Talk:Comparison of American football and rugby union

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of WikiProject American football, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to American football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.

	Comparison of American football and rugby union is part of WikiProject Rugby union, an attempt to better organise information in articles related to Rugby union. If you would like to participate, you can edit Comparison of American football and rugby union, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and view a list of open tasks
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Contents 1 Missing comparisons 2 Advancing the ball 3 Strength and Power 4 Field dimension discrepancy.

[edit] Missing comparisons

I believe two important comparisons are missing...

I'm American and I'm relatively unfamiliar with Rugby but from what I've seen and what I've read this article appears to miss two important comparisons. The first noticable comparison is this article fails to note is the differences in the sports uniforms. Rugby players look more like American soccer players. No big pads, helmets, face masks, nothing. The second comparison I thought was missing was the differences in penalties in the two sports. Penalties can play a big part in the final score of an American football game. I would presume pentalties in Rugby would also play a part but to what extent and the differences themselves I don't know. I think it would be a fine improvement to touch on the differences on these points between these two sports. And unfortunately, I'm not qualified add such a contribution to this article.

to compare a rugby player with an american soccer player is just a bit silly. they may not wear pads but i doubt there is too many 6foot 6 300lbs soccer players. some rugby players "only" weigh around the 200lbs mark but they are called backs and there jobs is to be quick. the saying goes, "today the backs tackle like forwards, and today the forwards tackle like dumper trucks". Pratj 15:53, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

The page is there to be edited. If you want to add / change something then do so.GordyB 16:37, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Gentlemen. I misspoke my thoughts. I was refering to the players uniforms, not their physique, when I compared Rugby players to soccer players. This is perhaps a good example of the reason I chose to make my comments here rather than attempt an edit there. I enjoyed reading the histories and the comparisons of both sports. I just thought I'd suggest the improvement and see if there a kindred interest out there who was better suited to make the contribution. Thanks again. And sorry if I didn't sign my post earlier. Dennis 19:23, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

well, until about 3 years ago, players would wear cotton long sleeve shirts and shorts. the cotton was very strong (so it didn't rip when people grabbed it)and thats how shirts have always (within reason) been. basically they were so strong that you could probably hang a man off of them and they won't rip. but then around 2003 in the world cup skintight lycra based shirts came in. apparently they were stronger than cotton but i saw many ripped in the world cup. but the skin tight shirts make you harder to grab, which is a benefit (kinda like the vaseline on your legs trick which works at school) Pratj 20:13, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Advancing the ball

Sorry signing in with my IP. I don't have an account over here (I'm just a rare visitor) but I do have one the Dutch Wikipedia. I would like to comment the paragraph Advancing the ball. Though it may be a matter of definition I reckon Union sure deals about yardage as well. For the principal objective is grounding the ball in the opponents in-goal area. And without yardage no grounding. Would like to hear from you. [1] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.92.23.133 (talk) 10:26, 13 March 2007 (UTC).

I've tried to improve the section accordingly. though rugby union does not talk of yardage as it uses the metric system.GordyB 10:57, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

we still use the term yardage, meterage doesn't really fit, when we talk about gaining territory. even though technically the field is metric not imperial, old sayings die hard.

'Meterage' is a horrible word but yardage is not a word I hear on rugby commentary.GordyB 22:40, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

We mostly use words as gainline and statistics as time in opponents half. But that's not what I was referring to. Unlike to soccer where goals are made by a player who's at a certain (even very far!) distance from the goal-line, scoring (i.e. a try) in rugby can only be done if the player is very near to or behind the goal-line. On base of the 6 points touchdown/3 points field goal and the 5 points try/3 points penalty or drop kick one could say that american football emphasizes yardage slightly more. Klompco.

A lot more, in rugby union you can keep the ball as long as you don't drop it or allow it to be stolen. In American football if you don't make ten yards in four downs, you have to hand the ball over.GordyB 17:51, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

in rugby union at leats yardage is less important (league its important). as long as u don't keep falling behind the gainline (essentially how much yardage ou have made or lost) yardage isn't important as such Pratj 23:39, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Strength and Power

right, we need to clear this up. i don't wan't to start a revert war. the strength and power between equivalent sizes and positions of men in rugby and US football are similar. they are all professional athletes. if anything, rugby requires more power as wrestling is a more key component of the game, US football is often about blocking and hitting players to the ground. Pratj 18:55, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Linesmen are much larger than rugby union forwards but they'd never be able to run around for 80 minutes, I think there isn't so much difference in the sizes of backs, a winger and a wide receiver / corner back might be about the same.GordyB 19:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

i agree, u would expect that 350lbs of linesmen would be stronger than 200lbs of fly half. that's a given. but whether he would be stronger than a prop of 300lbs i don't know. probably but from what i have seen of linemen their job is just to block the way protecting those behind them, rather than physically lift or push them. anyhow, all i'm saying is i'm pretty sure that 200lbs of american footballer and 200lbs of rugby player will both be pretty much as strong as each other. the guy editing it before was saying it like american footballer lift trucks for fun Pratj 21:51, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Field dimension discrepancy.

In the section "The field" it states: ["The length from try line to try line is always 100 metres: the only varying distances on a rugby field are the width of the playing field, and the distance from try line to the dead ball line."] when the rules as stated in the IRB Rule Book^[1] only specify maximum lengths. I have played on 4 local fields, all of which are currently used by local college level teams in official games, none of which have the same dimensions. One is significantly smaller in length and width than any of the others, closer to 85m from try to try. I did not measure it but walking it noticed the difference. Yes the width of the field and the depth of the try area were also different for all, but the try to try and the height of the crossbar, level and slants of the fields were all different as well. If the wording was changed to say ["The length from try line to try line is expected to be 100 metres..."] it would have greater staying power because as most of us know the words "Always" and "Never" rarely hold up in an argument. -- Billy Nair 06:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)