most recognise Rugby as a minority game of very little skill
Evidence?
You've accepted that the kicking is a real skill, and there is a lot of it in rugby, so surely that disproves your 'very little skill' comment.
When you're running at speed with the ball you need skill to know the exact moment to pass it, and to flick it so that it spins the way it does (I could never do that when I played rugby at school), plus the accuracy to get it to the man so that he hopefully doesn't have to break his stride. I don't know any everyday life situation when we need to do that.
As for tackling... if you get a tackle wrong then it can be very dangerous. Getting it right so that it stops the man without risking injury to either player is a skill.
lets do it one more time....I said from the outset that apart from the kicking in rugby there is very little skill. That bit in bold, just there.................^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Do you disagree with the rest of what I said? Or with what Calydon_road said ("I'd like to see someone with no skill reverse pass the ball 30M whilst taking man and ball")?
Do you disagree with the rest of what I said? Or with what Calydon_road said ("I'd like to see someone with no skill reverse pass the ball 30M whilst taking man and ball")?
Look EA its been a great debate, but its not skill, throwing a ball to someone, whilst smashing into an oppo player, you wont change my mind, I know what I see, I wont change your mind, thats your loss. But as long as you enjoy it........!
Well, I disagree. I think it is a skill as it fits the dictionary definition of a skill. If you really think someone with no skill could do all the things I and others have mentioned then that's your business. I know I won't change your mind.
By Greenie's logic I don't understand why we aren't all playing for England on Friday night, throwing miss passes off our weak hand while sidestepping a 19 stone Fijian.
Or why I have never been asked to field for England in the Ashes, making a ridiculous one handed diving catch before throwing and hitting one stump from the boundary running the non striker out.
Just catching and throwing after all.
Anyway, I'm off to training now. Not really sure why. After all, apparently there are no skills to learn or hone....
The World Cup. The Final. The last second. The most important match of your life. That is the point at which you can demonstrate how much skill you've got. Get it right and you win the World Cup, you're immortalised in English sport and you're knighted.
"The ball came to me. I ran forwards and looked up. I thought to myself "hit it as hard as you can". I knew that, if I hit it hard enough, it would fly miles past, into the crowd, and, by the time the ball had come back, the ref would have blown the whistle and the game would be over and we'd have won. I hit it and, to my surprise, it went in".
"The ball came to me. I shaped to kick with my left foot, but the angle was covered by an opponent. So I shifted my weight, sent the opponent the wrong way and kicked for goal with my right foot. I knew it would go over as I had practised and practised and practised scoring, with either foot, for years".
Now, tell me again, what was the sport you said required no skill..?
FFS - the kicking is the skilled part, never argued that, as for dropping a shoulder with the ball at your feet, like that? Then watch football.
"The only skill in rugby is when a player takes a conversion"..?
Agreed, good point!
It's utterly, demonstrably and ridiculously inaccurate, however.
most recognise Rugby as a minority game of very little skill
Evidence?
You've accepted that the kicking is a real skill, and there is a lot of it in rugby, so surely that disproves your 'very little skill' comment.
When you're running at speed with the ball you need skill to know the exact moment to pass it, and to flick it so that it spins the way it does (I could never do that when I played rugby at school), plus the accuracy to get it to the man so that he hopefully doesn't have to break his stride. I don't know any everyday life situation when we need to do that.
As for tackling... if you get a tackle wrong then it can be very dangerous. Getting it right so that it stops the man without risking injury to either player is a skill.
lets do it one more time....I said from the outset that apart from the kicking in rugby there is very little skill. That bit in bold, just there.................^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Actually you didn't Greenie. You originally said the only skill in rugby was taking conversions.
Rugby league has more skill than union( players switching to union are rapidly picked for national teams) has better attendances and is better to watch ie the whole game isn't kicking the ball off the pitch.
Union is played at a serious level in only 6 countries (UK, lreland, France, Australia, S Africa and new Zealand.
