The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

What is "rugby" (never seen it played), anyway ?
I keep thinking it's the same as lacrosse. I should quit being lazy and google it.

Ah, rugby is what we call "a man's game", tc. One of the many varied forms of football, it has little obvious similarity to lacrosse, apart from the presence of two opposing teams who seem intent on killing each other.

There are two formats: rugby union and rugby league, which feature 15 and 13 players on each side respectively. The Aussies have been the best in the world at rugby league for ever, until New Zealand gave them a tonking a short while back.

Rugby union is the game that has featured in the conversation between myself and skinsjock. England are the current world champions, having defeated the Aussies in their own backyard in a misleadingly close game back in 2003.This gave we English a rare opportunity to gloat, since Australia regularly thump English teams at almost any sport you care to mention.

Rugby union is far too complicated to explain here - suffice to say that it features a number of large men (such as England's World Cup winning captain, Martin Johnson) whose job is to sweat, grunt and fight a lot in order to secure possession of the ball. Their role could be equated to the unglamorous positions on both lines in gridiron.

Once they win possession, they will ideally pass the ball out to the quicker and lighter players such as Jonny Wilkinson, who kicked the last minute drop goal (imagine a field goal, but in open play) to win England the World Cup.

You might find more useful information here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/rules_and_equipment/default.stm

Many fans of rugby (and particularly rugby league) would claim that American Football is a "poof's game", since the players wear considerable quantities of padding, unlike their rugby counterparts. When played well, rugby union is one of the greatest sporting spectacles I know, but it can be frustrating to watch due to the complicated rules and stop-start nature of play. Slowly, it seems to be evolving closer to gridiron, but the rules makers continually tweak rules to avoid that fate.

But, in conclusion, the most important thing to remember about rugby union is that England are world champions, and Australia are not. After that, we may have to get into a conversation about the "Ashes" and England's thumping of Australia's cricketers last summer. But that may be a step too far for you.

- Say what? Anytime a pom begins a statement with "Ah" you have to be very "carfull, you don't slip"!

This probably should be moved to the lounge as it has gotten a little off track.


- I will have to come back later -

UK Skins Fan wrote:You might find more useful information here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/rules_and_equipment/default.stm

Many fans of rugby (and particularly rugby league) would claim that American Football is a "poof's game", since the players wear considerable quantities of padding, unlike their rugby counterparts. When played well, rugby union is one of the greatest sporting spectacles I know, but it can be frustrating to watch due to the complicated rules and stop-start nature of play. Slowly, it seems to be evolving closer to gridiron, but the rules makers continually tweak rules to avoid that fate.

But, in conclusion, the most important thing to remember about rugby union is that England are world champions, and Australia are not. After that, we may have to get into a conversation about the "Ashes" and England's thumping of Australia's cricketers last summer. But that may be a step too far for you.

The one thing to keep in mind is that American Footballers are much bigger than an average Rugby player. Last time I checked there are not many 300 plus pound fullbacks or flankers running around.

There's no doubt about the size and speed of some players in the NFL

One of the main differences is that there is no break (or coming off the field) in rugby games - there are 2 halves and all the players (15) from both sides are on the field all the time. A 300 pound fullback is great as long as he can keep running for about 40 minutes each half.

All rugby players have to tackle and one of the first lessons in learning the basics of tackling another player is that no matter how big or how fast a person is, he does not get very far when his ankles are held together.

I love the NFL but it is also great to watch rugby and soccer games when they are played by some of those sports' stars.

SkinsJock wrote:One of the main differences is that there is no break (or coming off the field) in rugby games - there are 2 halves and all the players (15) from both sides are on the field all the time. A 300 pound fullback is great as long as he can keep running for about 40 minutes each half.

As movie title goes: "Once Upon a Time in America" ... there used to be players who played offense -and- defense, i.e., both sides of the ball for the -full- game.

Remember, American Football is a relative of Rugby as much as baseball is a relative of Cricket. The balls with which those games are played would tell alone the stories. Interesting that as time has passed these relatives see less and less of one another and forget the ties that bound them in the first place.

Now, if you REALLY wanted to know truly Canadian sports with no family ties, those would be Ice Hockey and Basketball. .

