The Ubiquity of Rugby

homerjay2005

rugby is popular in 2 or 3 areas, the rest of the country is mainly soccer and GAA.

compare the world cup last year to the euros in 2 weeks time. the rugby team just cannot capture the entire nation like the soccer team can. dublin v kerry last year was probably the most watched sports event of the last 10 years.

as already mentioned, liking rugby is just a fashion statement for a big portion of its fans, which is a massive insult to the many 1000s of genuine followers who supported the game for years before it became the sport to follow during the boom.

Sea Filly

Why do people get so pissed off at it being called soccer? It's association football, soccer is a contraction of this, as you all well know. What's the problem? There are different kinds of football, it's just to differentiate.

Paparazzo

I agree that bandwagon jumpers are welcome. Every sport and team in the world has them. Sure wasn't the whole country watching swimming cos michele smith was winning in Atlanta?

The rules in rugby can get too technical. Theres games where the ref doesn't know who to penalise, and in the studio backs don't have a clue of what the forwards are doing.
The simplicity of football is a big advantage and this will keep it a much more successful sport worldwide than rugby.

Whippersnapper

BarackPyjama wrote: »

I do find it understandable that anyone that hasn't played rugby, and maybe isn't 100% familiar with the rules, would find it a bit boring. Not saying that you are but if you're not clued into what's happening on the pitch and on the ground, I'd imagine it's fairly confusing and a bit drab.

I know the basics and I'm definitely not built to play the game so I think I may just need some more exposure while in the company of rugby fans.

Sea Filly wrote: »

Why do people get so pissed off at it being called soccer? It's association football, soccer is a contraction of this, as you all well know. What's the problem? There are different kinds of football, it's just to differentiate.

Yeah, when you think that soccer is the only major football code in the world that DOESN'T use hands then people might stop being so prissy about it!

dpqt

BarackPyjama wrote: »

Most rugby fans don't look down their noses at football or its supporters. A lot of them don't like the sport but most would agree - 'each to their own'.

On a personal level - I watch the Champions League. I watch a good few Utd matches with my mates who support them. As much as I'd love to *enjoy* a game of footy, the diving and s**ty sportsmanship really, really gets to me. As does the screaming in the refs face. That *really* annoys the hell out of me. Refs should be respected in every sport and verbally abusing the ref should be a red card offence. As should diving. If they brought more discipline into football, I'd enjoy it a lot more. Not saying rugby is perfect but it's a lot more sporting in that regard. (And yes, I appreciate that there are a lot more bone crunching punch-ups in rugby - that's part of the tradition for some reason - no need to point it out )

But a lot of them do look down on football, I've noticed the mentality myself a lot amongst rugby fans.

RoundBox11

The thing is, people who don't like football can base it on the fact that weve all played it. Most of us were forced to play it during our school years. I can use 14 years of playing it both in school and for a club as my reason for saying it's boring as **** to watch, but alright to play.

In the case of rugby however, most people have never played and a lot of the people who say "its just a bunch of lads running at each other and kicking it out of play" have no knowledge of them game and nothing to base this opinion on.

I love rugby because there are so many facets to the game. It requires a huge range of skills (passing, kicking using correct body angles in scrums and rucks and coordination in lineouts, etc) strength (both physical and mental) and the combination of defensive and attacking play that uses all 15 men, rather than just lobbing a ball up to a striker and hoping him to score 1/10 times.

I find football is so unproffesional also (which is ironic given the enormous salaries the players receive). Players diving, running after the ref shouting abuse at him and players taking shots that miss the goal by 20 feet.

But most of all, the things that i dislike about football the most is that it is forced on kids so much and that people insist its the best sport in the world because they wont give any other sports a chance.

BarackPyjama

dpqt wrote: »

But a lot of them do look down on football, I've noticed the mentality myself a lot amongst rugby fans.

I think a lot of rugby fans just don't like football. It's no more 'looking down' on football than some football fans 'look down' on rugby. They just don't like it.

BarackPyjama

RoundBox11 wrote: »

The thing is, people who don't like football can base it on the fact that weve all played it. Most of us were forced to play it during our school years. I can use 14 years of playing it both in school and for a club as my reason for saying it's boring as **** to watch, but alright to play.

In the case of rugby however, most people have never played and a lot of the people who say "its just a bunch of lads running at each other and kicking it out of play" have no knowledge of them game and nothing to base this opinion on.

I love rugby because there are so many facets to the game. It requires a huge range of skills (passing, kicking using correct body angles in scrums and rucks and coordination in lineouts, etc) strength (both physical and mental) and the combination of defensive and attacking play that uses all 15 men, rather than just lobbing a ball up to a striker and hoping him to score 1/10 times.

