Are you even trying, Europe?. . Are you even trying Europe?
Upload
Login or register
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (293)
[ 293 comments ]
Anonymous comments allowed.
151 comments displayed.
#17 - bckjoes
Reply +637
(05/28/2013) [-]
#142 to #17 - iggyblanco
Reply -26
(05/29/2013) [-]
thats because Europe has never even made it to the superbowl
#299 to #142 - awesomechardey
Reply +5
(05/29/2013) [-]
#308 to #299 - iggyblanco
Reply -9
(05/29/2013) [-]
I was joking guys
#222 to #17 - djequalizee
Reply -2
(05/29/2013) [-]
#145 to #17 - burningsmurfs
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
Wouldn't there be a ton of losses due to each team who didn't win each year though? At least that is making sense in my head. I just drove cross country I'm this side of brain dead don't judge me.
#287 to #145 - bckjoes
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
I'm not American, so somebody please correct me if i'm wrong.

I believe the Super Bowl is the name of the final game in the large American football tournament rather than the name of the tournament itself, therefore only two teams would be involved each time, and only one would lose.

So after 47 Super Bowls an American team would have lost 47 times
#312 to #287 - burningsmurfs
Reply -2
(05/29/2013) [-]
Ah yeah I was thinking of the teams that just plain didn't make it as well for some reason. Like I said, I was tired.
#221 to #17 - djequalizee
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#297 to #17 - mrshrapnel
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
Holy **** thats genious
#300 to #297 - vladhellsing ONLINE
Reply -2
(05/29/2013) [-]
#87 to #17 - SilentRaver
Reply +2
(05/29/2013) [-]
#318 to #17 - ironsoul
Reply +3
(05/29/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#61 to #17 - Tsquared ONLINE
Reply +7
(05/29/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#62 to #17 - zhanken
Reply +8
(05/29/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#35 to #17 - ohemgeezus ONLINE
Reply +24
(05/29/2013) [-]
yeah but we lost, and won 47, therefore we have a w/l of 0, we'll see what happens this season.
#146 to #35 - dovahsix
Reply +4
(05/29/2013) [-]
By that logic so has Europe... right?
#284 to #35 - senseofpurpose
Reply +3
(05/29/2013) [-]
Actually, 1 team wins and the rest loses, so you multiply 47 by the amount of the teams that lost. So, nope
Actually, 1 team wins and the rest loses, so you multiply 47 by the amount of the teams that lost. So, nope
#48 to #35 - anon
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
1
#52 to #48 - ohemgeezus ONLINE
Reply -29
(05/29/2013) [-]
Sorry, you dirty korean, but my superior math skills tell me that 47-47 does in fact equal 0, not 1.
#56 to #52 - kaitheguy
Reply +35
(05/29/2013) [-]
but we are looking for a ratio, Sir Faggot Ass McDickbiscuit. 47/47= 1/1
#54 to #52 - anon
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
u idiot, he probably meant the ratio. 1:1 you retard "merican
#63 to #17 - Wazzy
Reply +28
(05/29/2013) [-]
#73 to #17 - frysandaburger
Reply +50
(05/29/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#317 to #73 - shumdek
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
Sauce of this?
#321 to #317 - alstorp
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
#319 to #73 - frysandaburger
Reply -1
(05/29/2013) [-]
Dodgeball
#22 to #17 - smasselski
Reply +51
(05/28/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#19 - davvi
Reply +164
(05/28/2013) [-]
#131 to #19 - spartusee
Reply -4
(05/29/2013) [-]
Is it supposed to be a pie chart?
#153 to #131 - hewhoepicfails
Reply +10
(05/29/2013) [-]
No, it's supposed to be a cake chart.
#156 to #153 - spartusee
Reply -2
(05/29/2013) [-]
I don't know I don't feel like solving puzzles this late, no time. Does it mean Ms.? None of the things listed are universes, does it mean earth is the only habitable place out of these? Some of them are stars so again I'm confused.
#164 to #156 - hewhoepicfails
Reply +4
(05/29/2013) [-]
If killing brain cells was a crime, you'd make Hitler look like Gandhi.
If killing brain cells was a crime, you'd make Hitler look like Gandhi.
#168 to #164 - spartusee
Reply +3
(05/29/2013) [-]
I'm being really ******* stupid right now aren't I?
#170 to #168 - hewhoepicfails
Reply +7
(05/29/2013) [-]
#171 to #170 - spartusee
Reply +1
(05/29/2013) [-]
Being the idiot I am I shall not leave until I learn what this chart means!
#188 to #171 - unikornking ONLINE
Reply +2
(05/29/2013) [-]
It's implying that earth wins the Ms. universe contest every time because no other aliens races have participated.
#194 to #188 - spartusee
Reply +1
(05/29/2013) [-]
Oh, so it was poking fun at how comparing x and y to z, where y doesn't do z, is what happened in the comic. Okay, thanks.
#235 to #156 - jcdutt
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
None of those are stars, they're planets around stars.
#162 to #156 - hewhoepicfails
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#1 - mrshrapnel
Reply +145
(05/28/2013) [-]
Its funny becourse we play actual football.
Its funny becourse we play actual football.
#14 to #1 - zarcos
Reply -17
(05/28/2013) [-]
Football is lame....it's basically running and dancing but with a ball....
#24 to #14 - kez
Reply +5
(05/28/2013) [-]
American football is 3 hours of ads and people standing still and walking about and 12 minutes of quite cool running and throwing.
#91 to #24 - mynameisfoo
Reply +3
(05/29/2013) [-]
I know you're partly joking but that is still one of the least intelligent comments made about american football I've ever seen
#93 to #91 - kez
Reply -6
(05/29/2013) [-]
Its a joke, but its still true.