Only in the last of these is it the major sport.
Outside of the USA there are only three important sports in the world: football, football and football.
I love these Rugby vs Football arguments, it certainly brings the knuckle-draggers out their holes!
Better attendances in League?
Aviva Prem (Union): 12,754 average attendance
Super Rugby (League): 9,048 average attendance
Rugby World Cup 2011 (Union): Total attendance 1,477,294 (30,777 per match)
Rugby League World Cup 2013: 458,483 (16,374 per match)
Aviva Prem has clubs all over the country. Super League has 11 clubs along the M62 and 1 club from the border of France and Spain.
Don't get me wrong, I love both League and Union but they're two different sports and it is pointless comparing the two, the tactics used in either are very different. Whether one requires more skill than the other is debatable. League players tend to be fitter/more athletic due to the pace of the game and get hit a lot harder as well. I'm a bit annoyed League is not more popular or even as popular as Union but attempts to expand interest have not really taken off.
People banging on about how much they hate rugby compared to football sound like the people in my office who hate football and wish people liked tennis instead, even though they only like tennis because of strawberries and cream and players wear fashion labels.
most recognise Rugby as a minority game of very little skill
Evidence?
You've accepted that the kicking is a real skill, and there is a lot of it in rugby, so surely that disproves your 'very little skill' comment.
When you're running at speed with the ball you need skill to know the exact moment to pass it, and to flick it so that it spins the way it does (I could never do that when I played rugby at school), plus the accuracy to get it to the man so that he hopefully doesn't have to break his stride. I don't know any everyday life situation when we need to do that.
As for tackling... if you get a tackle wrong then it can be very dangerous. Getting it right so that it stops the man without risking injury to either player is a skill.
lets do it one more time....I said from the outset that apart from the kicking in rugby there is very little skill. That bit in bold, just there.................^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Actually you didn't Greenie. You originally said the only skill in rugby was taking conversions.
Do you disagree with the rest of what I said? Or with what Calydon_road said ("I'd like to see someone with no skill reverse pass the ball 30M whilst taking man and ball")?
Greenie has done an excellent job of WUM meister general on this thread. His first bait was that all rugby players are fat. Despite photographic and common knowledge evidence to the contrary. His failure to respond to the evidence and decision to pretend he was being threatened really made this effort stand out. Bravo!
His second cast of the line was when he said there is no skill. Patently utter bollox.
His third fly cast was claiming people, Charlton fans on a Charlton list were ''rugger buggers''.
Having caught a few nibbles he then claimed with his fourth effort, that people who like Charlton and rugby were calling football fans names like fairies. Demonstrably untrue and another classic ploy of the WUM.
Overall 4/10 for effort and sustainability, marks lost for puerile arguments, more deducted for swearing and abuse towards fellow Charlton fans. Bonus marks for accumulating a couple of Lifers to support the indefensible.
I like Greenie but I think he's on the wind up here
I played rugby for years at a decent standard, I played as a flanker blind or openside. I ended up in that position because it was simple, if opposition has ball you nail them and ensure they have the ball no longer, if you get the ball you look to gain ground then offload often drawing some of the opposition main tackling bodies. The set plays and tactic rehearsals needed are way beyond anything I did with football (im absolutely not saying I like rugby more than football) as I said earlier the fly and scrum halves need to have a higher level of sporting intelligence than you would appreciate unless you played the game. Again, not saying I prefer rugby. The skill element is a bit unfair too, yes. Anyone can throw and catch an object, to do so when moving at speed, accurately, with 18 stone of front row bearing down on you requires no small amount of skill and guts.
Horses for courses and getting back to the subject matter at hand. I'd be intrigued to see a rugby referee officiate a football game.