I find football is so unproffesional also (which is ironic given the enormous salaries the players receive). Players diving, running after the ref shouting abuse at him and players taking shots that miss the goal by 20 feet.

But most of all, the things that i dislike about football the most is that it is forced on kids so much and that people insist its the best sport in the world because they wont give any other sports a chance.

Agreed. Rugby really isn't that complicated a game but you do have to understand the rules to really appreciate it's intricacies and to understand and enjoy what's going on in front of you. It's really exciting to watch 15 different players filling 15 different roles on the pitch, each with their part to play.

My biggest issues with professional rugby at the moment though are:

• It's slowly being tailored for the TV viewer. The scrum (as we know it) is quickly being phased out and a running game is being advocated. No problem with the latter but surely the scrum should remain the core part of the game? It's quickly being dismantled.
• The refereeing in professional rugby is appalling. I understand the rules inside and out. It's very much black and white. Yet for some reason, even at the highest level, referees are still allowed to make their own 'interpretations' or what constitutes fair play and what doesn't.

Paparazzo

RoundBox11 wrote: »

I love rugby because there are so many facets to the game. It requires a huge range of skills (passing, kicking using correct body angles in scrums and rucks and coordination in lineouts, etc) strength (both physical and mental) and the combination of defensive and attacking play that uses all 15 men, rather than just lobbing a ball up to a striker and hoping him to score 1/10 times.

I can see you played at a high level. Even Harry Rednapps tactics are more advanced than that.
And you were "forced" to play for school and club for 14 years? Were you in a nazi concentration camp and had to play for your lives? Was silvester stallone your keeper?

Naomi00

BarackPyjama wrote: »

Agreed. Rugby really isn't that complicated a game but you do have to understand the rules to really appreciate it's intricacies and to understand and enjoy what's going on in front of you. It's really exciting to watch 15 different players filling 15 different roles on the pitch, each with their part to play.

My biggest issues with professional rugby at the moment though are:

• It's slowly being tailored for the TV viewer. The scrum (as we know it) is quickly being phased out and a running game is being advocated. No problem with the latter but surely the scrum should remain the core part of the game? It's quickly being dismantled.
• The refereeing in professional rugby is appalling. I understand the rules inside and out. It's very much black and white. Yet for some reason, even at the highest level, referees are still allowed to make their own 'interpretations' or what constitutes fair play and what doesn't.

Yeah the refereeing at the England v Ireland match in the 6 nations this year was awful. It's the only match I didn't watch until the end, it was a joke. Nigel Owens is usually one of the better ones but he was so biased it was unreal, ruined the whole match.
Connacht usually get stuck with some bad referees too.

BarackPyjama

Naomi00 wrote: »

Yeah the refereeing at the England v Ireland match in the 6 nations this year was awful. It's the only match I didn't watch until the end, it was a joke. Nigel Owens is usually one of the better ones but he was so biased it was unreal, ruined the whole match.
Connacht usually get stuck with some bad referees too.

England were completely taking the piss in the scrum in this years 6 Nations. Fair play. They got away with it. They did exactly what Northampton did to Leinster in first half of the 2011 Heineken Cup Final. Bored into the middle (illegal) and ground the Irish front row into the ground. Only 1) the ref didn't understand what was happening and 2) unlike Leinster, Kidney had nobody there to tell the lads what was happening at half time and how to fix it.

ormond lad

ScienceNerd wrote: »

The popularity of Rugby in recent times is down to the success of the Irish team and said success being marketed well, which makes supporting rugby fashionable. Obviously not all rugby fans would fall into that description and I know there are plenty of hardcore supports borne out of the last 10 years or so. People like to follow the winning team it's nothing new and there's no point getting bent out of shape about it.

The biggest reason for the increase in popularity of rugby is more the success of the provinces not the National team. Munsters struggle to rise to the top of european rugby in the early noughties and then winning twice in three years followed by Leinsters dominance has had a much bigger role in increasing rugbys popularity than the success of the national side

Bad Panda wrote: »

Yawn.

Any graceless, awkward person can throw a ball backwards and run forwards.

Soccer takes a lot more skill. Much harder to be a good soccer player than a rugby player.

And yeah, I'd know.

Much harder to be a good soccer player;)
Not really. The amount of different skills in rugby that have to be mastered is much higher than football like learning how to tackle, ruck, maul, if a forward scrummage, jump in lineout as well as the basics like being able to run etc

Wattle wrote: »

I have to laugh at those who are calling Rugby supporters bandwagon jumpers. In a couple of weeks time it's going to be wall to wall Boys in Green, Trap's Army, Ole Ole Ole Ole, nationwide nervous breakdowns and drinking and puking and pissing in the streets. Will we jump on that bandwagon if the team is doing well? Of course we will.

