Quote Originally Posted by Lyle
I would argue with you but I have no idea what "rucking" is and I don't know how you mean "mauling"....in football we don't (usually) bite people like dogs or anything but it does get pretty bad sometimes.

Yes football has the better athletes (barring most linemen but look at yall's fullbacks, about the same) and the bigger hits and therefore is harder to play because of such things. Rugby is to football what Cricket is to baseball...more boring and less skilled
Comedy genius.

Sorry mate...Amercian football has the better athletes? You are somking some pretty strong stuff. Rugby is a much more physically demanding game and you have to be much 'fitter' to play the game with any level of success.

I would say Rugby players are much more rounded athletes than American football players simply because the game is non stop physical exertion. American football relies on a bunch of fatass blockers (ala 'the fridge') and a guy who throws it to the one fit guy in the team (wide reciever) who then scores. Also its very start stop so no real sustained level of physical activity is required before the ref blows his whistle.