I'm an advocate of increasing the size of the American football to something much closer to a Rugby ball, although not quite to that size. That alone would take care of some of my frustrations with the way the game has developed.

Irn-Bru wrote:I'm an advocate of increasing the size of the American football to something much closer to a Rugby ball, although not quite to that size. That alone would take care of some of my frustrations with the way the game has developed.

Interesting thought FFA - a slight increase in size would very likely affect 2 things - the QB's would not be able to throw it as far or with as tight a spiral and the kickers would kick it further and with a little more accuracy.

btw - the shape of the "pointy" ball surely gave us the expression "that's the way the ball bounces" for when strange things happen

Redskin in Canada wrote:

SkinsJock wrote:One of the main differences is that there is no break (or coming off the field) in rugby games - there are 2 halves and all the players (15) from both sides are on the field all the time. A 300 pound fullback is great as long as he can keep running for about 40 minutes each half.

As movie title goes: "Once Upon a Time in America" ... there used to be players who played offense -and- defense, i.e., both sides of the ball for the -full- game.

Remember, American Football is a relative of Rugby as much as baseball is a relative of Cricket. The balls with which those games are played would tell alone the stories. Interesting that as time has passed these relatives see less and less of one another and forget the ties that bound them in the first place.

Now, if you REALLY wanted to know truly Canadian sports with no family ties, those would be Ice Hockey and Basketball. .

Basketball may have been born in Canada (the first NBA game was even played there) but it's an American sport at this point.

To my knowledge, "duck on a rock" is not basketball. There are plenty of folks in Springfield, Mass, who would be most pleased to discuss this.

Maybe you should stick to the funny pages, RiC.

Fios wrote:Basketball may have been born in Canada (the first NBA game was even played there) but it's an American sport at this point.

Invented in Canada, just like "your" Superman.

tcwest10 wrote:Maybe you should stick to the funny pages, RiC.

Some of those, together with some of "your" best comedians, are Canadians too.

Countertrey wrote:To my knowledge, "duck on a rock" is not basketball. There are plenty of folks in Springfield, Mass, who would be most pleased to discuss this.

Surely there were plenty of guys in the former Soviet Union who made the same argument too.

Redskin in Canada wrote:

Fios wrote:Basketball may have been born in Canada (the first NBA game was even played there) but it's an American sport at this point.

Invented in Canada, just like "your" Superman.

Superman is Kryptonian ... additionally, Superman was created by two men, only one of whom was Canadian. Jerry Siegel, a Cleveland, Ohio, native created the character after his father died of a heart attack during a robbery attempt and his creation actually happened in good old Cleveland, Ohio. Nice try though, we win that one.
And basketball is still American.

tcwest10 wrote:Maybe you should stick to the funny pages, RiC.

Redskin in Canada wrote:Some of those, together with some of "your" best comedians, are Canadians too.

I've never heard anyone claim a comedian as "ours"

Countertrey wrote:To my knowledge, "duck on a rock" is not basketball. There are plenty of folks in Springfield, Mass, who would be most pleased to discuss this.

Redskin in Canada wrote:Surely there were plenty of guys in the former Soviet Union who made the same argument too.

The Soviets had a nice run, way back in the day and they had to steal one from us in the Olympics. They suck now. In Olympic play, I am vastly more concerned about the Argentinian and the Spanish teams than I am the Russians. Basketball is our sport.

Europe! What-ever?! If Europe was a great place to live the U.S wouldn't be full of Caucasians and we'd be posting in Cherokee. Who really cares about Filth-a-delphia fans anyway? We own Philly!

SkinsJock wrote:Interesting thought FFA - a slight increase in size would very likely affect 2 things - the QB's would not be able to throw it as far or with as tight a spiral and the kickers would kick it further and with a little more accuracy.

btw - the shape of the "pointy" ball surely gave us the expression "that's the way the ball bounces" for when strange things happen

Those are essentially my reasons for preferring it. It would affect the speed of passes, too. We'd see fewer fastballs and more touch-based throws. . .fades, flares, go-routes, screens. Fewer outs, hooks, and crosses. Defenses would go back a little more to read-and-react strategies, too, I think, rather than blitz-always-and-hope-you-don't-get-burned gambles. My guess is there'd be more flow to the game and a bit less pin-point sharp shooting.

