>>44845381 American football is about style and being imposing rather than gameplay. It's a more entertaining show than soccer or rugby, even though the gameplay in those is better. Plus, it's a lot more structured, ie it's broken down into smaller chunks, and easier to translate into other formats because of it. The different field positions in american football are a lot more like "classes", too. There's a greater difference between the big guys and the small guys than there is in the other two sports, soccer in particular.
>>44845381 Gridiron works better as a tabletop game, rugby is too difficult to get right as it requires players to work together too much and apart from tackles there's not much more contact compared to half the team running into each other like the yanks do. Football would just be passing 90% of the time as well.
>>44845781 How did the creators know anything about American football at the time? Was there a small following of it in Britain back then? I just think a sport that is not present in the Olympics says something about it.
>>44846060 NFL was shown on channel 4 from the mid-1980s onwards. At the time, GW was populated by enthusiastic amateur types, who were more about motorcycles, magic mushrooms and death metal than spreadsheets and profit margins. American Football was like the ultimate niche sport in the uk, and somewhat violent and with cool armour to boot. The story of the origins of Blood Bowl is that Jervis was already an NFL fan. He played his first ever game of WHFB and then promptly went home and set about building a tabletop fantasy football gam, just using the Fantasy mechanics.
Contrary to the idea it is only loosely based on NFL, the original Bloodbowl game had expanded rules for playing full NFL rules, with downs and field goals, etc
>>44851008 >Huh. Wow. Yup, 19 deaths in 1905. Nuts. Just like BB then >>44855149 Its because they can punch harder with gloves now, the same thing with murican football armour
With gloves and bandages you don't have to worry of rip your skin on a punch or to twist your wrist so you can punch harder but in professional boxing you don't use any protection on the head or body so the head trauma is worst than bare knuckle one (and the degenerative diseases for prolonged head trauma) The same goes for murican football, they can tackle with more strength because it's less likely to injure himself doing so, but that cause more injuries on the opponent
IMHO we need to get back to the minimum required protection gear in order to reduce the chance of injuries on sport players, so no armor for football players and helmets and no gloves for boxers
>>44845381 >Instead of what it is, why not rugby? >Instead of rugby, why not proper football? >Instead of proper football, why not baseball? >Instead of baseball, why not hockey? >Instead of hockey, why not tennis? >Instead of tennis, why not billiards? >Instead of billiards, why not interpretive dance? >Instead of interpretive dance, why not being smacked in the dick with a fucking aluminum bat?
Because American Football is broken up into many short periods of play, which makes it better suited to a turn-based game, as opposed to rugby's continuous flow. rugby league can just fuck right off though
That scenario always happens when the last batsmen left are the bowlers who don't know how to bat properly. Then it turns out later the dude has been training to bat and has actually become an all-rounder and blows the fuck out of everyone.
>>44855894 There's the more obvious strategy aspect of choosing where to hit the ball based on where the limited number of fielders are, and then more abstract strategy of the team's batting order and manipulating what the other team expects from each batter
And all the stuff about when the right time to Declare is, trying to get out the Nightwatchman before the end of play for the day, getting the right bowlers on the right wickets (how "quick" the ground is and all that). Marvelous stuff.
Cricket is to Commonwealth countries what Baseball is to America. It's a highly statistics aggregated sport but there's a large amount of strategy underneath it all when people stop talking about numbers like batting averages/hits/run rate etc. Equivalent examples in Baseball you might do a sacrificial bunt and put a runner on third and all sorts. Cricket like that example the weak batters might just look to play defensively until the end of the over so the batters swap over and then the other guy can do his thing and if he's one of the better batsmen in the lineup he'll be able to gain more runs. If I recall you can't change fielding positions mid-over so in that pictured example if the weak batter manages to gain a single run and puts the better batter on point, then the bowling team's fielding position is fucked.
