For wimps?

Talk about current events, entertainment, technology or anything not related to soccer
NewBornProdigy
Admin
Posts: 2695
Joined: 23 May 2008, 19:51

Post

the stereotyping of soccer comes from an un-knoledgble view of the sport

this goes for all sports
rugby for thugs
soccer for wimps
badminton for nerds

all stupid stereotypical views made by someone who doesn't understand the challenges of playing the sport

i have played both rugby and footie for a proper team, i beleive that soccer is just as challenging, if not more, then a heavy contact sport

soccer is a very physically challenging, EVERYTHING IS DONE AT ALOT GREATER SPEED then any other sport (par with basket ball) you need great acceleration, speed, agility, aerobic fitness and anareobic fitness, strenght and balance

because of the high pace the game is player at, and because we are controlling and moving the ball with our feet not our hands it is alot harder to keep balanced and maintain that fast pace

also tackles aimed at the legs at such high speeds can be very very dangerous, rubgy tackles are indeed very sore, but not dangerous because the technique is perfectly outlined to make it safe for both parties (ball carrier and tackler) but in football the technique is not as easy to preform, far less sore when done right, but much more dangerous when done wrong, also the idea is to get the ball, regardless of the safety of the man, so this has brought forth all the rules about tackling too hard or wild, so the nature of the game has changed in the last few years, it is more tactically benifical and 'safer' to go down easy, but in rugby the harder you tackle the better

now if you were to play rugby you would realise you need to be heavy strong and mean IF YOUR A FORWARD

both games are very physically challenging, i used to play 2nd centre which you have to be tall, strong, fast, skillful and clever

just like in soccer to play AMF you have to be strong, fast, skillful and clever
CB's and forwards, need to be strong and tall
wingers in both sports need to be fast and skillful

but plenty of the wingers you come across could indeed be soccer players, they have to be able to move VERY quick and VERY agile at changing direction
BUT the reason they aren't?

the skill factor, do not take me wrong rugby is a very skillful game but it is prodimently focused on the physical attributes of a player

like the ones who you see kicking, you say 'well thats easy' NO IT IS NOT
rugby kicking is alot harder than it looks, but some soccer players think they could kick like that no bother, they are showing the same ignorance that people who think 'soccer is for wimps'

also there is no excuse why rugby players are stronger than you, by right soccer players should be just as powerful, mabye not as bulky but lean and powerful around the age of 14-5

but when it comes to soccer, it may not be as rough a sport it is by far 100 times more skillful
alot of soccer pro's got introduced to the game at 4
almost all rugby players get introduced to the game at 13

simply put rubgy and soccer require brains and brawn
but both require bigger does's of the other

and if any rugby player says your a wimp ask him for a rugby ball, do ATW and say 'but this wimp is gooood, man'

freestylejordan
Junior Member
Posts: 74
Joined: 25 Apr 2008, 07:08

Post

I play rugby occasionally as well as football and on Saturday I played a game of both. I ended up partially getting my nose broken in the football game after a guy elbowed me in the face after a challenge in the air. Afterwards I played Rugby and a guy tackled me around the legs, lifted me and dumped me on my head.

My point is both sports are physical and neither of them are for whimps. Football is scarier than rugby I reckon because you can't use your arms to defend yourself.

NewBornProdigy
Admin
Posts: 2695
Joined: 23 May 2008, 19:51

Post

freestylejordan wrote:I ended up partially getting my nose broken in the football game.....Afterwards I played Rugby
you crazy bastard, lol :D

but yeah there both physical and you have to play both to understand how hard they are, skill-wise and physical wise[/quote]

soccer_after_death
Veteran Member
Posts: 736
Joined: 21 Jun 2008, 19:57

Post

LOL newborn.....ATW with a rugby ball?? Imma go try it :D
Image

NewBornProdigy
Admin
Posts: 2695
Joined: 23 May 2008, 19:51

Post

yeah swear, used to try it when i was bored while training or warming up

note: prepare yourself for some nasty self inflicted sacking's, its quite easy to hit the ball wrong :D

i used to be able to balanace it on my head for like 10 seconds (on the valve, not the way cooler way with the point pointing up :( )

soccer_after_death
Veteran Member
Posts: 736
Joined: 21 Jun 2008, 19:57

Post

jeez man I've never tried any if this. Apart from
a football, the only other ball I've used to play footie is a basketball ( we was playin barefoot and hitting instep drives LOL, it was crazy )...
hurts like hell afterwards though..
Image

AJman2
New User
Posts: 17
Joined: 01 Jan 1970, 00:00

Post

I come from Australia. It is the only place in the world with 3 competing codes of football, 4 if you want to be technical. They are Australian Rules football, Rugby Union, Rugby league, and soccer (we say soccer so people don't get confused as to what 'football' we are talking about).

Now to my point... in general, soccer has a really bad image in Australia, in comparison to other sports. This is partly due the rough sporting culture in australia, as league, union, and aussie rules are all full contact sports. However, people, especially in Adelaide, get really frustrated with how long soccer players stay on the ground for, and how some people take a dive to try get a free kick. I went to an Asian Champions League game between Adelaide United and Seong Nam, and the crowd ended up booing. Why? cos some guy from Seong Nam took a dive a spent forever writhing in agony on the ground. Its things like that that don't help the 'wimpy' image of soccer/football.

