posted on Sep, 14 2003 @ 10:37 PM
Unfortunately us Englanders rarely get the decent fights on TV, unless of course you fancy paying �20 to watch Lennox.
Anyway, my reply here is mainly aimed at the Rugby/American Football comments. I play both sports and have done semi-professionally and so would like
to think I have a good knowledge of both sports respectively.
Anyone who watches them or casually has thrown a ball around can easily speak their mind, but unless you've played both I think it is unfair to call
one nation's national sport a pansy game.
American football is by far rougher, and can you guess why, the body armour. Since we are more physically padded for American football, we can hit
harder and push our defensive tackling more so than in rubgy. No idiot no matter how many pints he has had will go head first with an offensive runner
in a rugby match unless you want a nice concussion and a broken nose.
Rugby is alot more enduring, the lack of timeouts and play breaks means you are always on the move. I like rugby for this reason, as I like football
for the opposite reason. I certainly would agree you need bigger balls to play rugby though, no padding means a higher likelihood of injury.
In the end though, they are both awesome and exciting games for their respective gameplay. Remember, depending on where you grow up or happen to live,
the chance of playing one or the other is difficult, so don't put down people for having a lack of choice on what is on the national sports channels.