Other things factor in like there is pitch condition to worry about plus the weather and that can determine whether you want more spin bowlers, medium pace bowlers or fast pace bowlers. Then you have to wonder how many bowlers you want or if you would rather have a minimum amount of bowlers and concentrate more on a stronger batting game if the pitch favours your batting lineup.
>>44856078 Nah, you can change field positions as much as you want. This is part of the tactics, sometimes a captain might send fielders to deep fine leg and deep square leg to make the batsmen think a short ball is coming when the bowler is going to bowl full, for example. Some captains just rearrange fields mid-over to piss about and annoy the batsmen (Nassar Hussain used to stand right next to the batsman as he did it).
You're bang on about pitch condition, atmospheric condition, and ball condition all contributing to how the ball behaves though. It's all a bit of a black art at times.
So, umm, they don't implement forward passing in BB even close to as it appears in football. There's a host of rules for when it can be done, who can do it, and to whom you can pass the ball. The two biggest changes in BB are that you can pass at any time to anyone. In football, you can only do it once per play, from behind the line of scrimmage (where the play starts from), and can only pass to around 4 of the players on the field (two backs plus the the outermost person on the line). Once the ball has advanced past the line of scrimmage, you can't pass forward any longer. On things like kicking plays, you can't pass forward at any time...
>>44856173 You make some good points, but you wrote your post in the style of a passive-aggressive little bitch so I'm going to ignore all of them. Next time drop the "so, umm" bullshit, if you want to disagree with someone just fucking disagree with them. You twat.
I've never really got a straight answer for this on /sp/, but how do rules like the Ineligible Receiver rule >>44856173 mentions even come about? It essentially reduces 4+ players on each side to just blocking each other for the sake of it unless they get an INT.
Same for how the ball goes dead when the pass is incomplete, or after the tackle.
>>44856078 >Other things factor in like there is pitch condition to worry about plus the weather This is a big thing in baseball as well. Groundskeepers have all sorts of tricks they use to make the home field advantage a real thing. Some fields are so sloped in places that you can't see the batter's knees from the dugout. Others have a half-dozen different strains of grass planted with different coarseness, which changes how the ball will roll across it. Many have sections of softer or firmer earth carefully watered to encourage or prevent pop-ups on landing. It's insane.
For one thing it's a game that lasts 5 days, where rain stops play, and is played in the English summer.
Reasonably, it has tea breaks
The longest game was 9 days of play over 10 days, and would have gone on slightly longer (there was but 42 points to catch up ) had the england team not had to catch their boat (it was the 30s), so it was declared a draw
Well then that just solidifies the example that Cricket and Baseball are really more alike than I thought then. I actually wasn't aware of any of those things you just mentioned in regards to baseball but interesting to know now.
>>44856283 Rules for the longest have always been about making passing more difficult to happen. It's only been recently that passing has become the favored way of advancing the ball. Hell, in the beginning, an incomplete pass resulted in a penalty for your team.
Aside from that, one of the first things the rules began doing that's continued through this day is defining two different rulesets for backs versus linemen on the offense. This sort of thing doesn't exist on the defensive side of the ball (you can literally use zero linemen or up to and including 11 linemen on defense -- it's just a bad idea).
In truth, this division is necessary because it's hard enough to cover the 4 or 5 receivers who do go out for passes. Also, if you were able to send more out, they could just send more people directly after your quarterback (some teams have an effective pass rush of just three guys going against the offense's five guys who are blocking).
I don't know if there's ever been a conscious choice in codifying the rules in this way though...I think that's just kinda how it all worked out and it worked out in a way that was competitive.
>>44846060 We've always had American Football in the UK, I used to watch it on Channel 4 decades ago when it was on late night. We're not all ignorant of other cultures here in the UK. Although I do have some nice beads I'd like to give away to some children...
>>44856489 That one is easy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-minute_warning
If you don't want to click the link the tl;dr is: officials used to keep the official time. The two minute warning was so that the people operating the stadium's clocks and the teams were all on the same page as to how much time was remaining in the game.