Football refs moan about the lack of respect from the players but the players gob off and behave the way they do because they know they will get away with it. Arguing with referees is a waste of time, breath and energy, it also ensures focus is lost (our defending last weekend being a prime example) if all footballers knew hey would walk if they trapped off and dissented a referee it would stop pretty quickly. Beat in mind I never had a rugby ref who took exception to industrial language and I have a mouth like a sailors parrot. They were pretty happy as long as it wasn't directed at them and was used in encouragement or frustration. A prolonged verbal assault on an opponent you got told to shut up by your own captain or laughed at.
I love these Rugby vs Football arguments, it certainly brings the knuckle-draggers out their holes!
Better attendances in League?
Aviva Prem (Union): 12,754 average attendance
Super Rugby (League): 9,048 average attendance
Rugby World Cup 2011 (Union): Total attendance 1,477,294 (30,777 per match)
Rugby League World Cup 2013: 458,483 (16,374 per match)
Aviva Prem has clubs all over the country. Super League has 11 clubs along the M62 and 1 club from the border of France and Spain.
Don't get me wrong, I love both League and Union but they're two different sports and it is pointless comparing the two, the tactics used in either are very different. Whether one requires more skill than the other is debatable. League players tend to be fitter/more athletic due to the pace of the game and get hit a lot harder as well. I'm a bit annoyed League is not more popular or even as popular as Union but attempts to expand interest have not really taken off.
People banging on about how much they hate rugby compared to football sound like the people in my office who hate football and wish people liked tennis instead, even though they only like tennis because of strawberries and cream and players wear fashion labels.
In your office. Don't you mean in your staff room?
He just wants to referee a sport that that has some skill. Always makes me laugh when rugger buggers give it the big un about lack of discipline in football, when the reality is that in rugby the snide shit that goes on in the scums and rucks and also blind side punching etc is far worse. Shit sport for fat blokes.
Oh how I would LOVE you to say that to, oh I dont know, Dan Carter. I would pay to see the result. Or this fat bloke
I'd pay double to see you whisper that in front of this lot.
Why what would they do? Will I get duffed up? They wouldn't change my mind! Shit sport with fuck all skill level unless they're kicking a conversion.
A more ignorant comment has not been posted since someone last defended Tony Blair.
A sport for fat blokes - no retraction forthcoming?
No mate. I don't know how many times I gotta say it.
Look, I know we lost, but slagging off another sport with a demonstrably false statement isn't helping your case. Saying something that is patently wrong many times doesn't make it right. But carry on saying it if it makes you feel better.
Look, I said it before we lost, not that has anything to do with it. You like the game for fatties, I don't. If you enjoy it crack on I prefer sports based on skill and not brute force.
No issue with people not liking other sports, hey I find F1 very dull when others find it thrilling, but to slag something off with ridiculous made up statements is slightly off IMO.
'Only played by fatties'....'no skill involved'....hmm. I suggest you go against everything you believe in and tune into a couple of the world cup games if you want to see what it is really about.
Show me an everyday example of skill in rugby then. Lets look at it objectively, the ball (shaped for catching) is passed directly to someone, not in front and not behind, lets face it most people can catch. At the line outs they dont even have to jump, they are lifted, so brute force not skill. You have two types of rugby players, those that can run fast (not a skill) and those that are big units (again being a big guy is not a skill). The only skill in rugby is when a player takes a conversion, but if kicking a ball floats your boat then watch the beautiful game (its called that for a reason). Now, I have never said that Rugby matches cannot be exciting, Im sure some are, but do not confuse your love and excitement for a sport as skill. Oh yes BTW I played the game for 3 years.
I'm not even going to justify this with a proper response as you clearly just won't get it, but that is frankly one of the most ridiculous post's I've seen.
Those of us that play the game, watch the game and can appreciate the game will understand why skill is involved in rugby.
I dread to think what level you played at for 3 years if you just think it is fat men running around with no skill.
Typical cop out, show me or tell me so I can understand then, the thing is, its just a came of catch, we can all catch.
I don't think anyone can justify simplifying rugby when you look at the intelligence of
I love these Rugby vs Football arguments, it certainly brings the knuckle-draggers out their holes!
