American / Canadian Football (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_football) Yeah, there are difference between the two country's rules, but the game is basically the same.

Australian Rules Football (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australian_rules_football) What's with the guys in the nifty top-hats that just seem to stick their hands out whenever the ball hits the inzone? Somebody told me that it's a hereditary position. I didn't believe them.

Rugby (in all it's forms) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_rugby_league_and_rugby_union) This sport seems to have a million incarnations and it looks like, in its original form, was the great grand-daddy of American/Canadian football and Australian Rules Football.

Which one is superior. Which one is for pussies.

Discuss.

~String

I like watching both Aussie rules, and rugby football.

Rugby League being my favourite, then Aussie rules, then Rugby Union.

I don't like American Football.

Rugby seems to be the toughest (possibly on par with American football, but I don't watch that much so I don't know).

Where as Aussie rules seems to be the tamest.

There's nothing tame about aussie rules. ;)

Due to the free flowing game with the players all over the field, not organised in to two teams facing each other, it requires a more rounded athlete who can run all day - although the stronger bodies still have the advantage. Each player has to be able to mark (catch), handpass and kick the ball accurately as well as tackle.

So the majority of the players are faster, have more endurance and have superior ball skills than rugby. So yes you could say it was tamer because it doesn't have the beefcakes that rugby does but I think it is a better game.

Rugby players are tough.

Aussie rules is a faster game though and some of the bumps and collisions are pretty bad considering there is no padding and they can come from any direction.

I can't say much about American football because although I like it (I like them all) I'm not an authority.

There's nothing tame about aussie rules. ;)

Due to the free flowing game with the players all over the field, not organised in to two teams facing each other, it requires a more rounded athlete who can run all day - although the stronger bodies still have the advantage. Each player has to be able to mark (catch), handpass and kick the ball accurately as well as tackle.

So the majority of the players are faster, have more endurance and have superior ball skills than rugby. So yes you could say it was tamer because it doesn't have the beefcakes that rugby does but I think it is a better game.

Rugby players are tough.

Aussie rules is a faster game though and some of the bumps and collisions are pretty bad considering there is no padding and they can come from any direction.

I can't say much about American football because although I like it (I like them all) I'm not an authority.

I really enjoy watching Aussie rules, and I hold it almost on par with Rugby League.

Whilst they may be great athletes it's no where near as physical as its cousins.

Fair enough

I'm so tempted.

Sport is a <Self censored> and should be <Self censored> and <Self censored> and <Self censored>...


Anywho. .

Whats grid iron ?

If you're talking toughness it's hard to make a case for American Football, sure the hits are worse but they do get a full suit of armour.
Makes more logical sense to me than rugby though, who the hell would want to run forwards only to pass the ball backwards, thus undoing all their hard work?

I know next to nothing of aussie rules though. It seems more similar to rugby but can you pass the ball forward? I think it has more use of the feet too. Could be wrong though.:shrug:

If you're talking toughness it's hard to make a case for American Football, sure the hits are worse but they do get a full suit of armour. It's not armor, it's weaponry - it's what the hits are made with.

And there's a tradeoff - the more pad, the slower. Football is a game of extreme quickness and speed - you don't want extra weight and hindrance.

The stuff on TV is small, tends to fool people sitting at home - the stuff on that field is happening very quickly.

Try this: suit yourself up in that "armor", find one of those freestanding mailboxes they put on city corners, take a five meter full speed running start, and launch yourself through the air into that box as hard as you can - knock it off its bolted concrete feet with your shoulder. Then consider that you are slow, and not hitting very hard at all compared with a serious football player.

But the greater violence of football collisions does not answer the question of toughness. Olympic freestyle wrestling is a very tough sport, with few collisions. Rugby is more a contact sport, like wrestling, rather than a collision sport, like football.

I just watched the NRL Grand Final. What a drubbing.

I'm so tempted.

Sport is a <Self censored> and should be <Self censored> and <Self censored> and <Self censored>...


Anywho. .

Whats grid iron ?

Bring back gladiatorial combat, I say.

AFL rules and now also do my beloved Hawks-Premiers 2008.

Take the armour off and see if they throw themselves with such gusto in human chess American Football. Admittedly, I don't know all the rules, so could be off beam.

Rugby League is excellent too and probably the toughest code.

Mind you Rugby Union seems to attact the sporting romantics worldwide. Sometimes though it just bores me to tears as the referee just seems to have such an impact on the final score.:)

AFL rules and now also do my beloved Hawks-Premiers 2008.