+1

St.Spodo wrote: »

As a fairly athletic person, I find that there are very few things I can't do that rugby players do. I can catch the rugby ball from high in the air, handle it and kick it far. This leads me to believe that if I was faster and had another 20kg of muscle, I could play rugby at a fairly high level.

When it comes to football, it is a lot more difficult to master a ball that is at your foot as opposed to in your hands. It takes a lot more skill to develop the technique and control required to do so.

Football is a much more skilful game.

No football is not.
I can run fast and have a very good level of fitness, ive very good ball control and can kick a ball very direct very far. Therefore i could play football to a very high level.
If you are so sure that if you were a bit faster and bigger you could play rugby to a fairly high level then why dont you join a club and play. oh wait you'll be found out as a big bullsh*itter

St.Spodo wrote: »

The skill level of at least half the players on a rugby pitch is wholly unimpressive. The likes of Paul O'Connell or that other big gormless Limerick lad are revered as great sportsmen. They wouldn't be if they were 5ft 11 and 12 stone. It is often the case that the great footballers become revered in spite of their physical prowess.

Paul O Connell is a great sportsperson, was near scratch golfer and was a fairly elite level swimmer/ If Paul O Connell was 5ft 11 and 12 stone he'd more than likely have been an outside back and considering the person he is,his levels of determination etc,he'd be a damn good one.

St.Spodo wrote: »

I am not saying football is the most skilful sport. I came in when people where arguing the merits of football and rugby.

To reply to the second part, I think it would be a lot easier for a person who has the correct physical make up to become a quality rugby player than it would be for someone to become a quality football player. John Hayes didn't start playing rugby until he was 18. It would be nigh on impossible to start playing football at 18 and turn professional and excel in that sport.

When John Hayes started playing rugby the sport was 5 years away from being a professional sport. He nearly immediately joined one of the strongest club sides in the country and trained under some of the best coaches in the country. It was a completely different era. You will never again see someone start playing the sport so late in their life making it as a top pro unless somebody who is an elite level athlete in a compatible sport takes up rugby for example a track sprinter takes up rugby and plays on the wing and quickly moves up the ranks to become a pro

LH Pathe

it's hardly ubiquitous around here.. Not a couple of postcodes away anyhow. I love the game, personally but then I like a lot of sports. But the only oval balls bein put to use in my neighbourhood are flesh

mikemac1

Attended one rugby union game ever

Went with the lads after work to Donneybrook

Pre-season friendly between Leinster and Northampton

Not a clue of the rules, did my best to keep up but I was badly lost.

However....I was madly impressed that the losing team formed a line and clapped the winners off and then the winners did the same for the losers

Classy, just pure classy :cool:

Doc

I love rugby union and have played it since I was a child. My dad played outhalf when he was young and one of my earliest memories is catching a spin pass from him when I was out in the front garden and he was in the back garden. He fired the ball in the back door through the kitchen down the hall and out the front door to where I was standing in the front garden. I caught it and it knocked me off my feet and onto my ass (It was one of the real old-fashioned leather balls too).
I don’t hate football (soccer) and have played it too but I never got the same enjoyment out of it as I do with rugby.
I do love watching Ireland or Munster play and will support the other provinces too as long as there not playing Munster but I’m not an avid fan (I live in Australia now and would not stay up till 3am to watch the games). Having a team that you support or have done since you were a child really dose influence how much you care and therefore enjoy a game. I don’t care enough when I watch the football on tv and although I can appreciate the skill I just don’t get into the game.
The reasons I love playing it above other sports are

1: Im good at it.
(It might sound egotistic but what I mean is I’m better at then all other sports I have played and I think that it’s natural to enjoy something you are good at.)

2: The Hits
(It is a very physical game and I get a huge amount of enjoyment out of making a big tackle or braking free of one. It’s the fact that both skill and physical strength are needed. For me and most people I have ever played with its not about hurting the other person but it’s one of the few full contact sports and even if you haven’t actually scored a try in a game if you have make some big tackles it can feel almost as good.)

3: Variety of Skills required.
(The difference in terms of the skills required for the various positions on a rugby union team are huge. I personally think that the difference is much greater than most other team sports with the possible exception of American football. Not only that but no matter what your position you also have to have a verity of basic skills in order to be any good.)

4: Team work.
(I know all team sports to one degree or another display team work but rugby union in my opinion when played right is less about individual brilliance and much more about the team playing to its strengths. It could be the forwards all driving forward as one or an intricate back line move being executed it’s all about the team as a whole rather than the individual.)

Other things that I like about rugby are the fact that you can stand with the opposition supporters and it’s never an issue other then banter back and forth. Most clubs are very social places with old players, families and friends coming to see the games.

