|
|
Post by blazerrose on Mar 21, 2014 2:33:09 GMT
It's March Madness season, and it seemed a perfect time to talk about sports myths.
Some were discussed on the old Disco boards, like can you actually gain time if you shave off all of your body hair before swimming, but what others do you have? Keep in mind, the team can do their own testing for these, or they can bring in an expert (Matt Cain, anyone? Or the swimmer for the syrup myth?). Personally, I would dig a football myth, if for no other reason than to get a showdown between Colin Kaepernick and Russell Wilson again LOL.
For our UK friends who know football as something different - Can a leather soccer ball be lethal if it gets wet and you go to do a header?
So what do you say? Is it time for Sports Myths part deux?
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Mar 21, 2014 3:28:46 GMT
how about the myth about who hits harder: American football or Rugby. dress Buster in the appropriate attire, and let two of the respective sports' best have a go at him.
for that matter, you could square off baseball vs cricket, as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by blazerrose on Mar 21, 2014 5:21:21 GMT
Ooooh, a little friendly competition between nations.  |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Mar 21, 2014 7:48:19 GMT
This is going to get Ugly.
"Scrum"
If you watch UK Rugby, some of the players who are on the front row of the Scrum, wear head bands....
This isnt a fashion thing.
Its to stop the opposing team ripping their ears off?....
Who hits hardest..... UK rugby or US American Football.....
I will say that the UK rugby hits hardest in "anatomical correct" area's.... they know how to hurt and what to hurt?.... without disabling the player completely.... they want him to limp off (a walk of shame) rather than be stretchered off.
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Mar 21, 2014 7:49:43 GMT
Leather football "Lethal"....
Well, there have been documented instances of "Knocked unconscious"..... does that count?....
No one has died "on the pitch" that I know of from heading a ball.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Mar 21, 2014 11:11:45 GMT
I love the idea of pitting Rugby and (American) football players against each other, or cricket against baseball.
Cricket Vs Baseball might be fun because there are two or three 'cheap and simple' ideas that spring to mind;
Americans are incapable of understanding Cricket, likewise the British are incapable of understanding baseball.
Could a batsman from one of the sports compete reasonably well in the other sport? (In other words do the skills for baseball translate well to cricket and vice-versa)
Which is more dangerous, a baseball or cricket ball?
|
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on Mar 21, 2014 11:58:36 GMT
how about the myth about who hits harder: American football or Rugby. dress Buster in the appropriate attire, and let two of the respective sports' best have a go at him. for that matter, you could square off baseball vs cricket, as well. Probably, and I say this as a rugby union fan who is going to Wembley tomorrow with 80,000 others to see his team play, well also as one who has a season ticket and watches ordinary matches in the pouring rain, American Football hits harder. The regulations in rugby regarding the Tackle, it can't be too high, a proper attempt in the referees opinion must be made to wrap the arms around the opponent rule 10.4 f, in the IRB rule book, a person cannot be tackle if they are in the air, etc mean that it is about making a proper tackle rather than just a hit in rugby. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Mar 21, 2014 13:29:30 GMT
This is going to get Ugly. "Scrum" If you watch UK Rugby, some of the players who are on the front row of the Scrum, wear head bands.... This isnt a fashion thing. Its to stop the opposing team ripping their ears off?.... Who hits hardest..... UK rugby or US American Football..... I will say that the UK rugby hits hardest in "anatomical correct" area's.... they know how to hurt and what to hurt?.... without disabling the player completely.... they want him to limp off (a walk of shame) rather than be stretchered off. of course, we are dressing the American football dummy in his full armor... so if Buster shows equal G-forces on both impacts, we know the Yanks hit harder. remember - we're going with how hard they hit, not with how dirty they play. (although that could be one of those "untestables" you don't think they wear plastic shields over their eyes here to be fashionable, do you? its hard to find mud to fling on astroturf, but it is possible. and that brings up another gridiron myth - is Astroturf truly a more dangerous playing surface than grass? I would be inclined to think it would be a skid-and-catch traction event that would produce the danger to ankles and knees; and that is testable. |
|
|
|
Post by PK on Mar 21, 2014 15:19:36 GMT
Another sports myth that was brought up on the old Disco site and occurred to me during the Winter Olympics:
Runaway skis.
There are several variations of this, but they all come down to the same thing: just how dangerous is (was) a runaway ski.
The version I heard when I was a kid (back when skis had bindings rather than brakes and runaway skis were not uncommon) was specific to lower-body injuries: if it built up enough speed it could break a leg or even skewer your body. (Obviously, a blow to the head with a hard, fast moving stick has lethal potential).
