Rugby in the US

[O_Town_Clown]

BJ Sands said:

...

[BJ Sands]

and no sport named Australian Rules Football would ever make in the U.S.

As absurd as it is, I think this is a valid point. If the sport was called "Ooloowongo" or some other equally aboriginal sounding name, we'd be more likely to go for it. But Americans aren't likely to crowd around the TV to watch the American Australian Football League game of the week.

That wouldn't stop me, personally. I love watching the English Premier League and I don't think twice about it.

Another factor which would hurt those sports here is the quality of the play. No top-flight athlete would say 'Screw that scholarship to play football at Florida, I'm going to play in a start-up rugby league.' The athletes playing wouldn't be anywhere near our best.

[BB61]

As absurd as it is, I think this is a valid point. If the sport was called "Ooloowongo" or some other equally aboriginal sounding name, we'd be more likely to go for it. But Americans aren't likely to crowd around the TV to watch the American Australian Football League game of the week.

And that's because Americans are stupid and xenophobic. I'm an American, I speak the voice of experience.

I agree that the landscape is crowded and it would be impossible for it to latch on as a mainstream sport. I just think that it's stupid for people to honestly look at a sport for three minutes and dismiss it as being boring or needlessly complicated (Unless we're talking about synchronized swimming. That's something different), especially in light of the fact that this country embraces baseball and football, two sports that are both boring and needlessly complicated even at their very best.

What I'm saying is that people can't get interested without being exposed to it, and due to the rise of popularity of a number of "sports", a great opportunity for sports fans to pick up on real, honest to goodness sports is being wasted.

And I know that it's about money and ratings and blah blah blah but you know what? That just adds to my whole stupidity argument.

Another factor which would hurt those sports here is the quality of the play. No top-flight athlete would say 'Screw that scholarship to play football at Florida, I'm going to play in a start-up rugby league.' The athletes playing wouldn't be anywhere near our best.

It's not about the quality of the athletes... it's about the quality of the players themselves. If you have good rugby players, then you'll have a decent quality league. You can have great athletes who can't play rugby for crap, and the quality of play will suffer. So I don't think it's about that totally.

[TFoA]

So I decided to do a little bit of research on rugby and its various codes the best way I knew how: Old school video games. It's how I figured out the basic gist of hockey back when I was a kid, and it's currently the way that I'm figuring out the basic gist of rugby.

Apparently EA Sports came out with 2 games for the Sega Genesis: Rugby World Cup 95 & Australian Rugby League, with the first one being rugby union and the second one being rugby league. After playing both games, I've determined that the more fun one is rugby union, just because of the fact that they don't stop play after a tackle like in rugby league. Plus, after I watched the Rugby Sevens thing on ABC a few weeks ago, I found it to be VERY exciting. Once I figured out that rugby sevens is basically 7-on-7 rugby union, I've made my choice: Where can I watch me some rugby union?

[DEAD!]

Once I figured out that rugby sevens is basically 7-on-7 rugby union, I've made my choice: Where can I watch me some rugby union?

justin.tv?

[jr79]

So I decided to do a little bit of research on rugby and its various codes the best way I knew how: Old school video games. It's how I figured out the basic gist of hockey back when I was a kid, and it's currently the way that I'm figuring out the basic gist of rugby.

Apparently EA Sports came out with 2 games for the Sega Genesis: Rugby World Cup 95 & Australian Rugby League, with the first one being rugby union and the second one being rugby league. After playing both games, I've determined that the more fun one is rugby union, just because of the fact that they don't stop play after a tackle like in rugby league. Plus, after I watched the Rugby Sevens thing on ABC a few weeks ago, I found it to be VERY exciting. Once I figured out that rugby sevens is basically 7-on-7 rugby union, I've made my choice: Where can I watch me some rugby union?

Yeah Rugby League becomes more and more like the American Football every season. They even added another official on the field this year so one can police the tackle and the other the defensive line. They'll be stopping play between tackles and wearing helmets before you know it.