>>44856890 I can just tell you are in your 30s, because you still adhere to the stereotype that the Italians are the flounciest footballers around. :D
Sadly, everyone in football does this now. It is written into the game.
>>44856834 Strangely, the concussion spazz outs, murder-suicides, etc etc that you see in US sports aren't really seen in Aussie rules, or Rugby, or even MMA and boxing for the most part.
Concussions are dangerous. But I think the real mental trauma US athletes suffer from is from commercial steroid abuse. They all do it. It's in the interest of the sports bodies and the big pharma to keep this out of the spotlight though.
you see they make fun of the pads and plays but you literally LINE THE FUCK UP AND FULL BODY TACKLE THE OTHER DUDE AGAIN, AND AGAIN, and thats your job. You aren't running about catching the ball, you are fucking smash man, you will move five yards a play, and that is all you will ever do. Shit you can even be fat.
>>44857139 Why do they tackle like that in American Football anyway? Because they feel like they can? I only played in Middle School and they always say "Go for the legs, stay below the shoulders" but the higher up you get I think they encourage up to the shoulders.
>>44857139 I also played and I agree. The other part I find staggering about NFL is just how terrible they are at ball handling. You're just catching a ball, dudes. I don't believe that the suits of armour make it THAT much more difficult.
>>44857159 It's also excursion. You can throw yourself on the floor and keep getting back up when playing amateur sports at a slow pace. When everything is full throttle as you approach pro levels, you can't sustain such athletic play.
That said - the fitness levels in rugby are ~20 years ahead of NFL, at very least. But even there, once you get 50 minutes into an international match, you will see at least one of the teams worn out, going in for standing tackles and hold-ups rather than going for legs.
>>44845764 Actually, American football has a lot of players suffering future brain conditions because all that armour makes them more careless. Studies shows that when they take away the helmets during training the players get less concussions because when they wear the helmet they think they will be fine no matter what.
It's kinda like how the glowes in boxing actually doesn't soften the blows. They protect the hands so the boxers just ends up punching even harder.
>>44857031 >Strangely, the concussion spazz outs, murder-suicides, etc etc that you see in US sports aren't really seen in Aussie rules, or Rugby, or even MMA and boxing for the most part. That's simply because the hits aren't as hard in Rugby as they are in Football (boxing actually has more concussions, since you didn't realize). Steroids has nothing to do with it. For the same reason that boxing with gloves caused more deaths than without, hitting each other with padding caused more concussions than without. Watch "League of Denial" for more info. >>44857139 >>44857159 Tackling in American Football is done like it is to protect the guy holding the ball.
Before tackling rules, you could bash his head in and then scoop up the fumble
>>44857159 Depends largely on the position you're talking about. Most of the diving through someone tackles are done by secondary players. D-line and linebackers tend to actually tackle.
Aside from that, you're looking at a combination of rules designed to prevent injury by outlawing various low hits, plus what I suspect is a culture that discourages it because it can end someone's career. The NFL knows its primary job is to remain entertaining which isn't the same thing as being an exemplar of the highest level of technique in a sport. >>44857185 You'd be surprised, especially given how much visibility the helmet takes away. Shoulderpads affect the range of motion quite a bit, and you're neglecting the speed at which those balls are thrown. NFL speed passes can literally cut your hands with the ball.
>>44857207 >the fitness levels in rugby are ~20 years ahead of NFL, at very least. sigh. No, it's entirely different kind of fitness. It's like you're trying to say middle distance runners are in better shape than sprinters or olympic power lifters. The demands of the game are different so different kinds of physicality are needed.
>>44857304 No you misunderstand. Each of those sports gets concussions. But NFL is having a War on Concussions right now, because it is linking player deaths / depression / suicides etc to the condition.
What I was saying was, sports with equivalent levels of head trauma don't really record that level of off-field drama like NFL stars do.
