Why aren't there more injuries in rugby?

Ginger · 22-12-2008 12:44PM

anonymous_joe wrote: »

True enough. The vast majority of people playing at the top know well what they're meant to do. That can only reduce injury levels.

This is the bit I don't agree with.

When a footballers goes down injured, he's not a (insert whatever insult you want) he's just cheating. He's doing that to help his team win, which is the only moral point that counts in competitive sports in reality.

Must be a new law. As long as its helping the team to win its ok? Did i read that right?

So by that argument drugs bribery etc should be ok? If the only thing is to win why have rules in the first place.

If feigning an injury to achieve a free/penalty is against the rules then its cheating otherwise its not. I am not too up on the rules of soccer to quote them.

anonymous_joe · 22-12-2008 01:10PM

Ginger wrote: »

Must be a new law. As long as its helping the team to win its ok? Did i read that right?

So by that argument drugs bribery etc should be ok? If the only thing is to win why have rules in the first place.

If feigning an injury to achieve a free/penalty is against the rules then its cheating otherwise its not. I am not too up on the rules of soccer to quote them.

In all sports, people will cheat as much as they're allowed. Let's not be children here. The best rugby player in the world is the best cheat in the best team of cheaters in the world. They do what they have to do to win. It's the nature of humanity. It's not pretty, but that's how it is.

daveyrovers · 22-12-2008 02:49PM

I was trying to find it there on the addidas website as when they launched their footpod thing with polar HRM (about 4 years ago). They placed one in David Beckhams boot for 90 minutes he travlled just over 10km's over 90 minutes. Jonny Wilkinson was also part of the experiment he travelled just over 11k in an 80 minute match.

I don't know enough about Beckham to know if he would be conisdered a footballer who would cover much ground but I know Jonny Wilkinson wouldn't be in a position that would cover that much ground (pivot). Someone like David Wallace or Richie McCaw or Schlak Berger would be covering a massive amount more ground.

22-12-2008 04:00PM

siochain wrote: »

You can tell by looking? That’s how your backing up the facts!!!
Only thing you can tell by looking is the video is running faster then its original speed.

Henry on his day is a class player. I seen him play in anfield and his pace and skill on the ball was worth the ticket money alone and i was there supporting Liverpool. But no way is he sub 10 sec.

I agree,I would say he in his prime he was 10.20/40 or so but there are defo players faster than him playing world football.

If you say the fastest player in the world of rugby is chavanga then if you look at the thousands of africans playing proffesional football,there are defo some faster than that.

daveharnett · 23-12-2008 05:00PM

Sangre wrote: »

Anyone ever wonder why football players get stick for diving/faking injury to gain an advantage for their team, yet, when a rugby player infringes in the ruck with hands or lying on the wrong side he is usually praised?

Sangre wrote: »

they're both unsportman behaviour.

A: What's an unsportman?
B: The underlying purpose of any sporting contest is to determine who is the better man, not the better possum.
- Risking a penalty and a good shoeing to benefit the team - manly
- Throwing oneself on the ground and pretending to be dead - possumly
- Attempting to benefit your team by weakening the other team - unsportsmanlike.

OP, I would point to the following
- Rugby players tend to be running more or less forward most of the time, so less twisting and turning (excepting the Darcy's of the world).
- Rugby players can almost always see the tackle coming, and prepare themselves for it. Football more often requires the player on the ball to put his back to the opponent.
- Most injuries are caused by the player's own weight, rather than by the collision. This makes the feet first, ankle high tackle more dangerous.

Sangre · 23-12-2008 05:18PM

daveharnett wrote: »

A: What's an unsportman?
B: The underlying purpose of any sporting contest is to determine who is the better man, not the better possum.

Your assumption. The purpose of a sporting contest is to determine the winner. Whether you decide that person is manly or not isn't really the point. Are snoooker players, darts players, golfers, sprinters, marathon, runners more manly if they win? Is gavin henson more manly than chabal if wales beat france?

- Attempting to benefit your team by weakening the other team - unsportsmanlike.

You mean by hitting someone so hard in a tackle that they have to go off or are intimidated/unsure in the next tackle? You mean by weakening the other team's ability to play legal rugby by constantly infringing in the ruck? You mean by diving in a tackle to get someone sent off in football?

What are the differences in these?

Punching someone in the face in a rugby match isn't unmanly. So is it unsportsmanlike?

daveharnett · 23-12-2008 05:51PM

Sangre wrote: »

Your assumption. The purpose of a sporting contest is to determine the winner. Whether you decide that person is manly or not isn't really the point. Are snoooker players, darts players, golfers, sprinters, marathon, runners more manly if they win? Is gavin henson more manly than chabal if wales beat france?

Sure, it is just my opinion. To me, the primary appeal of sport is at the caveman level. I can't speak for others, but I think that this is pretty common.