What I will say is that it without a doubt produces the best one-on-one hits/tackles in professional sport.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYCQXKgMnfU

[heernumurr]

So I decided to do a little bit of research on rugby and its various codes the best way I knew how: Old school video games. It's how I figured out the basic gist of hockey back when I was a kid, and it's currently the way that I'm figuring out the basic gist of rugby.

Apparently EA Sports came out with 2 games for the Sega Genesis: Rugby World Cup 95 & Australian Rugby League, with the first one being rugby union and the second one being rugby league. After playing both games, I've determined that the more fun one is rugby union, just because of the fact that they don't stop play after a tackle like in rugby league. Plus, after I watched the Rugby Sevens thing on ABC a few weeks ago, I found it to be VERY exciting. Once I figured out that rugby sevens is basically 7-on-7 rugby union, I've made my choice: Where can I watch me some rugby union?

Not sure about live games where you are, but if you want a fix immediately, Rugbydump.com is a great place to go.

[FiddySicks]

So I decided to do a little bit of research on rugby and its various codes the best way I knew how: Old school video games. It's how I figured out the basic gist of hockey back when I was a kid, and it's currently the way that I'm figuring out the basic gist of rugby.

Apparently EA Sports came out with 2 games for the Sega Genesis: Rugby World Cup 95 & Australian Rugby League, with the first one being rugby union and the second one being rugby league. After playing both games, I've determined that the more fun one is rugby union, just because of the fact that they don't stop play after a tackle like in rugby league. Plus, after I watched the Rugby Sevens thing on ABC a few weeks ago, I found it to be VERY exciting. Once I figured out that rugby sevens is basically 7-on-7 rugby union, I've made my choice: Where can I watch me some rugby union?

Not sure about live games where you are, but if you want a fix immediately, Rugbydump.com is a great place to go.

Mediazone.com is another really good site to catch free highlights.

[Viper]

Our sports landscape is so based in tradition and habit that neither rugby or Aussie-rules football would ever "take off."

We Americans watch football in the fall, basketball (and hockey to a lesser extent) in the winter and baseball in the summer. Not to mention college sports and NASCAR.

There just isn't any room for more sports. Heck, soccer has been pushed here and it's still behind hockey, even though the NHL lost a season to labor issues.

Rugby would be seen as too derivative of football (even though we know it isn't) and no sport named Australian Rules Football would ever make in the U.S.

Heck, not even the oldest and most storied of all North American-invented sports - lacrosse - has ever made much of a dent in the U.S. sports landscape, in either its "field" or "box" varieties. If lacrosse can't break through, I don't see how Rugby Union can either.

[BJ Sands]

As absurd as it is, I think this is a valid point. If the sport was called "Ooloowongo" or some other equally aboriginal sounding name, we'd be more likely to go for it. But Americans aren't likely to crowd around the TV to watch the American Australian Football League game of the week.

And that's because Americans are stupid and xenophobic. I'm an American, I speak the voice of experience.

I agree that the landscape is crowded and it would be impossible for it to latch on as a mainstream sport. I just think that it's stupid for people to honestly look at a sport for three minutes and dismiss it as being boring or needlessly complicated (Unless we're talking about synchronized swimming. That's something different), especially in light of the fact that this country embraces baseball and football, two sports that are both boring and needlessly complicated even at their very best.

What I'm saying is that people can't get interested without being exposed to it, and due to the rise of popularity of a number of "sports", a great opportunity for sports fans to pick up on real, honest to goodness sports is being wasted.

And I know that it's about money and ratings and blah blah blah but you know what? That just adds to my whole stupidity argument.

Another factor which would hurt those sports here is the quality of the play. No top-flight athlete would say 'Screw that scholarship to play football at Florida, I'm going to play in a start-up rugby league.' The athletes playing wouldn't be anywhere near our best.

It's not about the quality of the athletes... it's about the quality of the players themselves. If you have good rugby players, then you'll have a decent quality league. You can have great athletes who can't play rugby for crap, and the quality of play will suffer. So I don't think it's about that totally.

Americans wouldn't know the difference between somebody who can and can't play rugby. All they would know is that our ruhby players wouldn't be anywhere near our best athletes, and get turned off by that.

