Hey /fit/. I was looking for a sport to play while I'm cutting and I've narrowed it down to two.... Rugby and football.
I don't want to lose a ton of muscle, so I'm not sure rugby is the best choice. There's a ton of cardio in rugby and it might make me lose more muscle than I want to.
On the other hand, i think football might not have enough cardio. Sure I won't lose muscle, but will I be able to burn enough calories to cut properly?
What do you guys think?
>>36467356
poop dick disagrees
>>36467356
>implying rugby players aren't big as hell
Bro, that pic you posted is totally laughable. Rugby players are big af, muscular and with fat. It doesn't have that much cardio, I think it's a pretty good sport and totally underrated in /fit/
>>36467356
You might run 5kms in a game of rugby, if your gains are so fragile that they are kill from that then you're doing something wrong
>>36467356
Football practice has plenty explosive cardio.
>>36467497
He's a big guy
>>36467356
rugby is a man sport
football is for babys that need 3 ton armor and only 30 seconds of gameplay at a time.
>It's a "rugby vs football" episode
>>36467548
I agree with this logic, hockey players are also pussies because they are covered in protective equipment.
>>36467568
we've only just begun, rugby is an 80 minute game after all
>>36467356
The big rugby players are often basketball tall. They are massive and don't need no shoulder pads
CTE 1xF
>>36467575
Hurling> hockey
>>36467581
>implying football players aren't massive
>>36467632
They are massive in their mechas. Twinks or fat out of them tho.
>>36467632
i dont think he implied that at all, but the op implied that rugby players werent
>>36467356
FYI the kit on the left is Stade Francais out of Paris and they deliberately wear pink or flamboyant away jerseys to solicit the exact same reaction from the team they're playing - that they're soft as baby shit and they don't need to play them as hard. It works, as they have one of the highest away records in Top 14 and make up a huge chunk of the French national team.
Also, you need to remember that
A. Football stops after every play; rugby is virtually nonstop for two 40 minute halves
B. The tackling is completely different. In football you want to be a wall and stop the ball exactly where it is. In rugby there are no downs, so you just need to get the ball on the ground
C. Rugby is based on lateral passing, football is forward
D. Thug niggas play football, not rugby.
>>36467581
You're a fucking retard. Football players wear pads because they are more massive and hit harder than the average rugby player. There would probably be at least 2 deaths in every football game if we didn't wear any protection. The hits are that brutal.
>>36467665
hahhahahahha
>this is what football pussy's actually believe
>>36467665
actually the pads are what allows them to hit so hard, kinda like gloves in boxing
>>36467356
>I don't want to lose a ton of muscle, so I'm not sure rugby is the best choice. There's a ton of cardio in rugby and it might make me lose more muscle than I want to.
OP you are a literal faggot. Look up any lock or center on a rugby team and they're typically massive.
Pic related; Kieran Read is 6'4" and 243 lbs
>>36467665
There are still deaths in football in spite of all that padding. You get hit going full speed by a 350lb linebacker, you're going straight to snap city.
>>36467656
Kek, Stad Françias are shit. Racing Metro ftw
>>36467692
as far as i know only lineman are that heavy in football, linebackers average under 250 lbs, that not even cosidered big amongst rugby forwards
>>36467721
I never said rugby wasn't brutal. Since living in Europe for a long time, I've grown to like it a lot.
As the Brits say, "rugby is a hooligan's sport, played and watched by gentlemen. Football (soccer) is a gentleman's sport, played and watched by hooligans"
Rugby is fucking awesome.
The hits usually aren't quite as hard though because they're always all closer together. In American football, a defensive player could be at full speed by the time he hits someone. Weight + speed = force.
I prefer American Football as a sport, personally, but Rugby is where the beasts are at.
It's way more constant. You're fucked constantly. Every single player is running the entire game, tackling, scrummaging. When you get taken down with the ball, you pass it to the guy behind you, and you continue. There's no stop to get everyone back into attack/defence positions.
Just watched Wales thrash Italy in the 6 nations a couple days ago. Wales were 60-14, at 80mins, all they had to do was punt the ball to end the match, but the kept going to add another 5 to that score in 2 minutes.
>>36467671
>I have no actual argument
Kill yourself. Football is the tougher sport.
>rugby players are small
>>36467785
It's not tougher. Just because you're allowed to hit harder doesn't make it tougher. It's less difficult. In American Football, the players stop every five seconds when a play ends to get back into formation. It's all stop and start.
Rugby players run up to 7.5km on average a match. American footballers on the other hand, barely cover 2km.
