afl vs rugby league

[penga]

i am always fightin with my mates about the superior league (of course we all know that league is ****)

anyway so they always tell me about how good the players are and their skills are exceptional and ra ra ra ra ra, what a crock

anyways, i asked my mate what a league player will usually cover in a game, and when i said nathan buckley covered 19.1km last week he got all narky coz he knew he had lost

anyways, my question is... does anyone know how far the average stat is for distance run on a league game?

we then watched a bit of the replay of collingwood carlton match and he never stopped sayin that how all the players were standin around and werent sprintin and stuff, he also reckons that league players probably cover more than that of an afl player

im so sick of fightin with my mates about this, they should just bow down and realise that footy is the only game worth callin football and a sport...

[desredandwhite]

Y'know, it's funny. I spend a lot of time defending league to my Aussie rules mates, yet more time defending aussie rules to my league mates and the rest of the time defending soccer from the lot of 'em!!

They're different games, pure and simple. An average aussie rules player would get pounded into the dirt playing rugby or league, the average league player would be a wheezing asthmatic heap on the ground after 3 quarters of aussie rules and the lot of them would be completely lost on a soccer field.

Of course, you get exceptional players who could probably do pretty well at both, like Paul Kelly or Laurie Daley (covered in PK's new book!!!)

Also, it depends on the positions etc. You couldn't argue, for example, that Tony Lockett covered more ground in a match than a rugby league winger. League is all about short explosive sprinting and strength, aussie rules is more about longer term endurance and 360' awareness.

It's a useless argument (though perhaps not as useless as trying to discuss politics or religion!!). There is no known way that you can prove that one sport is "better" than another. Just enjoy them all ;)

[Craig]

I disagree with you Des about AFL players being pounded if they played league. Look at the best league player - Andrew Johns. He is no bigger or stronger than almost any afl player, yet he doesn't get pounded does he. He is good because he is an excellent kick, I think afl players would have the wood over him on the kicking side. I'm not suggesting that an afl player could be as good as Johns, just using it as an example to show that they could actually play the game well.

Ok maybe footy players would get pounded if they were forwards, though they would make excellent half or full backs.

Daniel Chick would be a good league player.

[desredandwhite]

physically the same perhaps, but johns would be more used to the contact and hits of league - what I'm saying is that each sport requires different disciplines. it'd take a huge amount of work for a player from one to switch to the other and be immediately as good.

You're comparing two different things really. It's like saying apples are a tastier fruit than oranges.

all depends :)

[Craig]

Definately agree it's hard to compare as they are different sports. I guess I'm just saying that it would be easier to go to league from footy than from league to footy.

[Charlie]

In about 1950 RL and AR officials met and developed a game they thought would be the perfect blend of Footy and League. They wanted to create a national game. They then got two teams of players, I *think* they were from the VFL and NSWRL, and had them play a match to trial the new game.

It was so bad that it was NEVER suggested again, let alone played.

To me that shows that the two games shouldn't be compared.*









*Because Aussie Rules is 1,000,000,000,321.243 times better than thugby league... and don't get me STARTED on union!

[treespirit]

Originally posted by desredandwhite
physically the same perhaps, but johns would be more used to the contact and hits of league - what I'm saying is that each sport requires different disciplines. it'd take a huge amount of work for a player from one to switch to the other and be immediately as good.

You're comparing two different things really. It's like saying apples are a tastier fruit than oranges.

all depends :) Everyone knows apples are better than oranges. Oranges don't keep the doctor away, after all.

[jude_boltons_babe]

huys send me to jail i love both afl and nrl

[vagary]

what's the difference between league and union?

[penga]

Originally posted by Craig
Look at the best league player - Andrew Johns. He is no bigger or stronger than almost any afl player

u gotta be kidding, i shook his hand at a powderfinger concert and he was short bout 5'8 but about 5'8 across his shoulders and about 5'8 deep in his chest... very solid boy

[penga]

i wasnt trying to compare the two games mainly and as des said noone will ever convince me that nrl is actually a sport (id rather see em run at a brick wall - about the same really)

my main question was does anyone know how far they actually run in an nrl game on average?

