Hiya.... I will enter the fray again over the Rugby/NFL - Cricket/MBL comparisons.. Firstly Rugby 1) NFL is an incredibly static game more like chess than sport where as rugby require fare more aerobic capacity operating constantly over 80mins - It is hard to believe that an NFL defensive end/tackle could last 40 minutes constant play let alone 80. 2) NFL player train for one position and are then broken down to a defensive and offensive team - yes both involve running tackling and kicking but there is patently a higher skill level across all these disciplines in individual rugby players -Individual rugby players require a wider range of skills having to be adept in all of them - 3) On a similar topic NFL is really played seriously in one country so realistically is best catagorised as a minority sport whereas Rugby is truly an international sport 4) If NFL players can easily transfer to rugby perhaps you could explain the USA performance internationally - on your argument and with the US population they should be able to field a highly competitive team - also look up Jarryd Hayne - Admittedly not a successful career with the SFO 49er's but similarly I cannot think of a single NFL player who has made any impact in international rugby. - and to use your own word similar arguments apply to the cricket / MLB comparison and you probably have not had much exposure to modern cricket particularly the shorter forms of the game - 20/20 cricket, that probably closest resembles MLB in terms of length of game clearly is the equal (if not more so) in terms of athleticism and skills... I am not actually arguing for one sport over the other but perhaps highlighting a Nth American bias towards it own little sports bubble - that probably also explains why you guys have world series without other any countries competing. cheers Andrew
By "the expert has spoken," I meant Thompson. I'm sure participants in various sports were waiting to see just where he would place them in is hierarchy. Why do academic types so often come off as bags of hot air?
Hiya.... I will enter the fray again over the Rugby/NFL - Cricket/MBL comparisons.. Firstly Rugby 1) NFL is an incredibly static game more like chess than sport where as rugby require fare more aerobic capacity operating constantly over 80mins - It is hard to believe that an NFL defensive end/tackle could last 40 minutes constant play let alone 80. 2) NFL player train for one position and are then broken down to a defensive and offensive team - yes both involve running tackling and kicking but there is patently a higher skill level across all these disciplines in individual rugby players -Individual rugby players require a wider range of skills having to be adept in all of them - 3) On a similar topic NFL is really played seriously in one country so realistically is best catagorised as a minority sport whereas Rugby is truly an international sport 4) If NFL players can easily transfer to rugby perhaps you could explain the USA performance internationally - on your argument and with the US population they should be able to field a highly competitive team - also look up Jarryd Hayne - Admittedly not a successful career with the SFO 49er's but similarly I cannot think of a single NFL player who has made any impact in international rugby. - and to use your own word similar arguments apply to the cricket / MLB comparison and you probably have not had much exposure to modern cricket particularly the shorter forms of the game - 20/20 cricket, that probably closest resembles MLB in terms of length of game clearly is the equal (if not more so) in terms of athleticism and skills... I am not actually arguing for one sport over the other but perhaps highlighting a Nth American bias towards it own little sports bubble - that probably also explains why you guys have world series without other any countries competing. cheers Andrew
Well, the expert has once again spoken. Praise be!
Woops - in his hierarchy.
By "the expert has spoken," I meant Thompson. I'm sure participants in various sports were waiting to see just where he would place them in is hierarchy. Why do academic types so often come off as bags of hot air?