RUGBY VS. FOOTBALL: WHATS MANLIER?

you need pads in football in order to survive every play without a concussion or a broken bone.
 
Australian Rules Football hands down, none of that ridiculous armour. I do enjoy watching/playing Rugby Union though, Rugby League is terrible.
 
r95273_287498.jpg


25s_robertson,0.jpg
 
Pads dont really do shit to prevent broken bones. You can easily break your shoulder/collarbone even with shoulder pads. I cracked my knee this season wearing pads so its not like the pads totally prevent against any injury. They protect more against bruises and shit like that
 
i'd say pads actually make you do more damage. so when you take the pads off, it kind of evens itself out. yes you'll feel it, but it wont be as bad as getting hit by someone with hard plastic on their head. rugby requires more cardio endurance and you cant get away with being a fat piece of shit that cant run the field like in football.

football does have more serious injuries though, in rugby you get the scrapes, bruises, some sprains here and there. but the bone breaking is less than football.
 
I really don't think football is too manly of a sport. Rugby by a mile. In football, there are like 50-100 people on any given team, and you barely actually play at all. You don't have to run a lot, and the game stops every 2 seconds. Half the people on football teams should say they watch football instead of they play football, because all they do is stand on the sideline. Rugby doesn't stop very often, you are running constantly, and there is just as much contact as football and you only wear like shin guards haha. Rugby by a MILE.
 
but in lacrosse you have pads because if you didnt, you would break your arms in a second. Even with pads your get pretty fucked up. Its titanium alloy, you cant beat it.
 
true.

I have had my neck clotheslined by a lacrosse stick in a game and been tackled by a 200 lb muscly guy in rugby too...they're about the same pain level.
 
yeah but my arms and legs get fierce messed up after a solid game. last week my arm was somehow bleeding on the inside from getting hit where i had no pads. a patch about the size of a tennis ball was blood red and i could see the blood moving around but it was trapped by my skin. i had to cut a little slit where it was to drain the blood out
 
yo rugby for sure.

i play rugby and people get fucked up a shit load more than they do in football, i had 2 concussions last year and 3 broken noses on my career.

sure theres some man on man touching but thats every contact sport..
 
having played both and watched a lot of both, i wouldn't be so quick to say rugby. yes rugby you have no pads, but only the person with the ball really gets tackled. thats the thing about football is that anyone can hit anyone basically. if you know when you're going to get tackled it makes a big difference. if i had to make a choice i would say rugby, but only by a little
 
I have also played both, and Rugby at quite high levels, (I was scouted to play in New Zealand, and played in front of Canada scouts) and I would have to say they are different sports and are not as easy to compare as you think. Football is dangerous because of the pads, if you tackle like that in Rugby you will get hurt severely, but that doesnt remove the nice hard helmet smacking you in a soft spot, that shit hurts and you get more trauma injuries from the higher impact.

That being said try and compare a football hit to a solid dump tackle in rugby and you will see the difference, imagine my lifting you onto my shoulder 5 feet in the air minimum and jumping off my feet slamming you onto your back and head while landing my shoulder into your stomach. (doesnt happen that often though)

There are lots of big hit videos out there, but the advantage of this one is that they are all legal hits.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y_bRQHE_JcQ
 
I disagree last year a kid at a school close to mine died playing rugby last year I don't know about you but I think thats pretty serious
 
RUGBY its NOT even a question. whoever made this thread has deeefinetly never been to a rugby match.
 
They are totally different sports. A kid from the UK who was a rugby player came to the us and played on my football team and got absolutely worked every play.

He said that if you played rugby like you played football no one would ever finish a game because everyone would get hurt.

So therefore they are the same in their own manor.

Plus the only real manly sport is ultimate fighting. Any sport where there is a good chance that one of the athletes will be unconscious at the end of the fight is pretty fucking manly.
 
this guy knows whats up, they are 2 different sports and both have different aspects of manliness. If you look at the guys that play rugby, most of them arent very big, but you look at the dudes in the NFL and they are all fucking huge.
 