[bricon]

There are usually around 60 complete sets of tackles in an NRL game and each completion probably averages around 60 metres gained; there are a lesser number of incomplete sets (around 15 per game) where the gain would be very small. There are also occasional breaks by an individual and an allowance has to be made for players running back on-side etc.

Using this very rough scenario as a guide I reckon that the average NRL player would cover around 5 or 6 KM per match.

[penga]

Originally posted by bricon
There are usually around 60 complete sets of tackles in an NRL game and each completion probably averages around 60 metres gained; there are a lesser number of incomplete sets (around 15 per game) where the gain would be very small. There are also occasional breaks by an individual and an allowance has to be made for players running back on-side etc.

Using this very rough scenario as a guide I reckon that the average NRL player would cover around 5 or 6 KM per match.

seems like a pretty good educated estimate

now, who would run the least in an afl team (im thinking forward and back KPP)? and how far would they run???

[motorace_182]

This is a large topic for debate between me and my mates. I always compare the crowd sizes, they struggle to get 10,000 to most and are proud of 20,000. Then they say but so many games are played in Sydney of League and not AFL. But what about the 6million in NSW and i think 3.4 in VIC, and Syd alone has 4mill.

And then look at the smarts of the player. They are the dumbest iv ever met. Their skills are not even worth getting into and their fitness is pathetic. Only one player i can think of would match the AFL boys - Darryn Lockyer. He would be a darn good player, pity its wasted on a game like league.

League is like a modern form of union. My theory is that a few Union players got too soft with the yobbo rules and made union where the rules are a bit better. Without the rucking and a count for the tackle.

But what is the point of a league scrum?

[Charlie]

Ah.... league was actually a breakaway from union.... not the other way around.

[superswans19]

Distances in Aussie rules can vary from around 2km/match for full forwards/backs to up to 15-20km for centremen. League varies from about 2-6km on average.

[motorace_182]

League is like a modern form of union. My theory is that a few Union players got too soft with the yobbo rules and made union where the rules are a bit better. Without the rucking and a count for the tackle.

Sorry sub in league to union and vica verca, at that late at night im in a rush

[Skells]

I'm not a fan of either league or union, when you have to go backwards to go forwards reminds me of the saying "two steps forward one step back".

It is just what you were bought up with and where your from (AFL or rugby states).

The only League matches I will watch are state or origin and sometimes the finals. I also sometimes enjoy watching super 12 but with both rugby codes I still don't understand all of the rules.

AFL wins hands down IMO.

[desredandwhite]

You know, that argument (going backwards to go forwards) is the same one my girlfriend uses...

But it's really no more ludicrous than ARF's rule that you need to punch the ball instead of throwing it. surely the throw is more efficient, and easily controlled? It's the rules! :)

"better" is subjective, when you're comparing sports. If you make no effort to UNDERSTAND the game (bear in mind that simply knowing the rules is NOT understanding the game) then you can't make an informed decision. You can like it or dislike it - that's it!

Just enjoy what you enjoy and if other people don't like it? it's not your problem.

[Skells]

That comment (among others) is used as a joke and no offense was intended.

I have only been to see one live league match and was not in a fit state to appreciate the game.

The way I look at it is each to their own, everyone knows what they enjoy and it's not up to someone else to make that decision for them.

[desredandwhite]

no worries skells - "to each their own" is definitely the correct attitude. I don't really get american football, but gazillions of people love it, so maybe they just understand it on a different level to me. Whatever.

[snajik]

I find that Rugby (both League and Union) supporters have a tendency to be extra defensive about their respective codes. As soon as they find out that you prefer AFL, they begin to gear any subsequent conversations around what a bad game AFL is and how their form of Rugby is better. Sounds a tad insecure to me.

I wonder if the two really need to be compared? Is there any reason why you can't like both Vivaldi and Marilyn Manson? Or enjoy one and ignore the other? You like what you like and if you can get into both like Des, then great. Personally, it's a passion thing for me. It feels more natural to devote my passion to the Swans. I simply don't feel the connection with teams from other codes. Admiittedly I have seen great games in all of these codes but they don't seem to happen often enough. Supporting two teams simultaneously with the same degree of passion would be a bit too draining methinks.