Another variation I recall from Disco was a ski going through the door of a car in the parking lot, or the door to the lodge.
Testing might be difficult, particularly this year. What with the drought in California, ski resorts are going to be closing down soon, and those that are open are not going to want to shut down an entire groomed area for this. And while the actual testing of potential damage could take place in the shop, I'd think they would have to go to a real groomed run to see just how fast a runaway ski can go.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Mar 21, 2014 15:35:10 GMT
I think that given the turnaround time for setting up myths, if they could come up with a few other winter sports related myths, they could do them early next winter, and as for shutting down a slope - they could simply do it after hours on an early weekday. (many ski areas have shorter hours earlier in the week than on "weekend ski days")
|
|
|
|
Post by blazerrose on Mar 22, 2014 3:13:52 GMT
Or, they can come on up to Mt. Hood - the Palmer snowfield is open almost all year long, and would give them plenty of room. Plus, not that many people ski/snowboard in the summer.
|
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Mar 22, 2014 3:40:24 GMT
This is going to get Ugly. "Scrum" If you watch UK Rugby, some of the players who are on the front row of the Scrum, wear head bands.... This isnt a fashion thing. Its to stop the opposing team ripping their ears off?.... Who hits hardest..... UK rugby or US American Football..... I will say that the UK rugby hits hardest in "anatomical correct" area's.... they know how to hurt and what to hurt?.... without disabling the player completely.... they want him to limp off (a walk of shame) rather than be stretchered off. of course, we are dressing the American football dummy in his full armor... so if Buster shows equal G-forces on both impacts, we know the Yanks hit harder. remember - we're going with how hard they hit, not with how dirty they play. (although that could be one of those "untestables" you don't think they wear plastic shields over their eyes here to be fashionable, do you? its hard to find mud to fling on astroturf, but it is possible. and that brings up another gridiron myth - is Astroturf truly a more dangerous playing surface than grass? I would be inclined to think it would be a skid-and-catch traction event that would produce the danger to ankles and knees; and that is testable. Maybe they could get Ray Lewis to do a guest appearance. I know he's retired, but he hasn't been for very long, so he probably still hits like a runaway dumptruck. He's done it before for some sports science show while he was still active, but they never made the comparison with rugby players. If he's not interested, maybe they could try getting a safety like Ed Reed, Troy Polamalu or Bob Sanders. Those guys are infamous for making big hits. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Mar 22, 2014 7:48:24 GMT
of course, we are dressing the American football dummy in his full armor... so if Buster shows equal G-forces on both impacts, we know the Yanks hit harder. remember - we're going with how hard they hit, not with how dirty they play. (although that could be one of those "untestables" you don't think they wear plastic shields over their eyes here to be fashionable, do you? its hard to find mud to fling on astroturf, but it is possible. and that brings up another gridiron myth - is Astroturf truly a more dangerous playing surface than grass? I would be inclined to think it would be a skid-and-catch traction event that would produce the danger to ankles and knees; and that is testable. Maybe they could get Ray Lewis to do a guest appearance. I know he's retired, but he hasn't been for very long, so he probably still hits like a runaway dumptruck. He's done it before for some sports science show while he was still active, but they never made the comparison with rugby players. If he's not interested, maybe they could try getting a safety like Ed Reed, Troy Polamalu or Bob Sanders. Those guys are infamous for making big hits. I still remember back in the 80s or 90s, two defensive linemen hit the ball carrier from opposite direction, and put him into a flat spin above their heads. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Mar 22, 2014 9:46:27 GMT
A Volunteer is it?....
Ok, just stand there...
I would say a cricket ball, but then again, it depends on who is throwing it.
A Weight at speed........
Cricket fast bowlers or fast pitchers... I think it pretty even on who throws the fastest, and cricket bowlers stood still may have exactly the same speed as a baseball pitcher?...
Can a Bowler throw whilst stood on that mound, and can a Pitcher make a decent run up to the crease?... (And still make a decent on target pitch whilst staying "In") now there is something that needs testing...
|
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Mar 22, 2014 9:46:42 GMT
Erm....
No.
No padding now.
Padding is for Whusses.....
And there you have it.
Yes we use a headband to keep Cauliflower Ears attached, but other than a gum shield, REAL men do it without padding up?...
Real men play with odd shaped balls...
seen as a bumper sticker on a Welsh Rugby fans car.
Had me laughing...
If you were to allow padding up in Rugby, you would see welsh fly-halves being punted out of the stadium by English forwards... and Vicky Verca. (Who is a nice girl, but changes her mind a lot?..)