The average televised NFL game is:
-- 67 Minutes of players standing around talking.
-- 60 minutes (roughly) of Adverts
-- 17 minutes of replays
-- Only 11-12 minutes of play
-- 3 seconds of cheerleaders

With the rest of the time on the coaches, huddles, the broadcasters and other general random camera shots of fans and random people etc.
#98 to #93 - mynameisfoo
Reply +1
(05/29/2013) [-]
no 11-12 actual minutes of play is like the shortest amount of time played in the season, actual playing time is several minutes more. I play American football, it's much more anaerobic as opposed to soccer's aerobic exercise and has more specialized positions. both are difficult, just different kinds of it. each play is a wind sprint for american football
#172 to #98 - kez
Reply -3
(05/29/2013) [-]
Nah, 11-12 mins average bro.
#320 to #172 - mynameisfoo
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
again man, I play it. Fifteen minute quarters, and the clock runs after the play is complete when it's a run or a completed pass. incomplete, time out, if they run out of bounds, or any referee comments stop the clock. it does drain a lot between plays but it doesn't take up 3/4 of the actual game.
I'm not thumbing you down just so you know that's not me haha
#40 to #14 - rainbowrush
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
I once watched 30 min of american football. I think there was some 2 seconds play every couple of minutes, but I'm not sure. I'm not a big fan of football, but american football is just ridiculous.
#55 to #40 - anon
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
I don't care for either (hockey is my favorite), but I'd rather watch American football than soccer.
#4 to #1 - Nitsuin
Reply -3
(05/28/2013) [-]
Foosball?
#12 to #4 - himyouknowwho
Reply +4
(05/28/2013) [-]
Fußball
#241 to #12 - tocho
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
Fussball?
#243 to #241 - himyouknowwho
Reply +1
(05/29/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#251 to #243 - tocho
Reply +1
(05/29/2013) [-]
That face...
That face...
#32 to #4 - lordmoldywart
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
#117 to #1 - shadowhorn
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
generally I would agree with you, but an insult to American Football on here makes me want to destroy you. I hate american football, yet i find myself wanting to defend it.