I really dislike some of the stereotypes people place on rugby players particularly in Ireland. There is nothing gay about tackling someone or binding in a scrum and frankly those who say it is are just being stupid. Equally I would say that rugby players saying that people who play football are gay because there it is not as physical as rugby are idiots.
It is not a sport just for posh people either. True some people who play it might be, particularly in Dublin where private schools play it and not many public schools do but it is a ridicules stereotype to have. I certainly wouldn’t consider myself posh and nor would I the vast majority of the people I have played the game with over the years.
The whole football v’s rugby debate is stupid. They are completely different sports its like comparing apples and oranges.

DEFTLEFTHAND

mikemac1 wrote: »

Attended one rugby union game ever

Went with the lads after work to Donneybrook

Pre-season friendly between Leinster and Northampton

Not a clue of the rules, did my best to keep up but I was badly lost.

However....I was madly impressed that the losing team formed a line and clapped the winners off and then the winners did the same for the losers

Classy, just pure classy :cool:

Yeah its a nice tradition of the game that thankfully hasn't been lost since professionalism. Its practiced from kids rugby all the way up.

flyswatter

carvaggio wrote: »

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Like who?

Riquelme, Carlos Valdaramma, Roberto Ayala, Gianfranco Zola (the list goes on a long way). None of them were particulary notable in terms of pace, strength or size but all were excellent at what they did.

Football doesn't have the monopoly on skilful small players, ever heard of Shane Williams or Jason Robinson?

Sindri

bullvine wrote: »

From what I can tell about rugby, its always predictable, the good teams beat the crap teams, there doesnt appear to be much giant killing happening in it, that you get in Football, you'd never see the likes of Romania beating New Zealand in the World Cup but in the Football it happens in every tournament.

Tonga beat France at the 2011 RWC. Samoa nearly beat Wales and South Africa at the RWC.

England beat Australia in Australia in the 2003 RWC final.

Connacht beating Harlequins, the Aviva Premiership Champions this year?

Leftist wrote: »

great post and 100% true.

there are plenty around that genuinely love the sport and did so before 2000.

so many bandwagon jumpers since. It's a fashion statement. A middle class glory hunting expedition. If irish teams were to become mediocre then these people wouldn't care.

The same could be said about Jacky's army, no? It was that era of football in this country that has mostly impacted the support for the Irish football team today, so much so that when one refers to the Irish team they are nearly always referring to the Irish football team. The Irish Rugby team is always proceeded by 'Rugby' whereas if one said 'the Irish team' it would be assumed that they were referring too the Irish football team.

Even then Leinster Rugby as a professional entity has only existed for the bones of 20 years, or less. Where else are these supporters meant to come from? Any way we'll wait for the Euro's and see what happens to the country then. It seems supporting football is much more socially acceptable and is actually assumed that one will support the national team as the national team is considered to be the Irish team and it is actually in reality the official sport of Ireland. I suppose the bandwagon is acceptable here though?

St.Spodo wrote: »

Lionel Messi. Born with GHD but transcended this due in no small part to his astonishing skill level. He is only about 5ft 6 now, but is the greatest football in the world.

I doubt he has the durability or the required physical shape to be the greatest football in the world. Any way and had to under go HT treatment to be able to play the game professionally, he plays for Barcelona as they agreed to pay for his treatment. It's only in Europe where he's considered the best player any way. Go to Argentina and you'll hear a different story.

St.Spodo wrote: »

The skill level of at least half the players on a rugby pitch is wholly unimpressive. The likes of Paul O'Connell or that other big gormless Limerick lad are revered as great sportsmen. They wouldn't be if they were 5ft 11 and 12 stone. It is often the case that the great footballers become revered in spite of their physical prowess.

Delon Armitage, 5 foot 10', Top 14 Player of the Year this year, told when he was younger that he was too small to play rugby. Plays open side flanker.

St.Spodo wrote: »

As a fairly athletic person, I find that there are very few things I can't do that rugby players do. I can catch the rugby ball from high in the air, handle it and kick it far. This leads me to believe that if I was faster and had another 20kg of muscle, I could play rugby at a fairly high level.

When it comes to football, it is a lot more difficult to master a ball that is at your foot as opposed to in your hands. It takes a lot more skill to develop the technique and control required to do so.

Football is a much more skilful game.

I don't think you understand the skill of rugby. The skills are a lot more succinct and subtle, and have to be done with the threat of physical pain or like running the correct line. Also when I played rugby I was the smallest person on the pitch at 7-8 stone and 5 foot 5' yet I was still one of the best players. Size doesn't matter in rugby, technique that takes years to learn, and isn't understood, does. Brian O' Driscoll, 5 foot 9' and 15 stone one of the best players ever. Why? Because he's skillful and intelligent. Phil Neville? Michael Carrick? Fletcher? Andy Carroll? Yeah they're all certainly extremely skillful.