Rugby players dont always steam in at full thrutch.... if they did, it would HURT, a LOT.... if they had padding and COULD?...
I think you would need to give each teams a few weeks training opportunity,....
One, to get used to the new rules.
Two to get used to the new equipment.
Three for the Americans to get used to the LACK of it?....
Hang on, I have an entirely appropriate but totally different myth that may need some attention.
The origins of....
Rugby, we all know the origins where William Webb Ellis decided to get inventive and picked up the ball and ran with it....
However...
Myth has it that the reason he did so was that someone had landed on the ball, and squashed it. hence its shape.
Being the ONLY ball, and not wanting to end the session, William just picked it up and said we can still play, just carry the ball and throw it instead of kicking it....
The rules have changes a lot since then, but how true?...
American football came from the same origins....
But because you took it over the pond, your rules went slightly astray....
Myth has it there are important differences in the shape of the ball.
The American ball is shaped to fly better in a straight line when thrown.
The British ball, not so much?.... its shaped more to give grip with muddy hands on a wet pitch.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on Mar 22, 2014 10:07:46 GMT
Erm.... No. No padding now. Padding is for Whusses..... And there you have it. Yes we use a headband to keep Cauliflower Ears attached, but other than a gum shield, REAL men do it without padding up?... Real men play with odd shaped balls... seen as a bumper sticker on a Welsh Rugby fans car. Had me laughing... If you were to allow padding up in Rugby, you would see welsh fly-halves being punted out of the stadium by English forwards... and Vicky Verca. (Who is a nice girl, but changes her mind a lot?..) Rugby players dont always steam in at full thrutch.... if they did, it would HURT, a LOT.... if they had padding and COULD?... I think you would need to give each teams a few weeks training opportunity,.... One, to get used to the new rules. Two to get used to the new equipment. Three for the Americans to get used to the LACK of it?.... Hang on, I have an entirely appropriate but totally different myth that may need some attention. The origins of.... Rugby, we all know the origins where William Webb Ellis decided to get inventive and picked up the ball and ran with it.... However... Myth has it that the reason he did so was that someone had landed on the ball, and squashed it. hence its shape. Being the ONLY ball, and not wanting to end the session, William just picked it up and said we can still play, just carry the ball and throw it instead of kicking it.... The rules have changes a lot since then, but how true?... American football came from the same origins.... But because you took it over the pond, your rules went slightly astray.... Myth has it there are important differences in the shape of the ball. The American ball is shaped to fly better in a straight line when thrown. The British ball, not so much?.... its shaped more to give grip with muddy hands on a wet pitch. Actually some degree of padding is allowed in Rugby Union Fotball, mainly around the shoulders and collarbone, it must be made of a light compressible material, normally built into an undershirt. These are the ones produced by Gilbert, who also manufacture the most popular match ball, including the ones used in the World Cup. www.gilbertrugby.com/body-armour/shoulder-padsThey like scrum caps that some players wear are not made of hard incompressible material. |
|
|
|
Post by OziRiS on Mar 22, 2014 10:30:39 GMT
Padding is for Whusses..... To put it in your own words: Erm... No! Having played both rugby and american football, I can tell you for certain that there's a perfectly good reason for the padding and helmets. I believe it was yourself who said that there's a vast difference in how the two types of players tackle. Rugby players are very focused on bringing the ball carrier to a complete stop by wrapping up his legs, whereas football players often make more of a genuine hit. After having played rugby for two years and having been tackled more times than I can remember without any injuries worse than some rather large bruises and a twisted ankle, I was in for a schock when I stepped onto a football field. The first hit I took knocked the wind right out of me, as I was blindsided by a blocker on a kick return. He hit me in the side in an upward motion, sending me flying at least a foot in the air and 3 or 4 feet sideways before I hit the ground. I couldn't breathe at all for the first 20-30 seconds and when I finally could again, I was hyperventilating like crazy for the next couple of minutes. And this dude wasn't even a linebacker or a safety. He was a wide receiver/cornerback who just happened to see an opening to cause some pain. I've never taken a hit like that in a rugby game and I can assure you that I was more than satisfied with wearing a helmet on that particular occasion! If I hadn't, hitting the ground like I did might have caused a serious concussion. Even with the helmet on, I've scored myself a few of those, not to mention broken ribs, dislocated a shoulder and broken my fingers more times than I care to remember. So no. Padding is not for wusses. It's for people who play a very different game than rugby. What I will say for rugby though is that every defensive player in football should learn how to tackle 'the rugby way' before being allowed anywhere near a running back! How many times have you seen an NFL game where a defensive player is lined up perfectly to cut the ball carrier down and then he goes too high and bounces right off of him? If they'd just tackle like rugby players - grab him around the hips and slide down to lock his legs - they'd stop him 9 out of 10 times. My brother and I had pretty good success with that approach - me as an outside linebacker and my brother as a defensive end. Once they learned that, most teams wouldn't run to our side unless they had at least two lead blockers or had a very short way to go for the first down. My brother and I - who both played rugby before football - had the best tackle percentage on the team for two years. More than 90% of contacts we had with a ball carrier resulted in him being stopped. The average for the rest of the team (who hadn't learned the rugby tackle) was around 80-85%. |
|
|
|
Post by silverdragon on Mar 22, 2014 11:11:59 GMT
[Edit SD, I am a Cynic, I am the boards registered cynic, before you read this, know that it is being said with a cynical sense of humour?....]
