Listen, the Aussie ran about as fast as a clean 16-year old Marion Jones... that and he would not make a single 4 x 100m relay team in the USA at the high school level.
It is pathetic. I understand they are more "middle distance men", but no more over-distance that a soccer player. Watching the games there is too much talking and walking around than actual running.
Lekuta wrote:
Watching the games there is too much talking and walking around than actual running.
It always cracks me up when soccer and rugby fans say their sport is non-stop. I watched a lot of the world cup soccer and the rugby sevens on tv. There is a lot of standing around going on. I enjoyed watching both events as they are excellent sports, but please don't grossly over-state the distances run while participating in a match.
There have been much faster rugby players!
FASB184 wrote:
David Campese wrote:Front page comment "11.10 seems like a slow time for Australias fastest footballer".
Rugby is not like NFL. These guys need to be able to run 10-15km during an 80minute game, it's non stop. They are essentially middle-distance athletes who need to weigh 200+ pounds. The decisive speed is from a standing start to 20m. He ran this in trainers.
It's an exceptional time.
I'm pretty sure America's fastest tennis player is faster than that. Says a lot about rugby, or footy, or whatever lame made-up sport you are whining about.
Rugby is a sport for real men - 80 minutes of headbanging war, non stop. American footballers wear black make up to try to make themselves look more scary, then jump into a big gay pile of heavily-protected bodies for a few seconds; have 2 minutes of rest between every play, during which time they chest-bump, high five and generally act like big children. I'd back a rugby player against an American footballer in a bar fight any day. BTW - American footballers - you do you know the rest of the world thinks you're ridiculous, don't you?
Maybe it was just the race? Professional Rugby is probably loaded with at least 10.7-8 guys.
Seems like you could race 8 guys from any pro soccer team and end up with faster results.
The NFL is only watchable on TV; if you go to a live game (I thankfully stopped 5 years ago) you realize just how much dead time there is, with guys just standing there waiting for the TV timeout to be done. At home you can watch the replay between plays, or grab a beer during the timeout, but sitting in the stadium you just watch the 300-350 pounders catch their breath for their next 5 second burst of activity. I'd far rather watch a good soccer game live (having never seen a rugby game live).
Let us get at least one thing straight.
Differentiate between Rugby UNION and Rugby LEAGUE.The former is a wuss game at which Aussies are competent but inferior to New Zealanders.
But Australian Rugby LEAGUE is the real thing.The fastest,hardest test of manhood on the planet in sporting terms and without body padding.
Lets not talk about Aussie rules!
[/quote]Rugby is a sport for real men - 80 minutes of headbanging war, non stop. American footballers wear black make up to try to make themselves look more scary, then jump into a big gay pile of heavily-protected bodies for a few seconds; have 2 minutes of rest between every play, during which time they chest-bump, high five and generally act like big children. I'd back a rugby player against an American footballer in a bar fight any day. BTW - American footballers - you do you know the rest of the world thinks you're ridiculous, don't you?[/quote]
We'll see who the real man is when a giant 6'8" mass of muscle from the ghetto hopped up on coke brings all of his gang members onto the Rugby field and they shoot the rugby pussies with their guns. Yes, that is what American Football players of today would do. But those tough little white guys did give it a nice try though!
Pussy fight:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lM-5qbFBXEc
Good fight:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIX5MA7uiwc
An NFL team would run away from these guys, but the fat ones would get caught and eaten:
Old Man by the Sea wrote:
Aussie Rules is not rugby.
Those are Rugby players. No one said that was Aussie Rules. That is a differnet sport, although somewhat similar. Austraila also has Rugby, of which those athletes are part of.
That said, i've known faster HS soccer players who run more miles in a game then these guys.
I've also known 200-215 pound guys who can run 11 flat and could run circles around these guys for 6 miles.
Pretty sure Matt Burke ran 10.6 in HS.
The All Black vs Tonga Haka is incredible.
Loved that one.
Rugby is the greatest team sport ever. Union rugby anyway. I also love 7's.
If you are around Aspen this weekend check out the Aspen Ruggerfest.