Better attendances in League?
Aviva Prem (Union): 12,754 average attendance
Super Rugby (League): 9,048 average attendance
Rugby World Cup 2011 (Union): Total attendance 1,477,294 (30,777 per match)
Rugby League World Cup 2013: 458,483 (16,374 per match)
Aviva Prem has clubs all over the country. Super League has 11 clubs along the M62 and 1 club from the border of France and Spain.
Don't get me wrong, I love both League and Union but they're two different sports and it is pointless comparing the two, the tactics used in either are very different. Whether one requires more skill than the other is debatable. League players tend to be fitter/more athletic due to the pace of the game and get hit a lot harder as well. I'm a bit annoyed League is not more popular or even as popular as Union but attempts to expand interest have not really taken off.
People banging on about how much they hate rugby compared to football sound like the people in my office who hate football and wish people liked tennis instead, even though they only like tennis because of strawberries and cream and players wear fashion labels.
In your office. Don't you mean in your staff room?
most recognise Rugby as a minority game of very little skill
Evidence?
You've accepted that the kicking is a real skill, and there is a lot of it in rugby, so surely that disproves your 'very little skill' comment.
When you're running at speed with the ball you need skill to know the exact moment to pass it, and to flick it so that it spins the way it does (I could never do that when I played rugby at school), plus the accuracy to get it to the man so that he hopefully doesn't have to break his stride. I don't know any everyday life situation when we need to do that.
As for tackling... if you get a tackle wrong then it can be very dangerous. Getting it right so that it stops the man without risking injury to either player is a skill.
lets do it one more time....I said from the outset that apart from the kicking in rugby there is very little skill. That bit in bold, just there.................^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Actually you didn't Greenie. You originally said the only skill in rugby was taking conversions.
Yes they kick conversions don't they?
You specifically said conversions. Are you now moving the goalposts? (See what I did there...).
If you had said the only skill in football is taking penalties, and then tried to say you meant all other kinds of kicking, people might think you a little foolish...
most recognise Rugby as a minority game of very little skill
Evidence?
You've accepted that the kicking is a real skill, and there is a lot of it in rugby, so surely that disproves your 'very little skill' comment.
When you're running at speed with the ball you need skill to know the exact moment to pass it, and to flick it so that it spins the way it does (I could never do that when I played rugby at school), plus the accuracy to get it to the man so that he hopefully doesn't have to break his stride. I don't know any everyday life situation when we need to do that.
As for tackling... if you get a tackle wrong then it can be very dangerous. Getting it right so that it stops the man without risking injury to either player is a skill.
lets do it one more time....I said from the outset that apart from the kicking in rugby there is very little skill. That bit in bold, just there.................^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Actually you didn't Greenie. You originally said the only skill in rugby was taking conversions.
Yes they kick conversions don't they?
You specifically said conversions. Are you now moving the goalposts? (See what I did there...).
If you had said the only skill in football is taking penalties, and then tried to say you meant all other kinds of kicking, people might think you a little foolish...
Algarve...I have been found out......I cannot comment further........except to say I hope we win the WC.
Interesting stuff on this thread. I was brought up by a rugby mad father and my secondary school played rugby not football. I was fly half and my footsteps were followed by Owen Farrell no less, a fellow St Georges, Harpenden old boy. But I was always football mad and as a kid that's how it should be. As has been said you can play it anywhere and don't need a ref.
The rugby lads at my school were mostly shocking at other sports. Our cricket team in the early days was just eleven from the rugby team. We never won a match as you'd expect with a prop forward opening the bowling. So I see the merit in the argument that rugby is a sport for failed footballers, hand on heart I'd say it is although as money flows into the game I'd guess more lads would choose it over football.