>>44857363 >Not really. It's very comparable - especially if if compare League instead of Union with NFL. Short bursts, strength and speed. Yeah no. I'm sorry that's not remotely true, especially not of League. There's no where near the strength requirements in League because there's little direct, opposed pushing. Union is the better example because of scrums, mauls, and rucks, and they aren't really that close.
Here, check this out: http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/2/19/8068835/2015-nfl-combine-offensive-line-bench-press This kind of strength is required. Realize that they're talking about reps of 225lbs (around 100 kg) and that these are guys who are trying to get into the NFL where guys are stronger.
It's highly advantageous to try to knock the ball loose with an impact. Or, failing that, to rip the ball free by digging at it. Bringing the man down will typically occur naturally as a part of this. Also what >>44857304 said about protecting the ball carrier. Nobody wants to end somebody else's career.
>>44857460 Okay this is really a semantic argument then. I don't use "fitness" to describe mass-lifting power. I am talking stamina - I think that was clearly indicated in my example of Union players starting to flag by the hour mark.
My initial point was that kind of fitness is far more advanced in Union than in NFL. You're saying "there are other types of prowess". Which is right, of course. But it's not the thing I was describing.
And again, league is the better parallel for that because it has a comparable short-burst play style.
>>44857507 Amen. I say this all the time when they cover cricket reports, and they basically talk up the quality of the pitch being the reason for a batting collapse. I always think that if the groundskeeper is that important, why doesn't he get a mention?
>>44857496 but those points are all valid in Union too. You want to bring the man down, if you can rip the ball/jackal then excellent as well.
My point was that American Football tackles are more dangerous. They're generally spear tackles which aren't allowed in Rugby, you have to bind or at least be seen to attempt to bind. Binding is safer for both and more likely to result in a better tackle than merely running or diving at a man.
You have to have that kind of strength because you're pushing on guys who are 6'+ tall weighing between 300 and 400lbs who are strong enough to do that. >>44857542 You're referring to general fitness. I'm referring to fitness for task, and yeah, I'll accept that ruggers are more generally fit than football players.
>short bursts As far as Union versus League goes, that's literally all that it has going for it. If you're talking about backs compared to backs, you might be right, but pack compared to linemen? Union's better. You still have the explosive bursts in rugby, they're just linked with jogging in between. The actual act of scrumming is far closer to what happens every play in football though (and yes, I've played all three of these codes).
>>44857625 >not realizing that football is called football in the US because it's an alternate code of football. >not knowing that soccer was known as "soccer" a long time ago because it's a pain in the dick to say "association football" >thinking someone calling American football code football is being dumb >forcing me to recycle all of this crap that you should know.
>>44857719 'Soccer' is British. It is a contraction of 'association' as in association football. the 'er' is the Oxford er which was added to various things things for various reasons. see 'Rugger' an informal name for rugby football, generally Union.
>>44857926 what has always annoyed me about that is literally no one in the US who is involved with the game has ever called it that. It's seriously only a product of wikipedia pawing around for something that's inoffensive and landing on what Australians call it because "American football" which most people know it as might cause offense because the USA is not all of the Americas.
>>44859465 That hasn't filtered through: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gridiron_football >Gridiron football, or North American football, is a form of football primarily played in the United States and Canada. The predominant forms of gridiron football are American football and Canadian football.
And if they haven't been archived yet, pop into the talk page for some of the debates I was in over this very topic.
Leave it to fa/tg/uys to parrot the bullshit europhilic memes about sports
Having played none themselves, they have a pathetic jealousy for their fellow Americans who thrived in American sports, so they deride American sports, as if their opinions had any value, them being non athletes
>>44857338 Money plays a part Rugby is going in that direction atm The thing is lots of cash in the hands of young blokes high on testosterone from training or syringes is bad They attract female gold diggers who fuck their lives up - cipriani an example - cos the bitches need million dollar spending a month so they can catch a billionaire Buisnessman 10 years down the line Heck look at cricket Shane Warne
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.