These guys are all quicker than these times suggest. They are all at the end of looooong seasons and their sharpness will be waning. Turner on the field looks almost as quick as Habana from south africa and he has a 10.4 to his name. Joe Rocococo from NZ ran 10.68 in high school and doug howlett 10.66 and I would say Turner is similar to those guys. None of these guys are as quick as Cauacunibuca, Vunibaka or Chavanga so wouldn't surprise me if those three are in the 10.2-10.3 boat. I'm not surprised the league guys are a bit slower as they have to carry a LOT of weight around as is the nature of that code.
The other thing different from NFL is that these guys have no formal sprint training, and would have been rugby training 100% of the time from a young age. I think its quite normal for American Footballers to get involved in track and field in the off season? Knowing how to get out of blocks is worth what 0.2-0.3 seconds? How fast are some of the quickest NFL guys? Must be approaching 10seconds?
Thanks for that mate. And not a pad or crash helmet in sight. Rugby union and league players; and lets not forget Aussie rules and gaelic football guys are harder than what most NFL fans would come to expect. The true comparison of hardness would be for NFL to get rid of helmets and pads; as well as eliminate the crappy time outs. Then we'd be able to seperate the men from the boys.
Yep, that League video is good too.
Those impacts are nothing like you'll see anywhere, unless they're wearing kevlar.
the monk wrote:
Thanks for that mate. And not a pad or crash helmet in sight. Rugby union and league players; and lets not forget Aussie rules and gaelic football guys are harder than what most NFL fans would come to expect. The true comparison of hardness would be for NFL to get rid of helmets and pads; as well as eliminate the crappy time outs. Then we'd be able to seperate the men from the boys.
Ok, I'm not going to rip on Rugby here because all sports are a little different and there's nothing wrong with that. But for Christs sake stop throwing the whole "pads and helmets" comment into the mix. Rugby players are tough, I'm sure of that. And they're likely more aerobically fit than football players. But make no mistake; NFL players, GENERALLY SPEAKING, are the biggest, strongest, fastest motherf***ing athletes on the planet. If they didn't wear pads and helmets, players would be dying right and left. Think about it. If Patrick Willis put a full speed hit on you, and you weren't wearing pads, you would die on impact. Even if you were a pretty big, athletic dude...your childhood memories would be erased from your brain by the time you hit the turf.
They wear protective equipment so the players can play full speed. It makes it more exciting to watch. Some people think watching players with no pads is more exciting. It's really a cultural thing I think. Americans like high speed collisions and things that go boom. I will admit though, I think there are actually too many safety rules in the NFL. If they keep trying to make the sport safer, it will eventually be a pussy sport.
i kinda like running wrote:
Ok, I'm not going to rip on Rugby here because all sports are a little different and there's nothing wrong with that. But for Christs sake stop throwing the whole "pads and helmets" comment into the mix. Rugby players are tough, I'm sure of that. And they're likely more aerobically fit than football players. But make no mistake; NFL players, GENERALLY SPEAKING, are the biggest, strongest, fastest motherf***ing athletes on the planet. If they didn't wear pads and helmets, players would be dying right and left. Think about it. If Patrick Willis put a full speed hit on you, and you weren't wearing pads, you would die on impact. Even if you were a pretty big, athletic dude...your childhood memories would be erased from your brain by the time you hit the turf.
They wear protective equipment so the players can play full speed. It makes it more exciting to watch. Some people think watching players with no pads is more exciting. It's really a cultural thing I think. Americans like high speed collisions and things that go boom. I will admit though, I think there are actually too many safety rules in the NFL. If they keep trying to make the sport safer, it will eventually be a pussy sport.
Different game though sweetheart. Bruce Willis or whoever would probably die too if he didn't have his Kevlar on. Or more probably he would be crying in the corner having gotten a little bit of a bleeding nose or something.
Yeah, he probably would be seriously injured as well. But my point is that the pads allow for faster play and bigger hits. Which the typical American viewer enjoys watching. Also, NFL players take just as much physical abuse as rugby players. Because, again, they hit with much greater force. I guarantee you that a full-speed hit from Patrick Willis, Ray Lewis, Dwight Freeney, Jared Allen, etc is going to inflict just as much damage with pads on as a hit from a rugby player without pads on.
You guys act like injuries do not occur in the NFL. And yet every time I watch a game someone is leaving with a broken ankle, concussion, torn ACL, broken ribs, etc. And this is happening while the players are wearing lots of protective equipment. Because NFL players hit you like a car accident.
No, I understand.
It's not about the sport, it's about the injuries caused.