Shane Williams? 5 foot 7' 12 stone, one of the best wingers of the professional era.

I think you don't understand the skills of the game of rugby tbh.

Bad Panda wrote: »

Yawn.

Any graceless, awkward person can throw a ball backwards and run forwards.

Soccer takes a lot more skill. Much harder to be a good soccer player than a rugby player.

And yeah, I'd know.

It's extremely difficult to pass a rugby ball backwards while some big chap is about to knock you off your feet and you only have a split second to pass the ball as you have to draw and set the man who wants to tackle you, doing this while sprinting. Go out into your back garden and attempt to pass the ball 20 yards perfectly to someone running at a similar speed to you, (which means you have to pass the ball effectively into space, judging perfectly where he will be, with no room or leeway for errors or poor spatial awareness) doing this.

bullvine wrote: »

I have a controversial opinion, I believe a lot of footballs popularity is due to its actual problems such as bad refs, no video replays, diving, play acting etc, and if these werent in it, if it was a cleaner sport like Rugby, I'm not sure if it would be as popular.

Rugby isn't a clean sport. Rugby has even worse problems than you stated above as parts of the game are nearly unrefable. If you knew anything about rugby you'd know that.

EdenHazard wrote: »

Rugby on its own merits is grand but the culture of it in Ireland is so cringey and false. That Munster/munster rivalry is so fabricated. 'Oh wow I'm really proud to be from Leinster' it means nothing.

Not really. It was originally for decades a Leinster-Ulster rivalry but since both teams are from the south and both teams are 2 of the best in the world and compete against each other domestically the rivalry developed out of that. See 2008 Heineken Cup semi final.


I support inter-county Gaelic and hurling teams. I follow the LoI and support Liverpool. I just think the game of rugby isn't understood by many people, in fact I know it isn't. It's a matter of preference of which one prefers but people knocking rugby and the reasons given are usually inadequate, (especially as few people actually broach much more valid reasons to dislike the game) and as well as people usually talking out of their hole.

bullvine

I never said I knew much about Rugby but Tonga are not exactly giant killers, I do know they have had decent results in the past in World Cups similar to Samoa or Fiji. Also, regarding how clean the sport of Rugby is, the way people I know who watch it tell me all the time how much fairer it is than football thats all I'm goin on. So does that mean the whole "Thugs game played by gentlemen" is a myth?

The_Kew_Tour

Rugby can be great game, but whats killing it for the avid fan is the amount of Glory Hunters coming along taking tickets and they hardly know the rules. Just there to be seen at these events.

aidan24326

Much harder to be a good soccer player;)
Not really. The amount of different skills in rugby that have to be mastered is much higher than football like learning how to tackle, ruck, maul, if a forward scrummage, jump in lineout as well as the basics like being able to run etc

Like being able to run? Wow, that's a skill to master alright!

Pherekydes

Sindri wrote: »

Tonga beat France at the 2011 RWC. Samoa nearly beat Wales and South Africa at the RWC.

England beat Australia in Australia in the 2003 RWC final.

Are these examples of giant killing?

The 9th ranked team beating the 6th ranked team!
The 10th ranked team nearly beating the 5th ranked team! Wow!
The 10th ranked team nearly beating the 3rd ranked team! Wow!

The FIRST ranked team beating the second ranked team in the RWC Final 2003. I mean wow! Who'd have thunk?

Next year, a big shock will nearly happen when the All Blacks almost lose to a team outside the top two*. The self-satisfied rugby community can point to this great event as an example of how "unpredictable" their sport is.


*Final score: NZL 69 RSA 13 (but it was close for 7 minutes)

:pac:

Tox56

Pherekydes wrote: »

Sindri wrote: »

Tonga beat France at the 2011 RWC. Samoa nearly beat Wales and South Africa at the RWC.

England beat Australia in Australia in the 2003 RWC final.

Are these examples of giant killing?

The 9th ranked team beating the 6th ranked team!
The 10th ranked team nearly beating the 5th ranked team! Wow!
The 10th ranked team nearly beating the 3rd ranked team! Wow!

The FIRST ranked team beating the second ranked team in the RWC Final 2003. I mean wow! Who'd have thunk?

Next year, a big shock will nearly happen when the All Blacks almost lose to a team outside the top two*. The self-satisfied rugby community can point to this great event as an example of how "unpredictable" their sport is.


*Final score: NZL 69 RSA 13 (but it was close for 7 minutes)

:pac:

Rugby doesn't have giant killings at international level because not enough teams play it, it still can have upsets though.

Tox56

The_Kew_Tour wrote: »

Rugby can be great game, but whats killing it for the avid fan is the amount of Glory Hunters coming along taking tickets and they hardly know the rules. Just there to be seen at these events.