Take the armour off and see if they throw themselves with such gusto in human chess American Football. Admittedly, I don't know all the rules, so could be off beam.

Rugby League is excellent too and probably the toughest code.

Mind you Rugby Union seems to attact the sporting romantics worldwide. Sometimes though it just bores me to tears as the referee just seems to have such an impact on the final score.:)

I prefer Rugby League, it's easier to follow, easier to learn, and seems more teamwork based.

I vote for the new lingerie league....

i used to umpire for Aussie rules both boundry and field. A game seen from the eyes of a boundry umpire is a 16km PLUS sprint with very few breaks along the way, its slightly better for the field umpires and the players because for the most part they dont have to go end to end but you get a free flowing game and play the wings (and deep into the pockets) because your the most athletic player in the team and *shrug*.

There is NO padding whats so ever in aussie rules, which is why tripping for one thing is banned. If you combine the ability to trip someone sprinting from end to end with the zero padding you asking for ALOT of neck injuries.

Rember one of the best players in the 1994? bommers flag (gaven wanganine) had to give up playing AFL and all football forever because the doctors were VERY concerned that if he hit his neck again he would be at BEST a quadraplegic if not instantly dead.

That being said when the game stops flowing the punches start and then the game is more like 34 boxing games all held in the same ring, or maybe a HUGE bar fight

It's not armor, it's weaponry - it's what the hits are made with.

And there's a tradeoff - the more pad, the slower. Football is a game of extreme quickness and speed - you don't want extra weight and hindrance.

The stuff on TV is small, tends to fool people sitting at home - the stuff on that field is happening very quickly.

Try this: suit yourself up in that "armor", find one of those freestanding mailboxes they put on city corners, take a five meter full speed running start, and launch yourself through the air into that box as hard as you can - knock it off its bolted concrete feet with your shoulder. Then consider that you are slow, and not hitting very hard at all compared with a serious football player.

But the greater violence of football collisions does not answer the question of toughness. Olympic freestyle wrestling is a very tough sport, with few collisions. Rugby is more a contact sport, like wrestling, rather than a collision sport, like football.
Tough to make a case but you do it well I'll give you that!
I'm a big hockey fan myself so despite what I see on TV I always imagined the NFL to be along those same principles of speed and throwing your full body weight into a hit. It's about being effective at taking someone out of a play.
It also seems to me the NFL is far more tactical than the other sports, and less focused on being tough enough to grind down an opponent.
My views on the toughness of the sports probably also has something to do with the fact that almost every NFL player I've seen after a career in the sport still has the ability to construct coherent sentences, think clearly, and despite injuries is obviously not affected in any long term way. In contrast almost every rugby player I've met has trouble with these things, speaks slowly and thinks even slower, apparently due to having taken so many batterings in the field. I could perhaps however be more unkind and say most of them weren't too clever when they started playing, whereas the NFL mostly consists of well educated people due to its structure. :shrug:

Although football is my favorite, I have a huge respect for all three sports.
While all three have intricate strategies, I think football is the most technical: you can have all sorts of offensive and defensive formations, including up to 5 wide receivers running routes to catch the ball. It can get very confusing. I also like the fact that you can hit in football.
From my understanding, in Rugby/Aussie rules, you are not allowed to only hit someone, you must also tackle them. A rugby friend of mine says you are allowed to hit someone with your shoulder at first, but you also must wrap them up and try to take them down, or you will get penalized for an illegal tackle.

umm your wrong (for aussie rules), its called a hip and shoulder and its used to protect the person with the ball or take out there protection. However its highly inefficent when someone has the ball because the idea is to stop them from getting the ball away (either by handball or kick) so you need to trap there arms and bring them down. There are only two legal ways of doing this, pinning there arms and driving them down to the side or pinning there arms and pulling them back onto yourself. Neck injuries again

My views on the toughness of the sports probably also has something to do with the fact that almost every NFL player I've seen after a career in the sport still has the ability to construct coherent sentences, think clearly, and despite injuries is obviously not affected in any long term way Their lifespan is shortened, statistically, especially compared with their income class - and yes,they do start out with at least a pretense of a college education. The Harvard grads are on the offensive line, the concussions are in the backfields.

