Which sport is more manly American Football or Rugby

[d-quik]

I would include Aussie rules football but I dont know what it is.

Anyways, which (in your opinion) is a more tough/rough/painful sport.

Rugby has no protection and people need endurence while football has more short distance hitting and bigger people.

[Coventrysucks]

I haven't seen much American Football, as coverage tends is limited on the terrestrial channels in the UK, and usually in the small hours of the morning.

From what I have seen though, I'm not impressed.

There seem to be huge bouts of people doing nothing, then a sudden, brief flurry of activity.

You can't easily get into it because they keep stopping so much, and you have no idea what is going on. Therefore I tend to loose interest pretty quickly.

Rugby is much more watchable. There aren't as many stoppages, and it is quite easy to pick up the rules.

As for which is more "manly" I'd definately say rugby.

American Footballers wear pads: You bunch of pansys!
Helmets? From the stereotypical view we get over here, there isn't much to protect in there.


Rugby players are a vicious bunch. You have people stamping/ rucking on other people (with proper studded rugby boots) and some of the tackles are almost sickening.
Dump tackles are particularly fun (to watch).

And you'd have to be pretty sure of your masculinity to be able to stick your head between someone's legs in a scrum, and not think anything of it.

[Chinky_boi]

Originally Posted by Coventrysucks

I haven't seen much American Football, as coverage tends is limited on the terrestrial channels in the UK, and usually in the small hours of the morning.

From what I have seen though, I'm not impressed.

There seem to be huge bouts of people doing nothing, then a sudden, brief flurry of activity.

You can't easily get into it because they keep stopping so much, and you have no idea what is going on. Therefore I tend to loose interest pretty quickly.

Rugby is much more watchable. There aren't as many stoppages, and it is quite easy to pick up the rules.

As for which is more "manly" I'd definately say rugby.

American Footballers wear pads: You bunch of pansys!
Helmets? From the stereotypical view we get over here, there isn't much to protect in there.


Rugby players are a vicious bunch. You have people stamping/ rucking on other people (with proper studded rugby boots) and some of the tackles are almost sickening.
Dump tackles are particularly fun (to watch).

And you'd have to be pretty sure of your masculinity to be able to stick your head between someone's legs in a scrum, and not think anything of it.

but that is because american football player are like 6'6 300+lb so they do need padding but i find rugby more manly.

[Bladerider]

Well,

I have played both quite alot.

I am 6foot tall, and weighed in at a rather muscular 18.5 stone when I was a defensive tackle. I also used to be a prop when I played rugby, but alas stopped playing when I was 15 as I just got bored running myslef to death!!

As far as which is the most dangerous, or which is the most overtly painful/brutish then American Football wins by a mile. You tend to think twice in rugby whereas the padding gives you a sense of invincibility with AF !! lol

J.

[Sweeney921]

i think it's a tie. Rugby has no pads, but football has massive players. I know very well what it's like to be smashed by one of them, and it isn't quite a walk in the park. I don't have any idea how rugby is, I don't even watch it, but I hear the players make full use of "full contact." However, rugby players are all smaller than say a defensive end (average 6', 200 pounds).

I love football, and u won't be able to make me think it is a wussy sport, so don't try changing my mind.

[NAZCA C2]

I would say rugby is more manly but rugby doesnt have players like Larry Allen. For those of you who don't know who Larry Allen is let me inform you. Larry Allen is a offensive lineman, he is 6' 3" and 325lbs. His job is to push other 300+ lb players around all game long and he does his job better than anyone in the NFL. He benches 600+ lbs, infact he used to bench close to 700 and probably could have benched more but his speed was suffering so the team (Dallas Cowboys) made him cut back. So until rugby gets some players like Larry Allen I will have to say that American football is more manly.

[Ferrari Tifosi]

Don't care which is more manly, but I can tell you that I find American Football more interesting. Both are hard hitting and painful. Ultimate tough sport has to go to hockey, fast paced, hard hitting, and not to mention a frozen puck flying around at speeds between 70-90 mph.

[Renesis]

ultimate masculine sport?

Soccer

[GTR Dreamer]

ausie rules? well if you wanted to compare a more manly sport with that then ahh, tennis might be a good option. lol any way i say they are a tie

[SlickHolden]

AFL Aussie rules football is the tuffest game on earth,
Many reason i watch American football, And Rugby leauge and Union.

But in AFL we don't use any protective gear it's a hard game some have been injured very bad one man a very very long time ago was paralysed from it. It's a fast game and very high flying game and a very painfull game. If anyone seen the AFL grandFinal this year they would see it's not a girls game.
Here are some pics .
P.S the bottom pic he is allready on his way down he was a good 2+ foot higher

[my porsche]

RUGBY!
they play with metal studs, and they dont stop running every two seconds for a "frist down" or whatever, they play without pads, and they are big but fast, not these 500lb linebackers that can run at 4mph

[The Tuner]

rugby looks more offensive coz there arent any pads n all...but for most manly sport, id say:

DESTRUCTION DERBY!!!

[stratos]

i vote rugby because i never saw a game of american footbal nto even on tv .... the only sport that portugueses are good its soccer

[NAZCA C2]

Boxing.

[CdocZ]

good poll........kinda hard to say, because the hits are alot harder in football......but rugby is more vicious......im split evenly, wont vote.