Rugby

[thacharger]

Rugby reminds me of a sport that Americans play as childern and teenagers. Its called "smear the queer." (NOTE: I dont mean to offend anyone by the name, but that is what is called.)

Anyways, you throw something around and if you get the ball all the other kids hit the crap out of you. It was very fun and you played for hours.

It dosent have the scoring or rules of rugby, but still a form of it in a way.

If I took a group of US kids who are athletes and trained them for 3 years on the sport of rugby, I could take them and beat any other youth rugby team in the world.

[BrianCappellieri]

:D I remember this game. Painful but a hell of alotta fun.

In the northeast ;) we call it "Kill The Carrier."

[Craig the Aussie]

In Oz it was "Kill the Dill with the Pill"

[BrianCappellieri]

:D

[Baracuda]

I don't think you could. How long has it taken the us to become good at soccer?

[thacharger]

Originally posted by Baracuda
I don't think you could. How long has it taken the us to become good at soccer?

The best athletes arent playing soccer. I would also say that they are now quite good in soccer.

[counterattack]

I am at a lost to understand this "my field sport is better than your field sport" crap.

Anyone who enjoys soccer in the US can tell you how the regular fans of US Football consider the Real Football to be some kind of evil curse.

Then I read this trash about Rugby. Why can't a person just be a fan of team sports on green pitches? A great game of Rugby, (League and Union) or Aussie Rules, or Gaelic, or Soccer, or American or Canadian has any number of outstanding moments to enjoy. Rugby is a game of endurance, strength, and skill, with all of the creativity needed for soccer. American football, at its best, resembles the Rugby game from which it comes.

I would hope that on Big Soccer, where we go to get away from the myopic thinking of the American Sports Media, we would try not to replace its prejudices with ones of our own.

[BrianCappellieri]

Guys, check what forum this is.

I don't think thacharger made this thread for serious discussion. Just joking around.

[thacharger]

Originally posted by counterattack
I am at a lost to understand this "my field sport is better than your field sport" crap.

Anyone who enjoys soccer in the US can tell you how the regular fans of US Football consider the Real Football to be some kind of evil curse.

Then I read this trash about Rugby. Why can't a person just be a fan of team sports on green pitches? A great game of Rugby, (League and Union) or Aussie Rules, or Gaelic, or Soccer, or American or Canadian has any number of outstanding moments to enjoy. Rugby is a game of endurance, strength, and skill, with all of the creativity needed for soccer. American football, at its best, resembles the Rugby game from which it comes.

I would hope that on Big Soccer, where we go to get away from the myopic thinking of the American Sports Media, we would try not to replace its prejudices with ones of our own.

I enjoy both soccer and American football.

As the previous poster alluded to, this is the World Rivalries forum. Its all fun and games.

[usscouse]

Originally posted by thacharger

If I took a group of US kids who are athletes and trained them for 3 years on the sport of rugby, I could take them and beat any other youth rugby team in the world.
I hate to let you in on this,you ignorant, puerile sack of parrot droppings but the USA has a national rugby team..! They are known as the “Eagles” They’re a fun bunch of guys who have brought a certain US flair to the sport. Unfortunately they usually get the shite kicked out of them every time they play. And they've been playing Rugby in the US for as long or longer than Football/soccer and a lot longer than gridiron football. Gridiron came from Rugby but it was too tough for whimps like you to play so they added the padding and changed the rules.

It was probably the events of your miserable youth and memories of being "SMEARED" that caused you to regurgitate this rubbish. Give the computer back to your MOMMY.

[thacharger]

Originally posted by usscouse

I hate to let you in on this,you ignorant, puerile sack of parrot droppings but the USA has a national rugby team..! They are known as the “Eagles” They’re a fun bunch of guys who have brought a certain US flair to the sport. Unfortunately they usually get the shite kicked out of them every time they play. And they've been playing Rugby in the US for as long or longer than Football/soccer and a lot longer than gridiron football. Gridiron came from Rugby but it was too tough for whimps like you to play so they added the padding and changed the rules.

It was probably the events of your miserable youth and memories of being "SMEARED" that caused you to regurgitate this rubbish. Give the computer back to your MOMMY.

Is this some type of insults? If so, try alot harder next time and get some orginallity. It will go along away.

Did I ever make fun of the sport rugby? No. I am sure the rugby team are great guys. You also have no idea what your talking about. I dont play football, havent since I was little. And we played this game, but the pain never got to me. I wish the US rugby team all the luck. Beat those Aussies.

Keep your head up. Work a little harder on those insults, it will come one day.