I'm an avid fan, but these people coming along pumping money into the game, raising it's profile and becoming part of the fanbase are great for the game. If you would rather stay away and sneer at these 'glory hunters' that's your choice, but 90% of avid fans will be embracing this new popularity.

Sindri

Pherekydes wrote: »

Are these examples of giant killing?

The 9th ranked team beating the 6th ranked team!
The 10th ranked team nearly beating the 5th ranked team! Wow!
The 10th ranked team nearly beating the 3rd ranked team! Wow!

The FIRST ranked team beating the second ranked team in the RWC Final 2003. I mean wow! Who'd have thunk?

Next year, a big shock will nearly happen when the All Blacks almost lose to a team outside the top two*. The self-satisfied rugby community can point to this great event as an example of how "unpredictable" their sport is.


*Final score: NZL 69 RSA 13 (but it was close for 7 minutes)

:pac:

Your argument is flawed as it is based on something that is partially intangible (rankings) particularly in a game that is tactically based. Did you know how the ranking system even worked before you made that argument? Or did you consider the dis-ingenuousness of a rank to dictate how good a team actually is or it's relative abilities?

Kev_2012

Sindri wrote: »

Delon Armitage, 5 foot 10', Top 14 Player of the Year this year, told when he was younger that he was too small to play rugby. Plays open side flanker.

That'd be Steffon Armitage. Delon plays at fullback.

Bad Panda

ormond lad wrote: »

Much harder to be a good soccer player;)
Not really. The amount of different skills in rugby that have to be mastered is much higher than football like learning how to tackle, ruck, maul, if a forward scrummage, jump in lineout as well as the basics like being able to run etc

You're citing 'being able to run' as a skill!? Hmmm.

Tackle? You ge to use your whole body in rugby to tackle and you've a much broader target. It's much more difficult to time a tackle in football running at pace, winning the ball and not committing a foul at the same time.

Jump?! Seriously! OK, it's easier to jump and catch a ball in your hands than it his to jump and time a header at a cross that's been whipped at you at a pace of about 60mph.

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

bullvine

Football is so much more skillful than Rugby, from the age of 2, Diego Maradona spent every single minute of his day that was available to him, kicking a football, both on his own and with friends and team mates. Its this dedication that made him the greatest in the world.

Did Brian O'Driscoll do the same with a rugby ball??

Flincher

Can we not just all be friends?

I play rugby seriously enough and soccer socially. The skill sets are completely different, and its a waste of time trying to compare them. Jumping to head a cross, or jumping in a lineout can't really be compared. They both require different types of athleticism.

The strenght and conditioning, fitness, etc, are all worlds apart. Obviously rugby players are bigger (varies from position obviously) and with more muscle mass. Your average rugby player is going to be bigger and phsyically stronger than your average soccer player. But soccer requies a different type of fitness. You see full-backs making 50-60m sprints dozens of times a game. The likes of Yaya Toure power up and down the middle of the pitch for 90 mins.

The rugby bandwagon stuff drives me mad. Yes, a lot of new supporters have started following the game, and obviously its going to take them time to get up to speed with the sport. I'd be the same if I started following GAA in the morning. But over the next month people who rarely watch soccer will be cheering on the Irish team.

Finally, the joke about people cheering in rugby when the ball goes out of play wasn't funny the first time. We'll go ape**** if Richard Dunne hoofs the ball out of play in the last minute if Iniesta is standing behind him waiting to equalise for Spain. As for the forward pass jokes, in soccer a lot of the time its a foul to stand near the goal you're trying to score into.

I don't really understand the need for different sports to slag each other off. Both have a core support, and then less avid followers who watch the big games. Its the same for every sport. Ryder Cup, Grand National, Olympics, etc. all attract casual supporters.

Tox56

daveirl wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Hard to have the kind of giant killing you see in soccer in any other sport since the scoring system in soccer is so allowing of a poor team getting a lucky goal or whatever and winning.[/Quote]

I know, but that doesn't mean you can't have upsets. It's not as unpredictable as soccer but not many sports are.

Ulster sent a bunch of 18-20 year olds just out of school down to Leinster earlier this season against a nearly full strength Leinster team, and it was a very competitive game despite the huge gap in quality (and size and strength) of the teams on paper. They lost, but it was very competitive.

Monty Burnz

Meh. This is the science versus religion argument in the domain of sport, you are never going to convince anyone.

The best anyone can do is approach either game with an open mind.

UnknownSpecies

bullvine wrote: »

Football is so much more skillful than Rugby, from the age of 2, Diego Maradona spent every single minute of his day that was available to him, kicking a football, both on his own and with friends and team mates. Its this dedication that made him the greatest in the world.

