tomson75;2131161 said:Have you played? I have played both, and believe me, Rugby players can HIT. The sport itself isn't conducive to the highlight reel hits because you don't have three tiers of defense, and you typically have a run at the opposing player. In fact, the player with the ball is usually the one initiating contact.
Believe me, Rugby players can hit just the same as football players. It's just not as common, and can often be a bad idea.
tomson75;2131294 said:Umm....how does that make what I said "not really true". You basically just rephrased what I was trying to say.
I have played them both as well.
thekavorka;2131291 said:Tom Hicks bought Liverpool, but you can continue hating Chelsea anyway. Nobody likes Chelsea. After their owner gets tired of his little toy, they'll go back to being the crap club they were before.
burmafrd;2131353 said:Like I said the big difference in Rugby is that the guys are not 300lb monsters and built like fireplugs. I think the average size of rugby players at the top level is what - 210 or so?
gazmc_06;2131887 said:Ah, a football thread, awesome. I was born and raised in Glasgow so football is my thing. Being a Rangers fan I can safely say that football is home of the biggest rivalry in all of sprots (Celtic-Rangers), I have been all over the world and nothing even comes close to the passion and hatred of the old-firm rivalry.
As for it being boring....if you don't like it don't watch. And also football players can have their careers ended with one tackle, they are far from sissies. The players from Spain, Portugal and foreign countries like that definetly play act, but British football is the toughest in the world, FAR from being sissies.
I don't know dude. Boca Jrs vs River Plate in Argentina, Penarol vs Nacional in Uruguay, Barcelona vs Real Madrid, and even Tigres vs Monterrey in Mexico are as intense as Celtic vs Rangers. Although I would put that match in the top 5 in the world football rivalries list. I have been lucky enough to catch a couple of those games and intense would be an understatement.gazmc_06;2131887 said:Ah, a football thread, awesome. I was born and raised in Glasgow so football is my thing. Being a Rangers fan I can safely say that football is home of the biggest rivalry in all of sprots (Celtic-Rangers), I have been all over the world and nothing even comes close to the passion and hatred of the old-firm rivalry.
As for it being boring....if you don't like it don't watch. And also football players can have their careers ended with one tackle, they are far from sissies. The players from Spain, Portugal and foreign countries like that definetly play act, but British football is the toughest in the world, FAR from being sissies.
Dreadnought;2132173 said:Your missing Roma vs Lazio, Flamengo vs Fluminense etc.
CowboyMark;2133380 said:Man U vs Liverpool, Colo Colo vs U.Chile, and AC Milan vs Inter Milan are some other great fooball rivalries.
UKCowboysFan;2131877 said:That's true to a point, because a 300lb guy wouldn't last 80 mins playing Rugby because he'd have to run all over the field.
The thing with the big hits, is that they don't usually come from the big guys on the line anyway. It's the smaller (?) guys that have speed as well that do the damage
As for the size of Rugby players. Jonah Lomu (who played on the wing for the All Blacks and was probably as quick as Terry Glenn) weighed in at 260lb. Getting hit by him at full pelt was equal to any hit that you could get in Football. As an example today, the All Blacks front row range in between 250 - 280.
I think the biggest difference in the hits, is the fact that in Football it is perfectly legal to hit someone without the ball. So they take a hit when they aren't prepared for it, that and the fact that knocking them down is enough.
JustSayNotoTO;2134524 said:Spurs v Gunners and even Man U v Man City is far more intense than United verse the Pool.
UKCowboysFan;2135049 said:Man Utd's hatred of Liverpool is far more intense than their rivalry with City.
Mostly because City have not been rivals on the pitch for many years, whereas Liverpool were the best team in England (and Probably Europe) through the late 70's & early 80's.
I have to agree with the Old Firm rivalry though.
In most other cities you could support either team, this is not true (and not really possible) in Glasgow where the city is split down sectarian lines.
I did see a documentary on the rivalry once, and there is a die hard Rangers pub, just a stone's throw from Celtic Park. They asked Celtic fans if they would ever visit, and to a man they replied not if they wanted to come out in one piece.
UKCowboysFan;2135049 said:Man Utd's hatred of Liverpool is far more intense than their rivalry with City.
Mostly because City have not been rivals on the pitch for many years, whereas Liverpool were the best team in England (and Probably Europe) through the late 70's & early 80's.
I have to agree with the Old Firm rivalry though.
In most other cities you could support either team, this is not true (and not really possible) in Glasgow where the city is split down sectarian lines.
I did see a documentary on the rivalry once, and there is a die hard Rangers pub, just a stone's throw from Celtic Park. They asked Celtic fans if they would ever visit, and to a man they replied not if they wanted to come out in one piece.