[skipshady]

Originally posted by thacharger
Anyways, you throw something around and if you get the ball all the other kids hit the crap out of you. It was very fun and you played for hours.

It dosent have the scoring or rules of rugby, but still a form of it in a way.

If I took a group of US kids who are athletes and trained them for 3 years on the sport of rugby, I could take them and beat any other youth rugby team in the world. And if you believe that, you also agree with sportswriters who say "Soccer is so easy. Look how big the goal is! It's just kids running around like chickens with their heads cut off around the field and kicking the ball around. It's fun when you're little but then you grow up and move on to real sports."

Except sportswriters don't actually believe that - it simply pays to dumb down their writing and appeal to the lowest common denominator. What's your excuse?

[thacharger]

Originally posted by skipshady
And if you believe that, you also agree with sportswriters who say "Soccer is so easy. Look how big the goal is! It's just kids running around like chickens with their heads cut off around the field and kicking the ball around. It's fun when you're little but then you grow up and move on to real sports."

Except sportswriters don't actually believe that - it simply pays to dumb down their writing and appeal to the lowest common denominator. What's your excuse?

Three years is a long time to train any athlete in any sport. Im saying If I took athletes who are fast, coachable, and wanted to get out there and hit, and assuming I know alot about rugby, they would be a competitive team that could compete with any teams and beat them. Why? Because they are plain and simple natural athletes who have made up thier mind they want to be the best.

[Craig the Aussie]

I reckon you are right thacharger. You would probably want a couple of Aussie, Kiwis, South Africans or Englishmen in the side in the more technical/tactical positions, but otherwise you could probably do it.

It would be easier in a contact sport like rugby than in an eye/hand coordination type sport - eg taking baseballers to play cricket or vice versa.

[thacharger]

Originally posted by Craig the Aussie
I reckon you are right thacharger. You would probably want a couple of Aussie, Kiwis, South Africans or Englishmen in the side in the more technical/tactical positions, but otherwise you could probably do it.

It would be easier in a contact sport like rugby than in an eye/hand coordination type sport - eg taking baseballers to play cricket or vice versa.

I agree. You could take a gropu of young rugby players, find some people who know something about American football, and train them to be a pretty good football team. As long as you bulked them up.

[Morpheus]

We have a game in Britain called `British Bulldog`. Kids have to run from on wall to another with one person in the middle. The person in the middle has to grab or tackle one of the kids running past him and hold him long enough to say `British Bulldog 1,2,3` then that person has to stay in the middle and do the same. At the end there is either the big kid or the fastest kid.

If I took a group of these kids who are athletes and trained them for 3 years on the sport of American football, I could take them and beat any other youth American football team in the world.

[skipshady]

So thacharger, what's your point?
You take decent athletes and take 3 years to train them, chances are, they'll be good at any sport that relies primarily on strength and athleticism.

I would agree that U.S. tends to produce better "pure" athletes than most other countries. You have a large population, physically gifted athletes of different types, a culture that promotes sports and athletes, a sizeable urban underclass, infrastructure and awareness of training and nutrition. Now, can those superior athletes dominate whichever sport they choose? Possibly, but not necessarily.

[thacharger]

Originally posted by Morpheus
We have a game in Britain called `British Bulldog`. Kids have to run from on wall to another with one person in the middle. The person in the middle has to grab or tackle one of the kids running past him and hold him long enough to say `British Bulldog 1,2,3` then that person has to stay in the middle and do the same. At the end there is either the big kid or the fastest kid.

If I took a group of these kids who are athletes and trained them for 3 years on the sport of American football, I could take them and beat any other youth American football team in the world.

You probably could, as long as you have the knowledge to theach them key fudamentals about American football.

That is why American football is not taking off around the world. We get forgien exchanges students at our school who play American football in Europe, and their fundamentals are horrible.

[thacharger]

Originally posted by skipshady
So thacharger, what's your point?
You take decent athletes and take 3 years to train them, chances are, they'll be good at any sport that relies primarily on strength and athleticism.

I would agree that U.S. tends to produce better "pure" athletes than most other countries. You have a large population, physically gifted athletes of different types, a culture that promotes sports and athletes, a sizeable urban underclass, infrastructure and awareness of training and nutrition. Now, can those superior athletes dominate whichever sport they choose? Possibly, but not necessarily.

You made my point in the above statement.

[Pirrip]

Originally posted by thacharger

If I took a group of US kids who are athletes and trained them for 3 years on the sport of rugby, I could take them and beat any other youth rugby team in the world.

If I took the NZ All Blacks and trained them to play American football for 3 years, they would win the Superbowl.