For me the other codes are all inherently deficient in some way.

League - Super League destroyed any traditional integrity it may have had. It is also a bit predictable with the five plays then kick routine. For the spectator it doesn't quite work at the game. A lot of it revolves around two columns of blokes moving backwards and forwards up and down the field. Endurance is also an issue.

Union - Have a real problem with union. The scoring system is arse about. 3 points for a penalty when you can seldom work out what it was for is wrong. Large sections of the game include blokes rolling around on the ground or trying to rake the ball out from under someone's head; mauls and rucks; or interminable shots for goal. A very boring game indeed. Even more so now that it has become a corporate plaything. The super 12 idea leaves me cold. No tradition, and most of the teams seem to have monikers instead of geographic origins.

Soccer - I quite like soccer, but the problem here is that two teams can play for 90 minutes without scoring a goal. This strikes me as being a little bit futile. Another shortcoming is the tendency of players to milk free kicks and penalties. How do these guys get so hurt so badly so often and recover so quickly? Now if every game was like the Burnley - Watford clash on the weekend (with a 7-4 scoreline) it would be far more exciting. My suggested improvement for soccer would be to have goals that stretch from corner post to corner post with 3 goal keepers each. Then we would have a game.

NFL - I must confess I am a fan. Since 95 I have been following the Cleveland Browns. The beauty of the NFL is that the season runs from September - January nicely complementing AFL. A lot of sport fans slag it off, usually because they don't understand it. It's true that without some basic knowledge of the game it's hard to warm to, but I reckon it's worth the effort. There are some great athletes going around in the NFL. However, it is a very desultory game. It is also short (in actual game time) and players may be on the field for less than 30 minutes each game.

AFL - The only thing about AFL that pisses me off is when the Swans lose.

With regard to the original League / Union split, I have been told that Union had upper middle / middle class origins. When it was played by members of the working class they found that they couldn't afford to get injured and miss work (as there was no compensation) so were forced to form a professional competition. Meanwhile their more wealthier teammates either didn't need to work or were not reliant on it to survive, so getting injured playing Union wasn't an issue. Any one else heard this tale?

[desredandwhite]

DM has brought up a good point here - It's a lot easier to warm to a certain sport if you are emotionally invested in a team's fortunes. For example, I can get pretty involved when the Eels are playing, or when the Wallabies are playing. I might have a look when other teams are playing, but I won't enjoy it as much, or have the same degree of fear when the opposition look like scoring ;)

There are other sports I enjoy just for the sake of watching the game - Aussie rules and soccer in particular.

People get fired up about this issue because they get emotionally involved. An insult to the code is by extension an insult to the person who chose to follow it. It's a little different to the team vs team argument though, as the sports are not REALLY in direct competition.

[robbieando]

I have no problems with both forms of Rugby and in fact I will be at the World Cup later in the year and I might go to a few Storm matches later in the season. Overall I love Sport but to me only 3 sports count - Aussie Rules (Swans) Soccer (Rangers) Baseball (Seattle Mariners)

I could watch these three sports all day

[NMWBloods]

Great post Snajik - pretty much agree with all of that.

In terms of football, AFL rules!! I enjoy watching any AFL, no matter who is playing - unless it is a blowout between a crap team and a team I hate who is winning.

I quite like NFL too, but you really need to understand what's going on to appreciate it.

I find Union boring as hell and not much of a spectacle. League is easier to follow but also fairly dull to watch. Also, I used to follow the NRL when I was about 12 - I reckon that's the mental age it is aimed at... :p

Soccer is fascinating, yet it needs something to make it good - either big teams, big names, big occasions or big crowds. I reckon dumping offside would help a lot to scoring more goals.

In terms of other sports, I think basketball is one of the best games to watch, but like most US sports, understanding the rules helps a lot.

[Skells]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by NMWBloods

I reckon dumping offside would help a lot to scoring more goals.