WHAT HAVE YOU DONE TO ME AMERICA
#227 to #1 - anon
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
Mfw no one even mentions afl(the greatest sport ever)
#71 to #1 - chadisyounggg
Reply +3
(05/29/2013) [-]
I think it's funny how people insult the american football style. Like oh you guys wear helmets and shoulder pads? Haha whimps. Well imagine if we didn't a 7 foot 400 pound black man jumping on too you would probally kill you if not injure you first.

So what we play is real football let's take our pros and put them against your rugbe pros and see who wins.
#195 to #71 - kez
Reply +3
(05/29/2013) [-]
American football has hardly any 400lbs players.

Its worth mentioning of those 400lbs players, they dont run. They can have that excess 150lbs of fat because it helps them in short bursts as they have more weight behind their great stength.

Rugby players are 180-260lbs but are generally sprinting 100m in less than 13 seconds for the slowest of players and are running 10km a game. The average American footballer runs less than 0.5km.

Its a completely different game.

Rugby is mix of strength, technique, strategy and stamina, generally all arounders where as American football is a mix of some players extreme strength/force no stamina or extreme speed and stamina average strength with all needing technique and strategy.
#85 to #71 - drdonothing
Reply +2
(05/29/2013) [-]
try having part of your ear pulled off by a big welshman then carry on playing
#88 to #85 - doughboyfreshcak
Reply +2
(05/29/2013) [-]
i still would feel more threatened of a black guy running at me then a welish dude
#124 to #88 - slugnugget
Reply +2
(05/29/2013) [-]
except the welsh guy will do repeatedly for over an hour instead of giving you a break every 10 minutes.
#192 to #124 - SupraLover
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#90 to #85 - anINTENSEginger
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
Try getting your finger amputated halfway through a game to go back and play more.
#120 to #90 - slugnugget
Reply +1
(05/29/2013) [-]
rugby ripped his sack and had a testicle hanging out...

he played on.
#92 to #90 - drdonothing
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
Not trying to 1 up anyone just pointing out that rugby is not as much of a pussy sport as he seems to think.
#96 to #71 - kez
Reply -1
(05/29/2013) [-]
I'm sorry but if you did that the rugby guys would dominate.

The fitness of the rugby player is way superior of an American footballer.

They would just out run them in nearly every sport they competed in and only marginally lose on strength.
#77 to #1 - totalsuckpod
Reply +4
(05/29/2013) [-]
**** YEAH IT'S BEEN SIX HOURS AND THE SCORE IS STILL ZERO! FUTBOL #1!
#101 to #77 - kez
Reply -9
(05/29/2013) [-]
**** yeah!

Its been 3 hours and i saw 12 minutes of play! American football #1!

(Thats not even exagerating, thats true)

And i know yours was a joke, but most football games have a goal every 30 minutes at the most.

Where as every 30 minutes of American football averages 2 minutes of play. Again, not exagerating, thats true.
#111 to #101 - cjfj
Reply +8
(05/29/2013) [-]
Quit pulling 'statistics' out of your ass.

Besides, the time between plays in American football is more exciting than a vast majority of the time spent watching a bunch of ******* fairies run around in circles. In fact, the only excitement in soccer (football, whatever.) comes from the shots on goal, which last a second a piece and often result in nothing except the fairies dispersing or faking injuries.
#118 to #111 - shadowhorn
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
i have never before heard soccer described so perfectly. bravo, sir.
#119 to #111 - slugnugget
Reply -3
(05/29/2013) [-]
bunch of fairies? then what does that make you?

im sure you must be superior if you can look down at ultra athletic men making millions getting bitches to left and right. just because its not a contact sport doesnt make them pussys you stupid cunt.

hurr baseball is for fairies hurr basket ball is for theories.

watch whatever sport you like and **** off.

#163 to #111 - kez
Reply -6
(05/29/2013) [-]
Well those statistics i "pulled out of my ass" are true. So accept them or don't. I dont care if you cannot accept how actionless American football is.