Rugby union players are usually fairly intelligent, they're mostly from priveledged backgrounds and well educated at private schools, in interviews they'll sound like 19th century gentlemen (they just look like shrek), rugby league players are usually from scummy backgrounds and poorly educated, in their interviews they're either stunned mullets with nothing to say or rough as guts and ignorant.
Complications arise lately because many people who grow up paying league end up getting paid to switch to union, so there are a lot of idiot league guys playing union these days, but traditionally union players are extremely well read, intelligent, eloquent, even charming, and it's always hilarious hearing what they're saying and how they're saying it and then seeing what big monster oafs they are.

American football players come from a variety of backgrounds but they're all force fed education and groomed to be in the public eye, they can all talk very well and with confidence, but a lot of the time they're talking shit and are deep down very stupid. Alot of them have lengthy post-football careers as sports analysts just because they are skilled in giving off the impression they know what they're talking about and that what they're talking about is significant and important, when if you pay attention it's largely redundant jibberish any idiot could and would say, they just wouldn't say it so convincingly.
(although I'm more and more convinced this applies to life in general, that people succeed by faking greatness)

More on topic;
I think both sides of this argument are impossibly ignorant about the opposing side, maybe (and uncharacteristically) the non-american side is even more ignorant. Most people outside of america just can not begin to understand american football and don't try, while americans are used to being the ignorant ones so they've put some semblance of an effort in to trying to understand (rugby, at least).

Aussie rules truely isn't on par with either, it's more like soccer- a haphazard mess of a schoolyard game that's inexplicably popular. There are a lot of great athletes playing it, and there's a lot of skill involved, but the game itself is very primitive and really quite silly.
Rugby (union and league) and american football are all great sports with different strangths and weaknesses. Realistically american football is the most sophisticated and refined (I might get into it when I can be bothered), but that's not to say rugby and it's players aren't underestimated by americans.

Aussie rules truely isn't on par with either, it's more like soccer- a haphazard mess of a schoolyard game that's inexplicably popular. There are a lot of great athletes playing it, and there's a lot of skill involved, but the game itself is very primitive and really quite silly.
Enlighten me as to why aussie rules is primitive compared to Rugby and American football.

AMERICAN FOOTBALL is the shit!!

bullrush beats them all i reckon, no rules to it, just line up in a row and try to reach the other side of the paddock while the guys in the middle try to nail you as hard as possible, each person that gets tackled becoming another tackler.

actually im a fan of international rules

Enlighten me as to why aussie rules is primitive compared to Rugby and American football.

It's not.
Rugby league is the primitive one. It's basically two dimensional and brutal. Having said that it would be by far the most physically taxing to play. The only reason they survive is because they are built like Staffordshire Bull terriers ( and almost as clever).
There are a handful of players who have any hand eye coordination whatsoever, the rest are brutes with no sense of fear.

Aussie Rules is far, far more elite in terms of overall fitness, three dimensionality and skill level.
American Football is clearly highly tactical but to an outsider to the sport seems ridiculous( you just want them to play footy instead of stopping and stopping and changing players and measuring shit.)

i do have to say to all the surporters of american rules football

STOP STEALING THE BODY ARMOR YOUR TROOPS NEED IN IRAQ:p:D

It's not.
Rugby league is the primitive one. It's basically two dimensional and brutal. Having said that it would be by far the most physically taxing to play. The only reason they survive is because they are built like Staffordshire Bull terriers ( and almost as clever).
There are a handful of players who have any hand eye coordination whatsoever, the rest are brutes with no sense of fear.
Yep. I was waiting for Lou's answer but I will comment anyway.

As everyone isn't lined up next to their teammates facing the same way it may seem confusing at first. However to therefore think that means it is silly and primitive is just ignorance.

Each aussie rules player would require a wider range of skills and attributes than the other sports. They have to be more balanced athletes. There are still roles of the field that are somewhat specialist such as the ruck or full forward but even then you are still expected to be able to kick, mark, handpass accurately as well as sprint, tackle and run all day.

Set plays are an important part of the tactics but they are nowhere near as complex as the american ones.

actually i herd that the ability to kick in AFL was getting alot of players picked up in the US for yanky football

Ben Graham (Geelong), Darren Bennet (Melbourne) and Sav Rocca (Collingwood) all had successful aussie rules careers before heading to the NFL. Mat Mcbriar played aussie rules but tried for the NFL instead of AFL.