NMWBloods, I play Hockey and a few years ago they abolished the offside rule. This IMO was the best thing they could have done as the final scores in the games have increased. The speed of the game has increased and it makes it more pleasing for the spectator as there is more scoring. I think that soccer officials should consider removing this rule.

If there is no offside it is one less thing for the umpires to have to worry about and then they might start getting some of the other decisions right. ;)

[penga]

great post snajik

obviously im a fan of AFL, none of my friends are... im starting to realise that im a non-conformist and maybe i follow afl to play devil's advocate to all the bogans that like nrl (no offence des, ie bogan) :D not really, there is a real buzz about afl that i think alot of sports lack... when u take an objective individual to a game, theyll love it! i think one factor that takes me back to the footy over and over is the feeling you have entering the stadium, u get that innocent little kid excitement all over! :) never fails

union - i quite like, must admit that i dont watch it much... id like to get into the super 12 though... one thing that i like about union is that they actually use their feet therefore fulfilling the name of football... i find union not as static as what league is

league - too short (time wise and field wise) when i go to an nrl game at full time it feels like it should be half time... ill always go for the team that is down, only way that makes the game interesting imo

nfl - i really enjoy nfl... i like watching the replays when theyre on espn, ie rather than the live game as you dont have to wait for the time outs, two minute warnings and play calling, play after play happens in quick succession... that is my main problem with nfl not enough game time

soccer - offside should definitely be dropped!

[robbieando]

Originally posted by penga
soccer - offside should definitely be dropped!

If you do that whats to stop Strikers camping out on the goalline waiting for long balls. It would become to predictable and ruin soccer.

[penga]

Originally posted by robbieando
If you do that whats to stop Strikers camping out on the goalline waiting for long balls. It would become to predictable and ruin soccer.

just means that defenders would have to cover more space... whats to say that soccer isnt ruined already with the low score lines (tongue firmly in cheek) :D

[Skells]

When offside was dropped from hockey there was the same concern about strikers camping in the goals. This hasn't happened as the defender's have to mark the opposition strikers more carefully (on their toes) and this forces the strikers to lead more offten to make opportunities. IMO this makes the game faster and more exiting to watch.

[NMWBloods]

One thing I do hate about League and Union is that people call them "the footy". They aren't footy - kicking is not the major part of the game!!

[snajik]

With the exception of rushed behinds, AFL is the only (football) code where scoring is acheived exclusively by foot. Hence AFL is the only genuine form of football!

Meanwhile Penga, you shouldn't be using non-conformist in the perjorative. It simply means that you've done a bit more thinking than your average Joe, assessed a few more options, and arrived at your own conclusion.

[penga]

Originally posted by snajik
With the exception of rushed behinds, AFL is the only (football) code where scoring is acheived exclusively by foot. Hence AFL is the only genuine form of football!

Meanwhile Penga, you shouldn't be using non-conformist in the perjorative. It simply means that you've done a bit more thinking than your average Joe, assessed a few more options, and arrived at your own conclusion.

scuse my ignorance, but what is perjorative? thats a big word! :confused:

[snajik]

Sorry, wasn't trying to be highbrow. Perjorative would mean that the word has negative connotations. For example, a term such as un-Australian is one that is currently doing the rounds. Often used in the form of slang labels to put someone / something down, ie greenie, yuppie, commie, fascist etc.

Therefore you shouldn't attach a sense of shame to being a non-conformist. Feel free to embrace it. It can be a good thing too.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by snajik
With the exception of rushed behinds, AFL is the only (football) code where scoring is acheived exclusively by foot. Hence AFL is the only genuine form of football!

Soccer...?

[bricon]

Originally posted by NMWBloods
Soccer...?


A soccer goal can be scored from any part of the body except the hands. Most common (apart from a goal by foot) are headed goals; deflections from a player's body/torso are also quite common.

[NMWBloods]

Originally posted by bricon
A soccer goal can be scored from any part of the body except the hands. Most common (apart from a goal by foot) are headed goals; deflections from a player's body/torso are also quite common.

But in AFL scores can be made by any part of the body also, the same as soccer. If the original post had meant goals then I would agree.