No point reasoning with a butthurt American football fan. There is a reason it is the most popular sport in the world. Just because you cannot understand it doesnt mean you shouldnt respect it.

Plus its pretty hypocritical to call footballers fairies when american footballers have pads and ****.
#176 to #163 - cjfj
Reply +3
(05/29/2013) [-]
Here's why it's the most popular sport in the world. Any broke kids/families can find anything to use as a ball, and designate a 'goal'. You grow up with this dull **** and it just becomes second nature to you. If every kid in the world had such easy access to American football equipment, the football v soccer debate would look much different.

tl;dr: You'z a broke bitch.
#249 to #176 - adamks
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
No. It's because the most people in the world watch it on their ******* tv.
#187 to #176 - kez
Reply -5
(05/29/2013) [-]
Because throwing something and running into an area is only something rich people can do?

Thats probably the worst arguement I have ever seen, go to bed you are tired, that doesnt make any sense.

Also doesnt explain why the sport is generally dominated by wealthy european countries. Your ignorance is pretty impressive.

I like watching American football, despite how milked out it is. I have played it and enjoy it. You dont like football and obviously have rarely played it and are making terrible arguements that make no sense.
#244 to #187 - vigilum
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
To google!
Most popular sport in the world, according to You need to login to view this link

Currently the highest ranking countries are: Spain, Germany, Argentina, Croatia, Portugal, Colombia, England, Italy, Netherlands, Ecuador. More here: http://www.fifa.com/worldranking/rankingtable/index.html
So there's just 13 non-European countries in the top 30.
Besides, the explanation for how it is dominated by wealthy European countries
is that you can make a living on playing the sport if you're good.
And Europe is the country with the second largest amount of countries.

I tried checking FAF's world ranking, but I couldn't find anything official. And they're trying to tell me that Israel is a European country. And they should fire whoever designed You need to login to view this link
#294 to #244 - kez
Reply -4
(05/29/2013) [-]
You can easily make a living playing football in most countries...

I am not trying to be nasty or disrespectful but what is your comment trying to say?
I do not understand why you posted it.
#66 to #1 - yearofthemonkey
Reply +6
(05/29/2013) [-]
You mean this game?
You mean this game?
#122 to #66 - slugnugget
Reply +1
(05/29/2013) [-]
atleast they actually play instead of time out time out time out 10 seconds of action every ******* 10 minutes.
#314 to #122 - yearofthemonkey
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
It's still more action than watching a soccer game. 90% of a soccer game is played at mid field with both teams turning the ball over every 5 passes. 7% is corner kicks and 3% is scoring chances. A lot of the time, you won't even get a goal in a full 90 minutes.
#322 to #314 - kez
Reply -1
(05/29/2013) [-]
You are wrong
#174 to #122 - kez
Reply -2
(05/29/2013) [-]
Its less than that. 2-3 mins of play every 30 minutes is pretty average
#315 to #174 - yearofthemonkey
Reply -1
(05/29/2013) [-]
I would like to see your sources.
I play Football (from Canada), and I can tell you that there is more than 2-3 minutes of play every 30 minutes. If you watch professional football, most of the down time you see if from commercial breaks.
Where you get your information is unknown. I have yet to look at any knowledgeable sources which state there are 2-3 minutes of football over a course of 30 minutes.
#324 to #323 - yearofthemonkey
Reply -1
(05/30/2013) [-]
Should that be true, It is still a more exciting 20 minutes of sports than 90 minutes of soccer.

Take this an an example as a difference in the sports as well.

Soccer players fake they are hurt, Football players act as if they aren't.

http://www. youtube . com/ watch?v=NzAPvICrEI8
#325 to #324 - kez
Reply -2
(05/30/2013) [-]
I'm not saying footballers arent pussies, they are and it is pathetic. But why are you comparing a contact sport with a non contact sport and calling them pussies? Thats kinda dumb.