Obviously, sports are an imperfect metric for determining a person's worth as a hunter-gatherer. I don't think anybody would dispute that Chabal is the better caveman, regardless of any results on the field.

Perhaps football fans are just more evolved, and enjoy the sport at a more intellectual level

. Or perhaps the fact that a team can benefit from players rolling over and playing dead reveals a deficiency in the sport's rules?

Sangre wrote: »

You mean by hitting someone so hard in a tackle that they have to go off or are intimidated/unsure in the next tackle? You mean by weakening the other team's ability to play legal rugby by constantly infringing in the ruck? You mean by diving in a tackle to get someone sent off in football?

A fair argument. First of all, I'd agree that setting out to injure somebody (even through legal means) is unsportsmanlike. Intimidation on the other hand is fine, in a competitive sport where aggression is expected. This is something a strong-minded opponent can counteract.

I'm mostly neutral on professional fouls, in both sports. They indicate flaws in the rules of the game, and it's hard to blame professional players for exploiting them. When professional foul crosses the line into trying to have opponents booked, I draw the line - it does nothing but damage the game.

Sangre wrote: »

Punching someone in the face in a rugby match isn't unmanly. So is it unsportsmanlike?

That all depends on the context. Compare stringer's constant niggling of players in order to provoke a reaction to O' Connell's pretty righteous retaliation a couple of weeks ago.

anonymous_joe · 23-12-2008 06:21PM

daveharnett wrote: »

A: What's an unsportman?
B: The underlying purpose of any sporting contest is to determine who is the better man, not the better possum.
- Risking a penalty and a good shoeing to benefit the team - manly
- Throwing oneself on the ground and pretending to be dead - possumly
- Attempting to benefit your team by weakening the other team - unsportsmanlike.

Sportsmanship is never a facet of professional sports or people who want to win.

Also, don't use words like manly, they're unfair and misleading in the context of sports.

The only objective of a guy on a pitch is to win. Rugby players are the same as anyone else. They fight, cheat and do everything they can.

OP, I would point to the following
- Rugby players tend to be running more or less forward most of the time, so less twisting and turning (excepting the Darcy's of the world).
- Rugby players can almost always see the tackle coming, and prepare themselves for it. Football more often requires the player on the ball to put his back to the opponent.
- Most injuries are caused by the player's own weight, rather than by the collision. This makes the feet first, ankle high tackle more dangerous.

Some very good points there.

toomevara · 28-12-2008 03:28PM

One aspect of this debate that hasn't been covered (I think. Apologies if already mentioned) is the long term cumulative damage which rugby players suffer because of a career spent shipping the kind of hits, on a regular basis, that would have most of us running to the local A&E.

Todays Tribune piece on the issue is really instructive and more than a little depressing. A timely reminder of the sacrifice most of these guys make and the determination, willpower and courage being a professional player requires. Just reading the legacy that Davidson has been left with, unbelievable.

What's really scary is that davidson, Wood et al were around for the beginning of professionalism. With the game getting ever more demanding, current players can expect ever shorter shelf-lives with more post-career complications.

http://www.tribune.ie/sport/rugby/article/2008/dec/21/the-body-blows-to-our-poster-boys/

Ginger · 28-12-2008 03:39PM

One of the things i always remember my old fella telling me about the game was at least you can have subs now, there was a time before when you could only be subbed when a doctor said you were unable to continue.. think that possibly runs in the mindset of the game still, only go off when you are really done ...

louthandproud · 28-12-2008 04:08PM

anonymous_joe wrote: »

Sportsmanship is never a facet of professional sports or people who want to win.

Thankfully that is untrue.

LightningBolt · 28-12-2008 04:22PM

Sangre wrote: »

Anyone ever wonder why football players get stick for diving/faking injury to gain an advantage for their team, yet, when a rugby player infringes in the ruck with hands or lying on the wrong side he is usually praised?

There's nothing you can do as a player about someone feigning injury, if someone has hands on the ball or is lying on top of it there's something you can do about it. They're both still unsportsmanlike one of which players can react to, one they can't.

[Jackass] · 28-12-2008 05:03PM

RuggieBear wrote: »

:pac:

Sangre · 28-12-2008 06:21PM

LightningBolt wrote: »

There's nothing you can do as a player about someone feigning injury, if someone has hands on the ball or is lying on top of it there's something you can do about it. They're both still unsportsmanlike one of which players can react to, one they can't.

Thats actually probably the best point made. In rugby the infringements happen during play, you can either pull the player off, rake him or just counter ruck. If a footballer dives you can rarely play on, its either a free either way.

I was mostly playing devil advocate with my questions.

RONOC08 · 31-12-2008 08:19PM

Punching someone in the face in a rugby match isn't unmanly. So is it unsportsmanlike?[/quote]

in rugby people punch each other in the face all the time it isnt really that unsportsmanlike because cheating in rugby is normal it happens all the time nd thats the only way to deal with it if the ref dosent notice

Why aren't there more injuries in rugby?

Comments