There is though, in my view, plenty of skill involved. It'll never be as skillful as football but skillful it is nonetheless. It's certainly not a great spectator sport as often only thr players can see the ball. I'm looking forward to the World Cup and it is great to be hosting it (even using football grounds, Henry.) When Charlton are going through the mill it can be advantageous to be a multi-sport fan. The Ashes kept me going through the summer and the rugby will see me through October. There's room for more than just football.
So good luck England tomorrow night and onwards through the tournament. I shall be staying on in Cardiff next Sat to watch our game with Wales. A memorable day could be in store. For those not sure about rugby, just give it a go. It's not all tweed jacketed posh blokes who go to it. And it's actually a sport that we're mostly decent at. What's not to like?
Yours in all sports (bar F1. I'll need big convincing with that one.)
Rugby isn't bad because it has no skill or no fans. Of course it's a skilled sport with in some parts of the world very many fans indeed. Of course it's for people who take pride in their fitness, not fatties.
BUT
The 'against rugby' argument needs to get back on track It's a bad sport because of its fundamental logic and aesthetic. It's trench warfare cosplay for muscle fascists. It has a culture of snooty superiority and beastly phallocentric behaviour that dictates a sort of laddish camaraderie to the detriment of the weak (especially the 'weaker sex', who are expected to recognise just what 'real men' are - rugby players). It fosters a repulsive culture (at least, in England) - and for what? A sport where nothing elegant, surprising or truly transgressive occurs? A pure war of attrition where the greater efficiency of physical endeavour prevails? That's basketball! Basketball without the style.
Rugby isn't bad because it has no skill or no fans. Of course it's a skilled sport with in some parts of the world very many fans indeed. Of course it's for people who take pride in their fitness, not fatties.
BUT
The 'against rugby' argument needs to get back on track It's a bad sport because of its fundamental logic and aesthetic. It's trench warfare cosplay for muscle fascists. It has a culture of snooty superiority and beastly phallocentric behaviour that dictates a sort of laddish camaraderie to the detriment of the weak (especially the 'weaker sex', who are expected to recognise just what 'real men' are - rugby players). It fosters a repulsive culture (at least, in England) - and for what? A sport where nothing elegant, surprising or truly transgressive occurs? A pure war of attrition where the greater efficiency of physical endeavour prevails? That's basketball! Basketball without the style.
Listen to the CL posh blokes words! Anyone know what they mean? ;o)
Comments
Sidestepping, timing a swerve, a disguised change of pace, picking the optimum line to run to receive a pass to name but four running skills.
Others above have already covered the different types of kick and scrummaging, mauling and rucking techniques.
That bit in bold, just there.................^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Or why I have never been asked to field for England in the Ashes, making a ridiculous one handed diving catch before throwing and hitting one stump from the boundary running the non striker out.
Just catching and throwing after all.
Anyway, I'm off to training now. Not really sure why. After all, apparently there are no skills to learn or hone....
Rugby league has more skill than union( players switching to union are rapidly picked for national teams) has better attendances and is better to watch ie the whole game isn't kicking the ball off the pitch.
Union is played at a serious level in only 6 countries (UK, lreland, France, Australia, S Africa and new Zealand.
Only in the last of these is it the major sport.
Outside of the USA there are only three important sports in the world: football, football and football.
Better attendances in League?
Aviva Prem (Union): 12,754 average attendance
Super Rugby (League): 9,048 average attendance
Rugby World Cup 2011 (Union): Total attendance 1,477,294 (30,777 per match)
Rugby League World Cup 2013: 458,483 (16,374 per match)
Aviva Prem has clubs all over the country. Super League has 11 clubs along the M62 and 1 club from the border of France and Spain.
Don't get me wrong, I love both League and Union but they're two different sports and it is pointless comparing the two, the tactics used in either are very different. Whether one requires more skill than the other is debatable. League players tend to be fitter/more athletic due to the pace of the game and get hit a lot harder as well. I'm a bit annoyed League is not more popular or even as popular as Union but attempts to expand interest have not really taken off.