And if you gonna bring that up, Rugby or boxing are more physical game than American football. That doesnt make rugby , although I personally prefer it, or boxing better just because they involve more contact, they are just different sports.

Nah, you need to understand football and actually watch it to appreciate it.

The main problem with america is their football (soccer) league is absolutely terrible. And its harder to get into a sport when the top teams in your country are very poor.

Either way I am a rugby man personally, playing at a very high and competitive level. I have played on with a concussion, two broken ribs and a broken nose at the same time before personally. My friend has broken his spine in a rugby match before and kept playing.
Its just what you do in contact sports, especially rugby. Its not a big deal.

Rugby players have had their scrotum ripped open and their testicle hanging out and they play on. Others have broken legs or arms or ribs or neck or spines and loads of things and play on, its just kinda expected in rugby.

Pic related, Manu had his ear ripped in half ( and nearly off) in a recent rugby match and just taped it up and played on like nothing happend, had the stiches done after the game.

Its said 1/3 of rugby players are injured at any one time.
#38 to #1 - teoberry
Reply +7
(05/29/2013) [-]
You play basically what zarcos said, except for faked injuries thrown in for good measure.
#7 to #1 - empithree
Reply +20
(05/28/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#13 to #7 - empithree
Reply +16
(05/28/2013) [-]
nobody over the internet shares my love for football.
nobody over the internet shares my love for football.
#97 to #13 - anINTENSEginger
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
I do....
#23 to #13 - smasselski
0
has deleted their comment [-]
#95 to #13 - dadukesta
Reply -1
(05/29/2013) [-]
I do... Go Ravens.. And not because they won the superbowl but because they have a great line up and a cool quarterback and respectable fans...
#100 to #95 - anINTENSEginger
Reply +2
(05/29/2013) [-]
A cool QB who basically destroyed their team. I really don't think he deserves more money than all the QBs in the NFL.
#191 to #95 - welcometoatl
Reply +1
(05/29/2013) [-]
A great line-up? Everybody left this offseason.
#309 to #191 - anon
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
He doesnt know what he is talking about. He is a band wagoner. Good line up? Majority of their key pieces left this off-season and why? Because of Flacco, who didnt deserve that big of a payday.
#8 - eclecticparadigm **User deleted account**
Reply +100
(05/28/2013) [-]
What the rest of the world except for North America think Super Bowl is.
#39 to #8 - anon
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
I live in Canada and up until recently I had no idea what the superbowl was......
#51 to #8 - darthblam
Reply +3
(05/29/2013) [-]
Suddenly I want to swim in that bowl... filled with milk and Captain Crunch cereal...
#43 - gibroner ONLINE
Reply +60
(05/29/2013) [-]
everybody knows to win the superbowl you need freedom
everybody knows to win the superbowl you need freedom
#69 to #43 - chiefus
Reply -9
(05/29/2013) [-]
We don't play stupid games in Europe..
#99 to #69 - bigsaltyballs
Reply +4
(05/29/2013) [-]
cricket and soccer is pretty stupid if you ask me
cricket and soccer is pretty stupid if you ask me
#225 to #99 - chiefus
Reply +2
(05/29/2013) [-]
nobody asked you faggot
#116 to #99 - slugnugget
Reply +1
(05/29/2013) [-]
soccer... you mean the worlds most played sport.

ok son. time for bed.

and cricket is no more stupid than baseball.
#311 to #116 - urtukdamoocow
Reply -1
(05/29/2013) [-]
lies! Slander and lies!
#135 to #99 - anon
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
football*
#109 to #69 - gibroner ONLINE
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
really...
#239 to #43 - anon
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
so, new zealand's just slacking off?
#283 to #43 - anon
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
Then New Zealand would win every single super bowl
#44 to #43 - stgfilitov
Reply +9
(05/29/2013) [-]
'Murica.
#46 to #44 - gibroner ONLINE
Reply +9
(05/29/2013) [-]
Murica indeed
#59 to #46 - urtukdamoocow
Reply +3
(05/29/2013) [-]
#2 - mraye
Reply +35
(05/28/2013) [-]
We where going to try, but then we realized we didn't live anywhere in America, so playing American football would be pointless.
#224 - ireallylikepotatoe
Reply +34
(05/29/2013) [-]
We have Rugby over here.