So what you are saying, is of the NFL tackles were more rugby style, they would stop the players more often with out the need for a HUGE impact.....
So the padding would not be needed......
The armour plating sure makes a glorious noise when two huge players collide... but as you say, they then bounce off and continue....
So the padding and armour plating are for "FX" effect rather than effective effect.....
Big Bangs more often without actually stopping play.
As for the tackles...
There is an offence in Rugby known as the high tackle.....
Yet in American football, not only have I seen "Clothes line" tackles, I have seen blatant grabbing of the nose-guard and helmet handling whilst tackling.
I seem to understand then when you "Sack a quarterback", there are no actual rules how you do it?...
And if you do it in a way that has the quarterback stretchered off, there will be extras in your "Bung"....
Also, in Rugby, once you have bought the opponent to ground, you must roll away....
Not "Sit on them" until play stops.
As Always, the above is observed behaviour, and as in football, I see players dive like an Olympic swimming team, I am sure not all I see is entirely legal.
It strikes me, American Football is HUGELY visually Violent.
The violence is a lot like the wrestling, done for effect, and not always real....
Its a visual entertainment thing for the crowd to enjoy?....
Rugby is a game played by odd shaped men with odd shaped balls, it is violent, but not cruel, and its a team effort to get that ball over that line, in any way that works, as long as you play the game and keep it clean.....
"Fairness".
I dunno... I sometimes wonder if we got it wrong.
England plays "Fair", we abide by the rules.
The rest of the world seeks to find ways to bend the rules.
We have to either adapt, or accept we can no longer play "Fair" if we actually want to win.
And now, winning is all that matters?...
Many years have passed since I heard the crowd saying "Bloody good game, even if they did win, both sides played well..."
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Mar 22, 2014 13:02:43 GMT
grabbibg your opponent by the face mask is disallowed - and can result in a penalty on the play. new rules have been instituted that penalize outside of the game as well for unnecessary roughness (which is, itself a penalizable offense.)
but consider: the offensive linemen are not allowed to grab onto a defensive lineman and vice versa. the only person who can actually be grabbed is the person in current possession of the ball.
and if you tackle the ball carrier the rugby way, you have given him an extra three yards over what he gets if you catch him square on and stop him in his tracks, let alone what you can get if enough of you grab onto him and bum rush him back towards the other end of the field.
(the legal definition of a successful tackle brings his knees to the ground while you are in contact with him; and the new line of scrimmage is where the ball was aligned when that happened.)
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Mar 22, 2014 13:11:36 GMT
A Volunteer is it?.... Ok, just stand there... I would say a cricket ball, but then again, it depends on who is throwing it. A Weight at speed........ Cricket fast bowlers or fast pitchers... I think it pretty even on who throws the fastest, and cricket bowlers stood still may have exactly the same speed as a baseball pitcher?... Can a Bowler throw whilst stood on that mound, and can a Pitcher make a decent run up to the crease?... (And still make a decent on target pitch whilst staying "In") now there is something that needs testing... there are two tests available for that. one, have a bowler and a pitcher each deliver a ball at competition velocities to a human analog - (no padding on this one as we are discussing an errant ball rather than a ball on gear designed to protect from the ball) the other, have a batter an a batsman deliver one to a human analog where the pitcher or bowler would be. I know that on occasion, a pitcher gets dropped by a hard hit ball that he happens to be in the way of. don't know if the same has happened to a bowler. (BTW, surface area of the ball will make an effect as well. a regulation softball is larger than a hardball, though both are about the same compressability (or lack thereof) - the softball can be caught barehanded at higher velocities than a hardball can. I think I recall a cricket ball is smaller than a regulation hardball.) |
|