>>36467745
most hits in both sports arent that hard, its only from time to time circumstances allow big hits to happen. also in football being tackled probably hurts the most but in rugby tackling is often more crushing than beeing tackled.
also when people say football players are heavier, they see the linemen, but those guys nearly never tackle (offensive line) and engage contact from very close distance
>>36467785
lel
>>36467692
The deaths in football because of how the game is played. In rugby the rules around scrums and tackling and so on are quite rigid and designed to prevent injury. The aim is not to hurt the other players. There are still deaths and serious injuries occasionally but mostly down to people not playing properly.
Also note that many rugby players transition to A Football fairly easily but the other way around doesn't happen.
>>36467504
>it doesn't have that much cardio
Yes it does retard
>>36467535
4U
U
>>36467871
If you think 5km is a ton of cardio, you're probably a fat lard of shit.
>>36467665
Your players wear pads as protection yet there's hardly any limit on how to tackle someone so the hits are only brutal because they're so dangerous. The hits in this video are massive and this is after they outlawed the shoulder charge which made from even bigger hits because we care about our player welfare and don't want them to be borderline retarded when they retire.
Check it out
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1A06stpydY
>>36467785
>>36467822
I think you'll find the hits in rugby are very hard.
>>36467897
If you think playing rugby is comparable to running at a steady pace you're probably legitimately mentally handicapped.
>>36467897
You try running around a field for 40 minutes straight tackling dudes and cleaning out rucks n getting in scrums n shit. Then do it again next half.
You actually have to be ultra fit. An NFL would never succeed in rugby or rugby league.
>>36467821
Football requires more elite athletics. Football players are some of the most elite athletes in the world. With the exception of linemen and other exclusive blockers, they're faster, tougher and stronger than any other athlete in any other sport, because the sport requires it. Football players may lack endurance, and many of them may be dumb, but it's a hard sport that requires explosive speed, strength, precise technique and movement, beyond many other sports. This comes down to the length of plays and the distances covered, as well as the number of men on the field at a time. The shortness of the games and the season makes every play essential, which is what makes the sport exciting.
Personally, I prefer rugby, and rugby players have to be strong, fast, and adaptable (a definite advantage over football players). Every player on a rugby pitch has to be strong, tough, fast and at least somewhat aware of what's going on around him.
The adaptability of rugby and the lack of precision (compared to football, because rugby is a fairly precise sport too, though there is more room for error) suggests to me that rugby is a better sport to play casually, or only somewhat competitively as a supplement to exercise and as a social activity, while football is better for tough training and that sort of thing. Unfortunately, it's probably late in your life to start at football, but it's probably not completely unreasonable.
>>36467897
It's not jogging m9, it's running hard, sprinting when you got the ball, while attempting to dodge, or if needs be, drag yourself while other rugby players are trying to pull you down.
>>36467746
The way they do the points is clever. You get more points in your group for thoroughly thrashing another team than if you just won p much.
>>36467906
shit that video got me hyped for rugby season
I've played both in college. Rugby has insanely more cardio in a game, but most collegiate football teams practice many more hours a week than collegiate rugby teams.
If practice time were to be assumed equal, you're talking about a difference of 60ish minutes of cardio per week at most assuming stoppage in the rugby game. This 60 minutes should be close to irrelevant.
As for which one is "tougher", obviously this a meme argument. Also, there's only one injury that can actually ruin your life anyway, which is concussions, so pick the sport which has a lower amount of concussions (it's rugby).
>>36467949
>In Football not everyboody is strong, tough, fast
>In Rugby every player has to be strong, tough, fast
>Rugby is to be played casually, no need for tough training
lmao whut
Besides, It's a hell of a lot more tough having to go constantly at 80-100% for 80 minutes, than to go at 80-100% for 5-10 seconds at a time, for 60 minutes.
Nobody cares whether Football is a better sport than Rugby, the point is that Rugby is more difficult, physically and mentally.
>>36467970
It's gonna be a good year
>>36467949
>because the sport requires it
m8, you start offering $120mm contracts to rugby players in the US and take them away from football players and you see how long it takes for the switch to be made. Football in the US is filled with elite athletes only because of the huge money involved and the giant collegiate system of athletics which doesn't exist in any other nation. Thinking it's something inherent about football is retarded.
Having played rugby for 16 years I'd say that one a single impact basis the american football hits are bigger. But the average player on a rugby team (particularly loose forwards and centres) will be involved in a much greater number of impacts over the course of an 80 minute game.
Factoring in Scrums, Rucks, Mauls and chasing kicks etc and in terms of toughness, and endurance rugby wins in my opinion. But i'd never try to take anything away from another sport - American football undoubtedly has big hits and coming back from receiving a particularly big hit or series of big hits and not getting rattled takes a lot of mental toughness.