It's the same sport but played by men.
#282 to #224 - intabutter
Reply -1
(05/29/2013) [-]
now thats what i call edgy
#293 to #224 - theshadowed
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
#310 to #224 - anon
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
Football is a harder hitting sport then Rugby by 3 times as much.

Video Proof. Ignorant *****. Long live science!
[url deleted]
#228 to #224 - zorororonoa
Reply +3
(05/29/2013) [-]
oh god, not this ******* argument again. Call in the butthurt everyones
#278 to #224 - rdunc
Reply +3
(05/29/2013) [-]
and both are *****
#229 to #224 - adrianking
Reply +4
(05/29/2013) [-]
That may be true.

But only because our version is played by bloodthirsty sadistic ******* animals.

(inb4 black joke)
#236 to #229 - REAVENTSNIPER
Reply +2
(05/29/2013) [-]
You're 'animals' wear thick padding, sorry but rugby players are ******* massive and they don't wear padding I'd like to see an american football team v them, they're ******* tanks.
#237 to #236 - adrianking
Reply -2
(05/29/2013) [-]
They wear padding because they kept killing each other.

And they still do. At an alarming rate.
#238 to #237 - REAVENTSNIPER
Reply +1
(05/29/2013) [-]
It's like 3 deaths a year on average.... and usually (sounds stupid) but padding and armor can be a cause of death+injury, We don't need **** we could easily tame your 'animals' with one man, rugby is for ******* psychopathic behemoths, american football is for, as you say, animals.... so crippled animal who needs protection? (hence the padding)
#240 to #238 - adrianking
Reply +1
(05/29/2013) [-]
"We?" Giving yourself a lot of credit there, REAVENTSNIPER.

First off, any death from a sport is unacceptable. Second off, before the padding was added and when American Football didn't deviate much from the Rugby standard in 1908, there were nineteen direct fatalities on the field, and that only increased to twenty-six in 1909. And this isn't counting the permanent injuries that ruined many players lives.

I appreciate your love for your sport, but to say that taking precautions for what is obviously a seriously dangerous activity is a weakness is just insane.
#247 to #240 - REAVENTSNIPER
Reply +2
(05/29/2013) [-]
'We' talking about 'us' as a community our country that supports the sport, not myself as a whole or direct focus.

I understand your opinions on the added safety precautions of american football, to emphasize on the fact that they needed it because of the brutal nature that resulted in many deaths on the field. However your opinion is lopsided and biased providing only information to back up your side ( assuming you're american?) and not that of the game of rugby, (not sure if it's origin so I'm not going to assign it to any country) I'm not much of a sports person myself. All sports are seriously dangerous, but this was the comparison of the two games assuming american football is derived from rugby yet included with the added safety precautions while England pretty much did '**** all' and kept the same. (talking about the padding etc). Lets leave it at this?
#246 to #240 - awesomechardey
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
So the difference is, European Rugby animals just don't die when they get poked a little.
#252 to #246 - adrianking
Reply -2
(05/29/2013) [-]
Or they don't poke as hard. Whose to say?
#258 to #252 - thirdjess ONLINE
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
I just wanna jump in an add a point, to my understanding, in American football the main idea is to have the quarter back through it all the way down field where it either gets kicked in or tryed (do you even have trys?) Suffering maybe one or two tackles per play. In Rugby the ball is passed and worked all the way down field tackle by tackle. So they get hit a lot more, a lot harder.
#263 to #258 - adrianking
Reply -1
(05/29/2013) [-]
One thing to be considered is that because of the passing effect, players are a lot more exposed. A quarterback must stand upright, with arms up and chest exposed to be able to throw a ball with any distance, and a collision with an linebacker who may have a hundred pounds on him when he is not in a defensive stance (that rugby players are consistently in) could cause terrible injuries to the players neck, spine, and ribs.