Sav's brother Anthony may try for the NFL next year. He can kick the ball a mile as well.

its sad to see them all wasting there tallents like that. There is just about zero chance that they would be able to keep up that level of fitness for a game which is what, half the size? if that

Those guys went there after their AFL career was over.

AMERICAN FOOTBALL is shit!!

Fixed.

i dont understand how many people think that nfl is the best game. It is more of a coaches game that places there so called warriors in tights on a tinyfield made of astro turf with a rubby underlay.. with the ultimate goal is showing off something that looks just like a circus. i watched a bit of it the other day. 1 minute to go in the fourth quarter and it went went for 15 minutes of stop start tactical b/s. come on 30 plus players wearing helmuts and protective gear, and tights,with only a dozen on at a time maybe a spectacle if you enjoy going to the mardi gras. how expensive is all that crap if you cant afford it. it shold really be called team sumo cause all they do is push. NFl is for show ponies where a team relies on two people- the coach and the quaterback, the rest is just sumo wrestlers who do nothing but fumble.
Im glad to say that i live in australia where the two best games are played, afl and rugby league, and looking at the websites they are becoming a popular sport over there, where as gridiron has no chance of catching on, as for soccer that is a game for wannabe actors who take a dive if a fly lands on there face. i hate them both and will always discourage any one from plaing either of them.
if only you guys understood afl properly only then youd agree like so many people who have given there time to a great and superior cause. Do yourself a favour and let it get the better of you. afl will become the number 1 game ever played and rugby league not too far behind- love watchin them both and always will....

Who dug this up? Well IDK, robbh, you are dumb, you never played football before I'm guessing, or you were benched and/or never got passed to.

If people actually start reading this thread, I'll explain my POV.

@robbh "i hate them both and will always discourage any one from plaing either of them". Well looks like you missed Brad Wing and Jesse Williams lol. Both aussies who are now playing "gridiron" at Div1 Universities, oh well guess they will have to continue playing in front of 100k screaming fans every week, leave with a 4 year degree and go on into the nfl to make millions, yeah gridirion is horrible lol. I doubt they would want to trade places with any afl or nrl player at this point. You really dont know crap, you even admit you only watched just a little of the sport, so how can you possibly know anything about it? American football is THE shit btw, (fixed for you G. F. Schleebenhorstnd) its a very explosive sport, those guys on the field are extremely fast, big, and strong, brian orakpo could probably bench press 2 of the heaviest afl players lol. "NFl is for show ponies where a team relies on two people- the coach and the quaterback, the rest is just sumo wrestlers who do nothing but fumble" Wow! just ignorant, please dont talk about american football if you dont know crap about it.
And Dr Lou Natic, of course they force feed them education, there is MILLIONS to be made in the NFL and if a 16-17yr old kid could skip college and go straight into the pros, they would. You dont see Lebron James going back to get his degree, do you? You need atleast 3 yrs of college to be eligable for the draft, but some do stay for their 4th year and leave with a degree. You said yourself, NFL players have a variety of backgrounds, some are from the hood, some middle class families and there are some who are privileged but play because they love the game. AFL players are drafted at 17! Teenagers basically going on to play a professional sport, NFL drafts MEN not kids. Go look at Andrew Luck or Robert Griffin III and tell me those guys are ignorant and stupid, both are very intelligent and well spoken athletes and its not just for show, and theres many in the league just like them, but you also have your share of ignoramuses in the leage aswell.

It's a function of what people are used to, I guess.

As am American, I've never really been able to appreciate Australian Rules football. For one thing, the name seems like an oxymoron. (Rules??) In real life I'm sure it does have rules and plays and strategies and lots of fascinating stuff, but I'm not educated enough about the game to fully appreciate it.

American football is the same way. To a foreigner, it's just a bunch of steroid-crazed behemoths dressed up like astronauts, running into each other, falling down, and TV cutting to commercial.

But to an American, each play is a unique situation. Every player does something different. And oftentimes offensive play-calls and defensive counters to them are fascinating strategies and their athletic execution are works of art. All of that with the added bonus of huge men bashing each other. (America's a bit like ancient Rome, as far as our taste in sports goes.)

The game that's really hard for me to relate to is the kind of football what we call 'soccer'. It's seemingly just a bunch of guys in shorts running around kicking the ball aimlessly while spectators make exotic sound effects and occasionally riot. Then the game is eventually decided on penalty kicks, or whatever they call it. (Boring.) But Mexicans seem to think that the game is a thing of transcendent beauty. It might be if you grow up watching and playing it.