Hopefully the arm chair fans who havent played since school will shut up and stop waving their pricks at one another
search for "sports science rugby vs football" on youtube. That video proves that football hits are 3x harder than rugby hits.
if rugby is so tough, why couldn't Jarryd Hayne even make the roster of literally the worst NFL team?
>>36468048
And that those hits would be literally impossible without the pads. Ray Louis's hit against a door vs. a 15lb battering ram on the show would have broken his own shoulder had he not be wearing the pads.
>>36468020
It's really not retarded when it comes down to it for the other reasons which I outlined in my posts. Association footballers are making 120 million pounds on contracts, and while they have extreme technical skills, it would be absurd to argue that the level of athletics required is comparable to USA football or rugby.
>>36468048
thats the most unscientific bullshit on the whole internet
>>36468134
At this point you'd have to compare the marginal benefit in being stronger (unless you'd argue that footballers aren't elite when it comes to aerobics) with respect to American football and football. I'd say it'd be tough to argue that footballers would get even remotely as much benefit from being stronger (and then on average heavier). But I suppose there is no way to tell whether a soccer team full of Chris Johnson's/Ray Rice's would be better or worse.
Depends on your size and what you like doing honestly, I've played both and enjoy both, but I like rugby more because I use to wrestle and that gives me an advantage in tackling for it.
>>36468195
No, I just mean that saying that the pay difference making the difference in the kind of athleticism required is sort of a moot point. I mean, of course footballers have great endurance and are very fast, but I would argue that the footballers with the best endurance and speed would only be marginally better than the rugby players with the best endurance and speed. I think both (all three, really) sports are difficult to play at a high level and demand very high standards of fitness. My argument was that rugby demands less specialization and more adaptability, and therefore less strength and explosive power, than USA football simply because rugby is a continuous play and football is precise, explosive plays of 8-12 seconds where a single yard makes an important difference.
I prefer football cause I dont wanna mess up my face, despite being pretty ugly to begin with. Football is also the more tactical sport.
>>36468155
>I don't agree with the results of the test so that means its unscientific.
>>36468155
hitting a non moving target after charging, by a pro and an amatuer tackling his moving teammate in a game simulation situation.
you know nothing
>>36467710
ASM ASM ASM ASM
>>36467575
>hockey
>the play object is a tiny, heavy piece of rubber as
>players are armed with sticks
>with knives strapped on their feet
>played on a surface that allows you to gain momentum several times of what could be achieved by running on a lawn
As opposed to
>handegg
>basicly the same as rugby but covered in pussypads
so seeing as football players play covered in pads, surely they should train covered in pads too?
>>36467682
>6'4" 243
>Massive
Cmon man
>>36467575
Lmoa wat. I've played hockey my entire life, only people harder than hockey players are rugby and lax bros
>>36467682
That ain't massive pussy
THIS is massive
Take your pussy ass rugby and gtfo
>"b-but muh running for 80 minutes"
If I wanted to watch a bunch of boring faggots run for hours I'd watch track
>b-but muh pads
They make you hit harder you retard. As someone who's been tackled both in and out of pads, pads tackle was hands down harder.
All you insecure eurocucks get the fuck out.
>>36468465
I've lived around hockey players my whole life "live in Canada"
They're all pussies
>>36468598
>that
>natty
Rugby players on roids are atleast aesthetic
>>36468632
>roiding for this
>>36468598
>muh pads don't protect me, they make me hit harder
>>36468659
Except he isn't. He's roiding for rugby.
>>36467682
He looks like a little manlet compared to most NFL players.
>>36467356
i would play basketball or something like that, doesn't risk injury and involves more running around. football and rugby are just poor choices imo.
>>36468686
LONDON
>>36468686
>basketball
>doesn't risk injury
>>36468632
They test for roids in the NFL retard
>>36468670
Do you hit harder with bare fists or brass knuckles?
>>36468705
i mean don't be an idiot don't play hyper competitively and you really have no chance of injury, much less so than tackling people in tights but whatever what do i no.
>>36468723
>They test for roids in the NFL retard
Haha so fucking what? The majority of sports have testing, doesn't mean shit.
>>36468727
>playing a sport
>not playing "hyper competitively"
Why even play, then?
I played rugby until knee surgery. Most people I know that used to play rugby with me have at least ONE big injury and several small ones, plus cauliflower ears. In the years I played I lost a couple of toenails (they grew back thankfully, I got my hand broken twice, broke some foot bone AND the knee surgery thing.