Yeah UFC is hands down the manliest shit. I mean you can elbow and kick people. Getting rocked in the face hurts, but when you can throw an elbow into someone's face...that's just asking for some pain.
 
american football is the second shittest game after baseball. Why the fuck do they have to wear all that protective shit, why the hell is there an offensive team and a defensive team, the game is so slow, there are adverts every 30 seconds, yes there are some big hits every so often but there are in rugby and their wearing shoulder pads a centimentre thick.

Football is a sport played with a round ball and 22 massively overpaid pre madonnas. becks is a prime example.

In my view rugby takes alot more skill than american football and it alot tougher, therefore it is alot more manly
 
I agree about american football completely. Soccer the guys are definitely overpaid, but when the entire world watches, its understandable. Baseball players are the worst. Some of the pitchers get like $10,000 per pitch. Thats a load of shit
 
jesus christ have you ever seen a international rugby team? i remember the average height for Winning UK team few years ago was about 6 ' 8 or seomthing, some of them are absoloubtly bloody giant, and not a single one of them are "small". even the fastest runners of them are still built like brick shit houses. id vote rugby,its a lot more intensive for a lot longer period, no breaks every 20 seconds. also the lack of pads means tackles are far more intense.
 
its kind of arrogant to talk bad about a sport that you actually know nothing about.

Football is a very popular sport in America and is based on tactics skill and brute force. Each play is highly designed and practiced endlessly. Each player plays an important part in every play. It is the ultimate team sport.

Once you learn the fine points of a game like football is is one of the most exciting sports to watch. All of your questions are easily answered. I don't give a shit if you watch football but respect the sport.

You have obviously never played football or rugby so all of your points are invalid.
 
I disagree. I've lived in america for 19 years, I know football very well and I sitll think its boring as hell to watch. The 2 seconds of action don't justify 100 commercials and all the plays where nothing happens in my opinion. But nobody will ever agree on something like this, so there isn't too much fo a point in arguing about it
 
I guess you have to play football to understand what it takes to get plays to work in an actual game.
 
I comepletely agree. Football and baseball are two o the most boring sports. I think I would rather watch grass grow. Quite honestly, you can get away with not being much of an athelete in both sports, which also takes away from it in my opinion. (let the hate begin)
 
rugbys crazy more likely to get hurt really bad i think in rugby. less positions? and stances? i remember in football the coach tryed to see if i was good for QB and i was very uncomfortable having my hand basicly lift up another dudes sac uhh gross but both are fun to watch
 
i play both and i think that rugby is manlier but less intense. Football hits are more punishing USUALLY, but rugby is just full out all the time without any stops. I think that the pain level is pretty much equal. both sports are very manly indeed, but rugby comes out on top due to the non-stop pace and continuous play
 
You sound exactly like those people who say

Soccer is a girls sport, all you do is kick a ball and run after it.

I don't see how rugby could take a lot more "skill". Why don't you point out why because you sure don't have me convinced.

Both sports are similar in concept, but strategy comes into play hardcore with football...you have passing, running, and creative plays that you can use. It's definitely hard work to know and keep your composure to pull them off correctly.

Now rugby doesn't have pads yes, but football is definitely more intense for a short time. Rugby has the overall tough factor, where you have to be tough for minutes compared to seconds.

I'm not taking anything away from rugby, it's a very intense sport, but you have it more spread out over time so you aren't forced to make a play by a clock and such. Rugby on the other hand takes a lot more endurance, you see a lot more fat people in football and a lot more fit people in rugby. Just because of the longer endurance needed.

Both sports can hurt.
 
Fat people are necessary in football. With an extra 40 pound it is much easier to push people around.
 
no there isnt, a football tackle has a lot more driven force than a rugby tackle. maybe if you are a beginner rugby player and stand straight up when someone is going to run into you, ya you'll get a concussion, but as you become more advanced you become smarter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top