Did Brian O'Driscoll do the same with a rugby ball??

Wow, that was a pointless statement. O'Driscoll probably did.

As for the guy who's questioning running being a basic skill; running is definitely a skill in rugby. Running an angle off the base of a ruck or off a centre is a skill that you obviously don't understand. Same with the basic forming of a defensive or offensive line. You must run cohesively or the whole thing falls apart. Running is a whole different story in rugby than it is in football.

Kev_2012

To whoever says that rugby isn't skillful. 2 quality tries from individual pieces of skill.

Isa Nacewa vs Leicester. To throw that amount of dummies and have some of the best players in England start falling over each other and hardly get touched doing so shows brilliant skill IMO. Try do that on a rugby pitch.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=528HoWAprvo

Keith Earls vs Newport-Gwent Dragons. That little deft chip of the ball back into your hands running full belt is quite difficult (a LOT harder with a rugby ball than a football before the GAA heads say otherwise because of the bounce.)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mdkuVKAm15c

geeky

Dravokivich wrote: »

ehm, 2 different skillsets. None of those guys would be too usefull as props and doubt they'd make a highlight reel for a rugby match.

It would be good for a comedy moment or two though. Until the bones started breaking....

bullvine

dorgasm wrote: »

Wow, that was a pointless statement. O'Driscoll probably did.

As for the guy who's questioning running being a basic skill; running is definitely a skill in rugby. Running an angle off the base of a ruck or off a centre is a skill that you obviously don't understand. Same with the basic forming of a defensive or offensive line. You must run cohesively or the whole thing falls apart. Running is a whole different story in rugby than it is in football.

He didnt, he played GAA at an early age! The point I'm trying to make is that most good soccer players I know spent most of their lives kicking a ball on the street from a young age. Where as with Rugby I don't think its the case, its very rare to see a kid with a rugby ball outside my house and I live in prime rugby land 2 mins from a major club with loads of players from the surrounding area.

I don't think it takes the same dedication.

In fairness to anybody saying Rugby is not skillfull, try throwing a ball to one another at speed or kicking it over the bar from 50 yards!

Monty Burnz

aidan24326 wrote: »

Like being able to run? Wow, that's a skill to master alright!

Running in rugby involves at least two components - one is finding space, as in soccer. The problem is that you have to find the space while standing on your own side of the pitch with your opponent watching you, so choosing the lines that you run are critically important - this is perhaps roughly comparable to clever diagonal runs made behind defenders in football.

The other component is evasion. Of course, you have evasion in football, but you are limited by having to control the ball, and your opponent is limited by only being able to tackle the ball, which makes it a very skilful part of the game.

In rugby, you are slightly slowed by carrying the ball, but other than that you are essentially playing a version of schoolyard 'catch' - there's no limitation on how you run, and there's no limitation on the defender tackling you. Thus, this element of rugby is exclusively about pace, power, evasion, deception and acceleration. In this regard it's sport stripped down to its simplest, and is therefore very viscerally exciting to watch and do.

Sindri

Bad Panda wrote: »

You're citing 'being able to run' as a skill!? Hmmm.

Tackle? You ge to use your whole body in rugby to tackle and you've a much broader target. It's much more difficult to time a tackle in football running at pace, winning the ball and not committing a foul at the same time.

Jump?! Seriously! OK, it's easier to jump and catch a ball in your hands than it his to jump and time a header at a cross that's been whipped at you at a pace of about 60mph.

Have you ever tackled anyone in rugby?

The Master of Disaster

St.Spodo wrote: »

The skill level of at least half the players on a rugby pitch is wholly unimpressive. The likes of Paul O'Connell or that other big gormless Limerick lad are revered as great sportsmen. They wouldn't be if they were 5ft 11 and 12 stone. It is often the case that the great footballers become revered in spite of their physical prowess.

St.Spodo wrote: »

Lionel Messi. Born with GHD but transcended this due in no small part to his astonishing skill level. He is only about 5ft 6 now, but is the greatest football in the world.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOXwCZG-eqA

That is all.

Pherekydes

Sindri wrote: »

Your argument is flawed as it is based on something that is partially intangible (rankings) particularly in a game that is tactically based. Did you know how the ranking system even worked before you made that argument? Or did you consider the dis-ingenuousness of a rank to dictate how good a team actually is or it's relative abilities?

I admit I put little thought into the argument based on the rankings. So let's do that now:

At the last RWC, 20 teams qualified for the finals, these were ranked 1-19 plus number 21. Countries ranked 1-8 made the QF. Are the rankings not predictive of playing strength?

In 2003, the first and second ranked teams played for the win.

Two small examples, but...

Monty Burnz

Pherekydes wrote: »

In 2003, the first and second ranked teams played for the win.

