Posted 13 February 2009 - 08:25 PM
I prefer rugby (union or league, there are two very distinct types of rugby) but I can see the qualities of American Footballers.
The point is quite simple some of the NFL guys could survive in Rugby especially wide receivers, running backs some of the more mobile tackles. But they are incredibly specialised athletes who are trained up to exploit the peculiarities of the game they play. Simply put most rugby players have to be more rounded players being able in varying degrees to display a variety of techniques for instance a rugby centre is fundamantally an attacking player however to be the best he must be able to tackle well, pass, kick acurately and far, have vison and a rugby brain and sustain this for 80 minutes. Similary a number 8 has to control the game, tackle from the scrum, be a viable outlet as an attacking runner, take part in mauls, jump in lineouts, pick up and run moves from the back of the scrum including passing, handle the ball in the line etc. Some of the players are truly specialised, such as props or scrum halves but they still have to carry out many other functions although the expectations are far less than in some other positions . In rugby league the elimination of competive scrummaging and the lineout has made the skills of the players even closer where all have to be able to tackle under collosal impacts with little padding.
In American football the players are far more specialised. I'd expect that a running back might be quicker or have a better side-step than a rugby centre, or a wide receiver quicker over 60 metres than a rugby wing, but I wouldn't want to stick them in an unbroken half of 40 mins and expect them to tackle and kick or pass with any ability, but then again they aren't required to or trained to do any of those things. Some of the guys would be manifestly useless in Rugby espcially the big guys at the line of scrimmage who are functionally little more than blockers with the odd exception.
I AM A TWAT
Help
