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 don't know, still seems kind of slow.
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.
Rugby is a game for Pu$$ies, Boy! Want Proof? that 100m time!
michelle says wrote:
David Campese wrote:Front page comment "11.10 seems like a slow time for Australias fastest footballer".
Rugby is not like NFL. These guys need to be able to run 10-15km during an 80minute game, it's non stop. They are essentially middle-distance athletes who need to weigh 200+ pounds. The decisive speed is from a standing start to 20m. He ran this in trainers.
It's an exceptional time.
Rugby is a game for Pu$$ies, Boy! Want Proof? that 100m time!
I have to agree. If that is an "exceptional" time for rugby then rugby players suck.
Slooooow
ffffffffffffffffffffffffss wrote:
i see your point but every player in the NFL could beat that guy up...so. f*** rugby
Not without their kevlar and oxygen.
Having played both, I would stay rugby is the tougher. Scrums are extremely tough and before you can get a break you have to run over to the next pile and push around another bunch of guys. American Football is far more reliant on quick bursts of power. You will be spent after both games but rugby involves more physical tasks so you have to be more dynamic.
Wait.
Rugby is a real sport?
Aussie Rules is not rugby.
Who said it was?
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.
FASB184 wrote:
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.
Why are Americans so insecure about sport?
OK I retract my statement that it is an exceptional time, but in trainers on grass it's good, for an Australian.
Check this guy out, he had a 10.6 to his name and weighed 122kg, or 270 pounds. Turned down a big offer from Dallas Cowboys in 1996:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqW0vT63mzk&feature=related
This guy also was/is very fast. hurdled in high school with some success:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dlLhwQEOizI&feature=related
And this guy ran a 10.4 in rugby boots, would be one of the greats but keeps disappearing in Fiji and piling on weight in the off season:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7H5HHy4BTXE&feature=related
And some more from the NZ rugby team, beating the British and Irish lions soundly in 2005:
No pads, no helmets, no stopping every 5 seconds, no time-outs.
Rugby is a game played by real men!! (There is women's rugby too, but looking at them they are basically men.)
Watch this video if you've never seen rugby before
Animal Mother wrote:
No pads, no helmets, no stopping every 5 seconds, no time-outs.
Rugby is a game played by real men!!
Your first sentence also describes ballroom dancing.
Rugby is pretty damn hardcore. The OP is right about this being a more middle-distance type run. I bet rugby players would run a way better 800 than any football player.
David Campese wrote:
OK I retract my statement that it is an exceptional time, but in trainers on grass it's good, for an Australian.
But it wasn't on grass or in trainers. It was on a track in spikes. Here's the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kc-e129SBb4michelle says wrote:
Rugby is a game for Pu$$ies, Boy! Want Proof? that 100m time!
michelle, if you had any idea who David Campese was you'd be getting out of town about now....
If you want to see the fastest athletes on earth in a team sport, going 100% and making some bone crushing hits at full speed, you will watch football. There are breaks often but it is needed when you are going 100% nearly every play.
If you want to see some fast athletes but more with better aerobic levels than NFL players, you will watch rugby. It is a slower game with the occassional big hit but it is usually all moderatly paced. There are no timeouts as previously mentioned.
Both bring something completely different to the table but both are fine in their own outright. Personally, I like the faster pace and bigger hits of the NFL. 99% of overseas people will prefer what they are used to and call the NFL a pussy sport because of the pads and timeouts. To each his own.
1 post was removed from this page.