Two small examples, but...

I think it's a good point. In rugby, if a team is 20% better, they will win 99% of the time. In football, they will win perhaps 75% of the time.

There are two ways of looking at this. One is that rugby is a 'fairer' game where the better team on the day nearly always wins. Another way to look at it is that upsets are very difficult in rugby, making it much more predictable and less exciting.

This would be less noticeable if the game was played as widely as association football - there would be more teams in each competitive 'tier' - and of course it does not reflect negatively on the game itself. Hurling is a great sport played, unfortunately, by a tiny number of people.

twinytwo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ioyt2zzm530

compared to

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8v-qZFVYnc

how many big girls blouses do you see in the second video??

how much roling around??

how many "men" crying for their mother??

At the end of the day soccer has been destroyed by a bunch over paid pussies who have egos bigger than most countries.

Bad Panda

ormond lad wrote: »

The biggest reason for the increase in popularity of rugby is more the success of the provinces not the National team. Munsters struggle to rise to the top of european rugby in the early noughties and then winning twice in three years followed by Leinsters dominance has had a much bigger role in increasing rugbys popularity than the success of the national side


Much harder to be a good soccer player;)
Not really. The amount of different skills in rugby that have to be mastered is much higher than football like learning how to tackle, ruck, maul, if a forward scrummage, jump in lineout as well as the basics like being able to run etc

+1

No football is not.
I can run fast and have a very good level of fitness, ive very good ball control and can kick a ball very direct very far. Therefore i could play football to a very high level.
If you are so sure that if you were a bit faster and bigger you could play rugby to a fairly high level then why dont you join a club and play. oh wait you'll be found out as a big bullsh*itter

Paul O Connell is a great sportsperson, was near scratch golfer and was a fairly elite level swimmer/ If Paul O Connell was 5ft 11 and 12 stone he'd more than likely have been an outside back and considering the person he is,his levels of determination etc,he'd be a damn good one.


When John Hayes started playing rugby the sport was 5 years away from being a professional sport. He nearly immediately joined one of the strongest club sides in the country and trained under some of the best coaches in the country. It was a completely different era. You will never again see someone start playing the sport so late in their life making it as a top pro unless somebody who is an elite level athlete in a compatible sport takes up rugby for example a track sprinter takes up rugby and plays on the wing and quickly moves up the ranks to become a pro

Sindri wrote: »

Have you ever tackled anyone in rugby?

Yes.

Bad Panda

twinytwo wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ioyt2zzm530

compared to

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8v-qZFVYnc

how many big girls blouses do you see in the second video??

how much roling around??

how many "men" crying for their mother??

At the end of the day soccer has been destroyed by a bunch over paid pussies who have egos bigger than most countries.

Oh come on. More cherry picking. You've taken the worst of Soccer and compared to it to the best of Rugby.

I could show you videos of rugby players being absolute thugs and soccer players' dazzling skills. Not really the same is it?

Monty Burnz

Bad Panda wrote: »

Yes.

Did you hurt yourself?

twinytwo

Bad Panda wrote: »

Oh come on. More cherry picking. You've taken the worst of Soccer and compared to it to the best of Rugby.

I could show you videos of rugby players being absolute thugs and soccer players' dazzling skills. Not really the same is it?

not really the videos are not a direct comparison of the skill envolved in the games but rather used to prove my point. Which is the attitude of the players. Soccer players dont seem to have any self respect.

Dont get me wrong you get morons in both games... but you cannot denie that soccer would be 10 times better if the diving, rolling around and crying to the ref everytime someone trips over invisible objects was removed from the game.

omgitsthelazor

We have successful Irish rugby teams who people can watch every week whereas you have to travel abroad to see any decent standard of soccer. Also nice that our rugby team is made up predominantly of Irish men living in Ireland and not exiles or english men with Irish grannies.

omgitsthelazor

Zab wrote: »

eh? It's nowhere near as popular as football.

This is actually wrong if you check RTE ratings for international soccer games (assuming you mean soccer and not GAA) and in just general stadium attendances. or well if you use any measurement at all.
Soccer has been down to the 4th most followed sport in this country for a few years now.

ghostchant

twinytwo wrote: »

not really the videos are not a direct comparison of the skill envolved in the games but rather used to prove my point. Which is the attitude of the players. Soccer players dont seem to have any self respect.

I'm sure I could find a compilation of "horrific football tackles" to selectively compare to the rugby video you posted, but that would also be cherry-picking.

Balmed Out

i like rugby but would prefer football. I go to live matches of both and I like that theres more scoring in rugby and less diving etc but i just think tactically soccer is in a different ballpark of complexity and I prefer that. Love hurling too, fast and exciting with the possibilities of large leads being overturned reguraly.