Talking Footy

Fred wrote: ↑Sun Aug 04, 2019 2:10 pm

NRL&NFLweLaughATafl wrote: ↑Sun Aug 04, 2019 12:58 pm

Yes but that would know they play a form of Rugby.

If you show players in AFL uniforms around the world you would think.
Are they male netballers?
Do they play basketball?

They look nothing like a footballer. Then you could show them an AFL oval and they would probably think it is a Cricket field.

Nothing football about AFL. Playing on a cricket field with 8 vertical posts.

You dont even have propper goals

What is AFL Can't be football.

So.... this would have to be the stupidest rationale here... afl players don’t look like footballers ... rl and ru players do .. soccer players do ... but not afl players. Again... nothing to do with kicking the ball lol.

Are you really this stupid ? Seriously? AFL actually gave kicking as an integral and frequent part of their game. RL throwing the ball is the integral thing...but you feel rl deserves to be called football more so then afl???? That’s just such a stupid statement you should be enbarassed.

Fred wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 12:36 pm

Seriously.... again every thing you have said has almost nothing to do with kicking the actual ball. Afl players do use their hands but kicking is the main part of the game. In rugby codes kicking the main way to transition the ball is to throw it. Let’s compare how many times the ball is kicked.... to see if afl can be called football. It has more claims to being football than a gams where you predominantly throw it.

SportCapital wrote: ↑Sun Aug 18, 2019 2:28 pm

Sorry Fred. I meant the falling over bit to score.
Is there another ball sport that requires less skill to score a major?

SportCapital wrote: ↑Sun Aug 18, 2019 1:41 pm

To move the ball forward you must throw the ball backward.
It's like a cruel joke.

notaleaguefan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 19, 2019 4:02 pm

SportCapital wrote: ↑Sun Aug 18, 2019 1:41 pm

To move the ball forward you must throw the ball backward.
It's like a cruel joke.

the skill required to catch those 7-meter sideways throws! of the rubber ball, larger in size than an afl ball!
such skill

Terry wrote: ↑Mon Aug 19, 2019 5:31 pm

notaleaguefan wrote: ↑Mon Aug 19, 2019 4:02 pm

SportCapital wrote: ↑Sun Aug 18, 2019 1:41 pm

To move the ball forward you must throw the ball backward.
It's like a cruel joke.

the skill required to catch those 7-meter sideways throws! of the rubber ball, larger in size than an afl ball!
such skill

The skill required to miss a goal in the fumbling game but still get a point for twying weel hard!!! Incwedibool!!

Oh.....And welcome back idiot. Your village still got ya on the banned list pal??

Quolls2019 wrote: ↑Mon Aug 19, 2019 12:35 pm

Is Chuckball even a real football code.

The Argus
Saturday, 2 June, 1888.

A RUGBY CRITIC ON AUSTRALIAN FOOTBALL.

Comparison between the Rugby and Aus-
tralian games is apt to be forced during the
season by the presence in Australia of the
English team. In due time the question of
superiority will no doubt be definitely settled
in New South Wales, which, from being once
entirely Rugby, now devotes its atten-
tion largely to the Australian game,
which in both the northern and southern
ends of the colony is making rapid strides.
The fittest will, no doubt, survive. In the
meantime, it is desirable that wherever a
comparison is made it should be a strictly
fair one. In New Zealand, where two Vic-
torian footballers have lately been engaged
in teaching the members of the English team
our rules, several scratch matches at the
Australian game have been played, and
the writers upon football in the New
Zealand papers have taken advantage of
the opportunity to institute comparison be-
tween the two games. Remembering that
those playing the Australian game were for
the most part novices, the comparison could
hardly be otherwise than unfavourable to
it, and, indeed, under the circumstances, it
was foolish to attempt a comparison at all.
The point as already stated may be much
more fairly settled in New South Wales where
both games are played to something like per-
fection and in many of the inland towns, such
as at Maitland for example, the Australian
and Rugby games flourish side by side. But
to accept a chance Rugby game played in
Melbourne, or a scratch Australian match
in New Zealand as throwing any light upon
the point, is carrying the enthusiasm of the
partisan to extremes. As a sample of the
criticism to which the Australian game has
been subject, the following comments
of a writer in the Weekly Press are interest-
ing. In the first place, the title Australasian
game is termed an impertinence since the
game is not played in New Zealand. As a
matter of fact however, the game bears no
such title, and throughout the Australian
colonies is known as the Australian game.
The writer continues as follows :-
' An old footballer here described the game to me
on Monday as follows :-' The Melbournites obtained
the rules of all the games of football ever played,
picked out the worst points in each and putting them
together called that the Victorian game.
(Abridged)
Taking the objections in detail, it
is considered a blot upon the Aus-
tralian game that passing, otherwise
throwing from hand, described as one
of the beauties of the Rugby game, is
not permitted. The objection, if really
it be an objection, can scarcely be sus-
tained, for passing is allowed in our
game, only bearing in mind that the game is
football, and not handball, the players pass
the ball with their feet. In this, indeed,
rests one of the chief indictments against
Rugby, viz., that what with tucking the ball
under the arm and running the length of the
ground, or engaging when collared in what
is elegantly termed a "scrum," the game be-
comes a race, a go-as-you-please contest, a
wrestling match--anything you may name, in-
deed, except football.

Fault is also found with
the Australian (game) being obliged to bounce the ball
as he runs. We who have seen the Aus-
tralian game at its best know that bouncing
the ball does not affect a player's speed when
he becomes proficient in it. Were it other-
wise, the man who runs with the ball would
have a poor chance of covering any distance
with teams of twenty in the field. It
requires, however, more intelligence and
cleverness than merely hugging the ball
and running away with it, and in so
far tends to lessen the elements of "brute
force and blind ignorance"