not a more manly sport than football ;D *ducks and covers* Speed is about equal on both sides, and stamina probably is too - only footballers don't have men twatting 'em every so often! Rugby players, on the other hand, seem to be far less prone to injury or rolling about on the floor sobbing like a little girl... ;D if a footballer can't out run a rugby player (in both ways that can be taken) he's not a footballer...... even that or he's a fat goalie! .... so they're shit at acting too? ;D
|
|
|
Post by shinny on Dec 18, 2007 16:06:06 GMT -1
Speed is about equal on both sides, and stamina probably is too - only footballers don't have men twatting 'em every so often! Rugby players, on the other hand, seem to be far less prone to injury or rolling about on the floor sobbing like a little girl... ;D if a footballer can't out run a rugby player (in both ways that can be taken) he's not a footballer...... even that or he's a fat goalie! .... so they're shit at acting too? ;D Our winger, full back and 2nd row were all originally footballers, and they are faster (and bigger) now than they were when they started!
|
|
|
Post by mortontheblade on Dec 18, 2007 16:08:19 GMT -1
if a footballer can't out run a rugby player (in both ways that can be taken) he's not a footballer...... even that or he's a fat goalie! .... so they're shit at acting too? ;D Our winger, full back and 2nd row were all originally footballers, and they are faster (and bigger) now than they were when they started! can't have been good at football then Being honest IF rugby players were as agile, fast and had the stamina of footballers, ALL top footballers would be built like rugby players, wouldn't they?
|
|