My conclusion... soccer is definitely not for wimps, it simply requires different skills to other sports. However, I think there are some players that are wimps, or rather act like wimps. This is what gives soccer the 'wimpy' image.

truesocceroo
Veteran Member
Posts: 333
Joined: 05 Jul 2007, 13:37

Post

AJman is right when it comes to soccer players staying down for too long but i think people who complain about it dont understand the nature of the game. In rugby for example, it is very physical but the bigger players are constantly being subbed on and off, and there is plenty of time to rest, as well as this if you go to a game not watch on tv you will see that the trainers constantly run on and off the field giving water to the players.

In american football they have so many breaks they have no reason to be tired. AFL is probably the most demanding because they run the most but as well they have quarters so it takes a bit of the strain off. Soccer takes the most skill but you can understand why people get the bad image. But some people really will never listen, people who like watching pointless punch ons and bad injuries and tackles, but will bitch about it when they see a dive. So dont bother with what they think.

Rome_Leader
The Italian Mod
Posts: 3028
Joined: 19 Jun 2007, 22:03

Post

That's a stereotype too, man. Most soccer players defense is that American Football is broken up into plays and thus, shouldn't tire you out as much. In reality, these breaks are in the tens of seconds, and there are some guys, such as linemen, who have one hand on the ground, in a prone position for virtually all the game. Each and every play, they get a load of punishment as they lock horns across the way with some of the biggest guys in football.

The receivers are running soccer speeds down the flanks, with the added worry of dodging body tackles, applying stiff arms and leaps, and just keep chugging it to the endzone. This is all after/IF they have managed to pull in a pass. The corners are doing similar things, but tasked with CHASING these dudes.

Every position in Favreball is tough too, you just have to know how it is played. I don't like that people call association football wimpy, but I also hate it when people say that American Football is not one of the most physical, demanding sports around, cos it is.

truesocceroo
Veteran Member
Posts: 333
Joined: 05 Jul 2007, 13:37

Post

American Football is a physical sport but it is much more drawn out than say soccer or rugby, in rugby for instance the same players must defend and attack, not seperate teams when in possesion or not, and they also have the same players on the field kicking not extra men, they have players running flat out 50m or more then getting smashed by big forwards, then having to convert the try literally seconds after. It is like saying cricket or baseball is just as physical, sure it lasts long but its drawn out so not all of the time is action.

NewBornProdigy
Admin
Posts: 2695
Joined: 23 May 2008, 19:51

Post

the one this i do notice from american football (this is coming from someone who has never played it)

is that the players have to be alot more anaerobically fit compared to aerobically fit
the do have alot of breaks that true, but since they have to make such a quick impression when on the pitch
the need huge explosive power, huge muscles, quick reactions

everything is pushed to the extreme for a few seconds

that is why they need all the armor, that is why its the roughest most physically challenging sport around

unlike that games like soccer and rugger are alot less physical, (but still pretty demanding) but more skill and tactics orentated, you have to have better aerobic capacity to be good at rugby or football, that what you need to be good at grid-iron

in turn all three sports are demanding, but one thing i have come to realise is that wimps find it easier to play football, cause emphassis is on skill which is so hard to master, the stronger faster players will be better but the skillful ones will always be the ones with most potential, as they can work out and get muscle very quick
skill takes years to learn, and becomes harder as you grow older

but just because your strong doesn't means your not skillful

then when you play soccer (and basketball) in your later years 17+ it becomes alot more physically demanding

in rugby it is very physically demanding at early ages 14+ so 'wimps' would stay away from it

American Footie is just plain tough from the begining

so its not a case of soccer is for wimps
but wimps like to play soccer, but as with all sports the best are the player with a good balance

truesocceroo
Veteran Member
Posts: 333
Joined: 05 Jul 2007, 13:37

Post

Rugby is as physical as American Football, there are a lot of big hits and people are tackled almost everytime they get the ball. If Rugby is not as physical american football, it is definitely not "a lot less physical", just maybe slightly, as it is also based around explosive power. If you are to group the sports together you wouldnt put rugby and soccer together, rugby and american football have much more in common than soccer and any of the sports.

NewBornProdigy
Admin
Posts: 2695
Joined: 23 May 2008, 19:51

Post

mabye man, but i see rugby as more like football
they are very much alike, even if rugby is harder cause of contact, it is not near as hard as american football
american football you can tackle anyway anywhere you want, rugby is very technique specific tackling

like honestly in the begining in the freemason's tavern in london, a whole group of representatives from the universities in england decided to sit down and make rules for a game
the group had to split in half because some didn't want to choose between handling the ball and kicking
those that left (the handballers) invented rugby
those that stayed (the footballers) invented soccer

so they both evolved from the same principal and game

its just the fact that tackles can be so dangerous in football, rubgy they hurt but they don't break bones when done wrong (usually)
so as the game evolved the game decided to be more cautios with tackling rules and it became less contact physical, but alot more about sprinting and fittness like a football match last 90 mins
a rugby one lasts 80
and unless you have played at a high level of football, you really haven't experienced how physically challenging it really is

but if rugby was as challenging as american football, why don't they use helmets and body armor? simply cause it isn't

MiKeOnE29
Junior Member
Posts: 61
Joined: 09 Apr 2007, 19:03

Post

NewBornProdigy wrote: but if rugby was as challenging as american football, why don't they use helmets and body armor?
because they're not pussys

Croatianblood1
Veteran Member
Posts: 2957
Joined: 25 May 2005, 21:36
Location: New York, USA

Post

Even with pads American football is a dangerous sport. The Buffalo Bills tight-end Kevin Everett collided with another player and broke his neck and lied on the field motionless. Luckily he survived and can still walk which is a miracle. Its a dangerous sport, its easy to get hurt and injuries can be fatal cause you are always colliding with other players.
Image

Post Reply