And, c'mon, you don't think that Adrian Peterson or Matt Forte would make pretty good rugby players? I think they could overcome their lack of rugby experience with their incredible athleticism.

(In case anybody's wondering, I am not anti-rugby or Aussie-rules football. I do wish both were on TV more. When Fox Soccer Channel was Fox Sports World, I loved watching those sports and, looking back, wish FSW hadn't turned into FSC.

I'm even trying to learn cricket. That has not been easy.)

[Alphabet Man]

Cricket is easy. Hit as many runs as you can and dismiss the opposition twice. And do it within 5days or its a draw.

Rugby Union is harder to understand.

[patsox]

Some guys at my college are starting up a team this year, attempting to earn club status within 1-2 years, and eventually procure a spot as a Varsity team (I think). So far it seems to be going really well.

[BJ Sands]

Cricket is easy. Hit as many runs as you can and dismiss the opposition twice. And do it within 5days or its a draw.

Rugby Union is harder to understand.

But that's just test cricket. What about Twenty20 or one-day international?

And how does one side dismiss the other?

[Saintsfan]

Cricket is easy. Hit as many runs as you can and dismiss the opposition twice. And do it within 5days or its a draw.

Rugby Union is harder to understand.

But that's just test cricket. What about Twenty20 or one-day international?

And how does one side dismiss the other?

Hmmm do I even try to give the low down on the worlds best summer game?

Ok I'll try and keep this brief. Each innings (no matter what form of the game you are talking about) includes 10 wickets. (Dismissals in baseball language). There are actually 10 ways of getting out. Caught is fairly self explanatory. Bowled is sort of like being struck out, except you only get one chance and if the bowler [pitcher in baseballese] breaks your wicket (the little group of wooden sticks!) then you are out. Then there is stumped, which is when the wicketkeeper [catcher] breaks your wicket when you are out of your crease, this typically only happens of slower bowlers. Run Out is a bit like being tagged out at the base, except that all the fielder needs to do is to break the wicket, he can do this from a throw even from deep in the outfield. Those are the main ways of getting out, and I get the feeling your head might be spinning already.

As for the different forms of the game- a test match is based on time, there are 5 days and each side gets two innings. If 5 days isn't enough to finish the game then it is a draw. Otherwise the team who scores most runs wins.

In Twenty20 and one day matches, the length of the game is a number of overs each. (An over is a set of 6 deliveries). In Twenty20, each innings is 20 overs. In one day matches typically an innings is 50 overs. (In both cases if you lose all 10 wickets before the end of the alloted number of overs thats it as well!) The team scoring most runs wins. It is impossible to draw a twenty20 or ODI. (Unless the game is abandoned as a draw) but you can get a tie, if both teams score the same. (You can tie a test match as well, but that is exceedingly rare).

[BrySmalls]

Cricket is easy. Hit as many runs as you can and dismiss the opposition twice. And do it within 5days or its a draw.

Rugby Union is harder to understand.

But that's just test cricket. What about Twenty20 or one-day international?

And how does one side dismiss the other?

Hmmm do I even try to give the low down on the worlds best summer game?

Ok I'll try and keep this brief. Each innings (no matter what form of the game you are talking about) includes 10 wickets. (Dismissals in baseball language). There are actually 10 ways of getting out. Caught is fairly self explanatory. Bowled is sort of like being struck out, except you only get one chance and if the bowler [pitcher in baseballese] breaks your wicket (the little group of wooden sticks!) then you are out. Then there is stumped, which is when the wicketkeeper [catcher] breaks your wicket when you are out of your crease, this typically only happens of slower bowlers. Run Out is a bit like being tagged out at the base, except that all the fielder needs to do is to break the wicket, he can do this from a throw even from deep in the outfield. Those are the main ways of getting out, and I get the feeling your head might be spinning already.

As for the different forms of the game- a test match is based on time, there are 5 days and each side gets two innings. If 5 days isn't enough to finish the game then it is a draw. Otherwise the team who scores most runs wins.