People banging on about how much they hate rugby compared to football sound like the people in my office who hate football and wish people liked tennis instead, even though they only like tennis because of strawberries and cream and players wear fashion labels.
His first bait was that all rugby players are fat. Despite photographic and common knowledge evidence to the contrary. His failure to respond to the evidence and decision to pretend he was being threatened really made this effort stand out. Bravo!
His second cast of the line was when he said there is no skill. Patently utter bollox.
His third fly cast was claiming people, Charlton fans on a Charlton list were ''rugger buggers''.
Having caught a few nibbles he then claimed with his fourth effort, that people who like Charlton and rugby were calling football fans names like fairies. Demonstrably untrue and another classic ploy of the WUM.
Overall 4/10 for effort and sustainability, marks lost for puerile arguments, more deducted for swearing and abuse towards fellow Charlton fans. Bonus marks for accumulating a couple of Lifers to support the indefensible.
Top quality entertainment though. 6/10
I played rugby for years at a decent standard, I played as a flanker blind or openside. I ended up in that position because it was simple, if opposition has ball you nail them and ensure they have the ball no longer, if you get the ball you look to gain ground then offload often drawing some of the opposition main tackling bodies. The set plays and tactic rehearsals needed are way beyond anything I did with football (im absolutely not saying I like rugby more than football) as I said earlier the fly and scrum halves need to have a higher level of sporting intelligence than you would appreciate unless you played the game. Again, not saying I prefer rugby. The skill element is a bit unfair too, yes. Anyone can throw and catch an object, to do so when moving at speed, accurately, with 18 stone of front row bearing down on you requires no small amount of skill and guts.
Horses for courses and getting back to the subject matter at hand. I'd be intrigued to see a rugby referee officiate a football game.
Football refs moan about the lack of respect from the players but the players gob off and behave the way they do because they know they will get away with it. Arguing with referees is a waste of time, breath and energy, it also ensures focus is lost (our defending last weekend being a prime example) if all footballers knew hey would walk if they trapped off and dissented a referee it would stop pretty quickly. Beat in mind I never had a rugby ref who took exception to industrial language and I have a mouth like a sailors parrot. They were pretty happy as long as it wasn't directed at them and was used in encouragement or frustration. A prolonged verbal assault on an opponent you got told to shut up by your own captain or laughed at.
Now American Football......that is a shit sport.....any takers!
No skill???
Hmmmm......
If you had said the only skill in football is taking penalties, and then tried to say you meant all other kinds of kicking, people might think you a little foolish...
The rugby lads at my school were mostly shocking at other sports. Our cricket team in the early days was just eleven from the rugby team. We never won a match as you'd expect with a prop forward opening the bowling. So I see the merit in the argument that rugby is a sport for failed footballers, hand on heart I'd say it is although as money flows into the game I'd guess more lads would choose it over football.
There is though, in my view, plenty of skill involved. It'll never be as skillful as football but skillful it is nonetheless. It's certainly not a great spectator sport as often only thr players can see the ball. I'm looking forward to the World Cup and it is great to be hosting it (even using football grounds, Henry.) When Charlton are going through the mill it can be advantageous to be a multi-sport fan. The Ashes kept me going through the summer and the rugby will see me through October. There's room for more than just football.
So good luck England tomorrow night and onwards through the tournament. I shall be staying on in Cardiff next Sat to watch our game with Wales. A memorable day could be in store. For those not sure about rugby, just give it a go. It's not all tweed jacketed posh blokes who go to it. And it's actually a sport that we're mostly decent at. What's not to like?
Yours in all sports (bar F1. I'll need big convincing with that one.)
9goals
What's happened in this thread???
Rugby isn't bad because it has no skill or no fans. Of course it's a skilled sport with in some parts of the world very many fans indeed. Of course it's for people who take pride in their fitness, not fatties.
BUT
The 'against rugby' argument needs to get back on track
Anyone know what they mean?
;o)