On the receiving end, catchers often have to extend their arms away from their torso, creating the same issues. On the same note, being suspended in the air as is often necessary to catch a wide pass, can set a player up for some brutal treatment from the opposition.
#264 to #263 - thirdjess ONLINE
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
Both those players have other players dedicated to keeping the opposition away from them.
#266 to #264 - adrianking
Reply -1
(05/29/2013) [-]
Players that often fail. Look up a "quarterback sack."
#269 to #266 - thirdjess ONLINE
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
Guy one gets to duck, has twenty besser blocks thrown at him.
Guy two gets a ply wood shield but has to stand upright, has three besser blocks thrown at him.

Who do you think gets hurt more?
#270 to #269 - adrianking
Reply -1
(05/29/2013) [-]
Hey, don't underestimate the power of ducking.
#271 to #270 - thirdjess ONLINE
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
The difference is they get to redirect the impact, but honestly after so many hits I don't think it matters.
#274 to #271 - adrianking
Reply -1
(05/29/2013) [-]
Oh, it matters. Ask any player, both Rugby Union and American Football, they'll agree "it's the one they didn't see coming that got them."
#277 to #274 - thirdjess ONLINE
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
My little brother had knee surgery from football, I know that a defensive position can make a difference on a tackle. On a single tackle. Like I said though, they get hit repeatedly.
#279 to #277 - adrianking
Reply -1
(05/29/2013) [-]
Much more than a single tackle. It's the difference between smacking a tree with a pipe or taking an axe to it.

Of course either way there are going to be injuries. You have huge, adrenaline and testosterone-filled mammals getting mad and smashing into each other at high velocities, **** will go down
#285 to #279 - anon
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
You're very mad aren't you? Rugby players could EASILY beat a NFL player in strength. Rugby players don't need padding, because they are tougher.(and they don't need steroids)
#289 to #285 - adrianking
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
I legitimately don't care. Just providing insight to how it is across the pond, and why pads don't make an individual weaker.
#254 to #252 - awesomechardey
Reply -2
(05/29/2013) [-]
They poke harder than you can imagine. I can promise you.
#257 to #254 - adrianking
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
Goddamn, a man can't make a ******* joke about a sport without people jumping on his nuts and roping him into an argument.

Fine, your sweaty man sport is better than our sweaty man sport. Go have a lager and enjoy your victory.
#259 to #257 - awesomechardey
Reply 0
(05/29/2013) [-]
lol, I'm not even british
#262 to #254 - stdhen
Reply -1
(05/29/2013) [-]
they don't poke harder, they poke more often. the average AF hit is 3,000lbs. of force, the average rugby hit is 1000lbs. of force. however, the average AF player only pokes 10 times a game, wereas the average rugby player pokes about 35 times per game. something else to point out is that AF is one game a week, rugby can be up to 4 times a week. thats 30,000lbs of poke by and AF player, and 140,000lbs of poke by a rugby player, and if you want by team, thats 330,000lbs for AF, and 2,100,000lbs of poke by a rugby team....
#265 to #262 - awesomechardey
Reply -1
(05/29/2013) [-]
yeah, don't take this **** too serious... It's just a fun site here.
#267 to #265 - stdhen
Reply -1
(05/29/2013) [-]
But my opin.... But... okay
#255 - europe
Reply +28
(05/29/2013) [-]
No, I'm not.
#260 to #255 - anone
Reply +2
(05/29/2013) [-]
oh you
#105 - incest
Reply +27
(05/29/2013) [-]
Only related gif I have
Only related gif I have
#280 to #105 - starswirl
Reply +2
(05/29/2013) [-]
Have the full one, bro
Have the full one, bro
#231 - peschardt
Reply +20
(05/29/2013) [-]
Bitch, we are fabulous and take our singing serious