In Twenty20 and one day matches, the length of the game is a number of overs each. (An over is a set of 6 deliveries). In Twenty20, each innings is 20 overs. In one day matches typically an innings is 50 overs. (In both cases if you lose all 10 wickets before the end of the alloted number of overs thats it as well!) The team scoring most runs wins. It is impossible to draw a twenty20 or ODI. (Unless the game is abandoned as a draw) but you can get a tie, if both teams score the same. (You can tie a test match as well, but that is exceedingly rare).

That makes a helluva lot more sense then when people were trying to explain it to me while studying abroad in New Zealand back in '03.

[Saintsfan]

I get the feeling that like Baseball cricket is both a simple game, and a very complicated game. I think you probably get into both games by admiring there beauty, and the atmosphere of a lazy sunny day spent watching/playing the game. The complications are best learned gradually. Expecting to turn up to your first day of cricket and end the day with an intimate understanding of the game is unrealistic. But given a bit of time and patience, it really can be a very beautiful and exciting game.

[BrySmalls]

I get the feeling that like Baseball cricket is both a simple game, and a very complicated game. I think you probably get into both games by admiring there beauty, and the atmosphere of a lazy sunny day spent watching/playing the game. The complications are best learned gradually. Expecting to turn up to your first day of cricket and end the day with an intimate understanding of the game is unrealistic. But given a bit of time and patience, it really can be a very beautiful and exciting game.

They also couldn't explain it as eloquently as you did.

[Saintsfan]

I get the feeling that like Baseball cricket is both a simple game, and a very complicated game. I think you probably get into both games by admiring there beauty, and the atmosphere of a lazy sunny day spent watching/playing the game. The complications are best learned gradually. Expecting to turn up to your first day of cricket and end the day with an intimate understanding of the game is unrealistic. But given a bit of time and patience, it really can be a very beautiful and exciting game.

They also couldn't explain it as eloquently as you did.

Typical Kiwis!

[BJ Sands]

Cricket is easy. Hit as many runs as you can and dismiss the opposition twice. And do it within 5days or its a draw.

Rugby Union is harder to understand.

But that's just test cricket. What about Twenty20 or one-day international?

And how does one side dismiss the other?

Hmmm do I even try to give the low down on the worlds best summer game?

Ok I'll try and keep this brief. Each innings (no matter what form of the game you are talking about) includes 10 wickets. (Dismissals in baseball language). There are actually 10 ways of getting out. Caught is fairly self explanatory. Bowled is sort of like being struck out, except you only get one chance and if the bowler [pitcher in baseballese] breaks your wicket (the little group of wooden sticks!) then you are out. Then there is stumped, which is when the wicketkeeper [catcher] breaks your wicket when you are out of your crease, this typically only happens of slower bowlers. Run Out is a bit like being tagged out at the base, except that all the fielder needs to do is to break the wicket, he can do this from a throw even from deep in the outfield. Those are the main ways of getting out, and I get the feeling your head might be spinning already.

As for the different forms of the game- a test match is based on time, there are 5 days and each side gets two innings. If 5 days isn't enough to finish the game then it is a draw. Otherwise the team who scores most runs wins.

In Twenty20 and one day matches, the length of the game is a number of overs each. (An over is a set of 6 deliveries). In Twenty20, each innings is 20 overs. In one day matches typically an innings is 50 overs. (In both cases if you lose all 10 wickets before the end of the alloted number of overs thats it as well!) The team scoring most runs wins. It is impossible to draw a twenty20 or ODI. (Unless the game is abandoned as a draw) but you can get a tie, if both teams score the same. (You can tie a test match as well, but that is exceedingly rare).

Thanks a ton. Now to, um, find it on TV.

[BB61]

Thanks a ton. Now to, um, find it on TV.

Your best bet is YouTube. Or, if you want an even better understanding, go onto Amazon and by the computer game. That's what I did.

I didn't mean to go off on you, BJ, and I'm sorry if it seemed that I did. It just irks me that people don't want to give new sports a try.

I'm not sure where you are in "Deep South Texas", but if you're near Austin or Dallas, they each have footy teams there -- the Austin Crows and the Dallas Magpies.