Rugby is no joke, you WILL get smashed sooner or later.
I still love the sport but if I ever have kids, they're not playing.
>>36468737
Means they're not on roids you idiot
I guarantee you if someone like prime Adrian Peterson went and played rugby he would absolutely smash the league
>>36468759
So because the Olympics test for roids, Klokov is natty?
>>36468750
I loved rugby as a kid, even though I was pretty small, up until some fucking stupid cunt dived at my face head first for pretty much no reason other than him being a massive twat.
He broke my nose and that put me right off. I tried to get back into it but I just lost my courage.
>>36468759
delusional cunt
>>36468750
>>36468817
Just about to go back after Knee Reconstruction (ACL+MCL as well as meniscus removal) before that I'd broke my nose a few times, couple of concussions and I broke a bone in my hand (Open side flanker problems)
It's a risk that comes with the sport but these things happen. If my future kids showed interest in rugby I'd actively encourage it as the friends I've made and enjoyment I got from the sport far out weigh the injury.
>>36467548
Lol the force of hits in football is 50x harder. Pads make the game tougher not the other way around.
>>36468705
You won't get injured playing basketball if you don't play like a retard.
That's why you see the only players getting injured in apehoopball are reckless nignogs.
>>36468886
>WE WEAR PROTECTIVE GEAR TO MAKE THE GAME HARDER.
how much can you shill one pathetic excuse of a sport.
>>36468911
If football is such a pathetic sport, why don't you go to the NFL right now and make millions? If football players are so pathetic, it should be easy. Right?
>>36468883
>If my future kids showed interest in rugby I'd actively encourage it as the friends I've made and enjoyment I got from the sport far out weigh the injury.
Fuck that, they can get friends by doing countless other things, don't want to buy a one way ticket to snap city for my kids.
I still can't squat big or anything too demanding thanks to my knee.
>>36468759
lmao shows how much you know about gear
>since they test no one can be on gear right guys ?
m8 look up a book called steroid nation, it will give you a pretty good insight on gear and how its used in professional sports, and thats just the illegal side of it. They have doctors in the change rooms pumping them full of surgical grade aesthetics when they get injured. theres a court case going on where ex football players are suing the nfl for the fact that they were pumping them full of these meds without saying what the side effects of them were going to be.
this goes for any major sport, as soon as there's a lot of money to be made you can be damn sure that people will be on gear to compete at that level, Olympics included
>>36468930
did you do proper rehab and stick to it? Be honest.
I'm not saying it cant happen, of course it can. But given what I'm coming back from I feel like you should be able to squat again
>>36467356
Uh the football player looks bigger because he is wearing protective padding on his shoulders, chest, hips, thighs, knees, arms, elbows and, not depicted, on his balls.
A rugby player only wears that silly hat.
>>36469081
Mine was a bit harder than the usual meniscus, I developed an overgrown bone due to some trauma at some point and it was basically a bone tumor, it was a large surgery and half my left leg has no feeling because it affected some nerves too.
Admittedly, I could've done better at the rehab, but I'd still be fucked.
>>36468723
>do you hit harder with bare fists or brass knuckles?
You hit the same regardless, you stupid piece of shit. Brass knuckles make the impact surface harder to do more damage to softer tissue. You don't magically throw punches harder or faster when you use brass knuckles.
Padding is designed to reduce the total amount of force applied by spreading it over a large area. The laws of fucking physics prevent you from being hit as hard if you're wearing padding. It may hurt your skin than skin-to-skin contact, but your body is taking less punishment, you brickheaded faggot.
>>36469101
The Rugby player looks like a downie.
>>36468883
how is a broken bone in the hand specific to a 7
>>36469117
Ouch, yeah I've got some numbness due to nerve damage from the operations but that overgrown bone stuff sounds like a nightmare.
>>36469214
I meant the list of injuries rather than the hand specifically... but since you ask... hands in ruck... legally my hand shouldn't have been there but we all know that hands go in when you need to slow play down to give your defence time to re organise
>>36467356
>no armour
>tonnes of armour
Oh gee whiz I don't know which sport you should play OP.
>>36469583
yeah but they were the armour as they are not pussy ass like you berniecuck
>>36467356
big is not equal to tough. Some NFL players can be bigger but they are pussies against a Rugby player.
>>36468220
Yes, same for me.
>>36469615
???????
Speak English, retard. Or did all that brian damage you got from playing football mess you up that badly?
>>36469257
understand. been lucky in my three years of rugby til today only had my calve bone broken, didn´t even notice its broken til 8 weeks after and some fingers dislocated by old and tiny guys in choke tackle/ maul situations