Previous generations of players couldn't run the precision offenses we do today because the ball wasn't (relatively) small enough. Call me old fashioned, but watching a team march downfield on 4-5 yard passes to the sidelines with the receiver immediately stepping out of bounds, and precise crossing routes where the receiver falls down as he catches the ball, are always a bit disappointing. It's even worse that they play on artifical turf—no one's clothes are even getting dirty!

That's not how the game was really intended in the beginning.

Not that there's anything "wrong" with current NFL gameplay. . .football is and will probably always be my favorite sport. It's the only professional sport I follow closely. It's just different than I imagine it would be with a ball that would better represent the original mechanics of the game. (I think it would increase people's admiration for what Slingin' Sammy did, too. )

Trample the Elderly wrote:Europe! What-ever?! If Europe was a great place to live the U.S wouldn't be full of Caucasians and we'd be posting in Cherokee. Who really cares about Filth-a-delphia fans anyway? We own Philly!

Isn't Europe a quaint little place in England?

Fios wrote:The Soviets had a nice run, way back in the day and they had to steal one from us in the Olympics. They suck now. In Olympic play, I am vastly more concerned about the Argentinian and the Spanish teams than I am the Russians. Basketball is our sport.

My post was perhaps a bit more cryptic (not to be confused with Kryptonite) than it needed. What I was meant to IMPLY was that the Soviets claimed to have INVENTED everything from the telephone to any other useful conceivable invention. Not that basketball is the most useful invention of all though ...

As far as other teams defeating the USA in international competitions, it has happened. It will probably happen again. The NBA is the highest quality league to play basketball in the entire world and players from many nationalities do well in it. What's more American than getting players from all over the world to play in the biggest market?

Basketball was INVENTED in Canada though. So, regardless of the fact that basketball is played at a higher level in the USA, it still holds a Canadian birth certificate and passport with a Maple Leaf in it.

Glad to hear your silence about Ice Hockey though ...

Please click on the image:


While you are at it, you could also take the TEST .

Redskin in Canada wrote:

Fios wrote:The Soviets had a nice run, way back in the day and they had to steal one from us in the Olympics. They suck now. In Olympic play, I am vastly more concerned about the Argentinian and the Spanish teams than I am the Russians. Basketball is our sport.

My post was perhaps a bit more cryptic (not to be confused with Kryptonite) than it needed. What I was meant to IMPLY was that the Soviets claimed to have INVENTED everything from the telephone to any other useful conceivable invention. Not that basketball is the most useful invention of all though ...

As far as other teams defeating the USA in international competitions, it has happened. It will probably happen again. The NBA is the highest quality league to play basketball in the entire world and players from many nationalities do well in it. What's more American than getting players from all over the world to play in the biggest market?

Basketball was INVENTED in Canada though. So, regardless of the fact that basketball is played at a higher level in the USA, it still holds a Canadian birth certificate and passport with a Maple Leaf in it.

Glad to hear your silence about Ice Hockey though ...

Please click on the image:


While you are at it, you could also take the TEST .

1) Ice hockey is 100% Canadian, no dispute there whatsoever, though I still find it odd there is such a small NHL presence actually in -- or at least near -- Canada. Were I the NHL, I would open/move a franchise to Seattle.

2) I don't know whether you included the link as a debate point but it confirms what I said. Jerry Siegel, an American, is credited for the creation, Joe Shuster, a Canadian (he moved to Cleveland when he was 9) did the artwork. Superman may have a Canadian co-creator but his creation occurred in Cleveland. There is actually an effort under way to preserve the house he was created in.

3) I went 9-for-10 on the quiz, got the debut comic wrong

Truth, Justice, and the Canadian way????










I don't think so...

Fios wrote:2) I don't know whether you included the link as a debate point but ...

3) I went 9-for-10 on the quiz, got the debut comic wrong

2) Just the fact man, just the facts.

3) Not bad ... for somebody from Cleveland.

It's incredible. This post started out as a typical TCWest "Canada as America's Hat" joke, but I googled "Famous Canadians...and was blown away by some of the names. I had no idea that Lorne Green, long considered an American Icon by the truly culture-ignorant TC...was in fact, as Canadian as a cold front.
Incredible.
You can't have Superman, though...and we'd like a refund on Celine Dion and Anne Murray, please.