--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Kevin Tarr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > At 10:55 PM 1/5/2004, you wrote: > >Jan Coffey wrote: > > > > > The Sugarboal. (Why do they call it a boal?) OU looked like they > > > didn't care, but then the LSU defence was rolling over them. > > > >In answer to the question, I think because various stadiums were called > >"bowls" or something. If anyone has a better answer, I'd be interested > >in it. > > Yes, that's mostly right. The football game played after the Rose > festival/parade was first. There was a game in 1902,
That game was a Rugby Football game BTW. >then the next one in > 1916. The same for this game. Even though much of the football played at that time had added the forward pass, and even though a couple of years earlier the Scrummage had been slightly altered, and happened more often, the game in 1916 was still essentially Rugby. > I can understand the arguments against football, but to me it seems like > nothing is happening in rugby or soccer most of the time. I would never say > I'm an expert, but I've watched enough to form my opinion. That's very strange that you would say so Kevin. In comparison the vast majority of the time from the beginning to the end of a football (grid-iron) game is not spent actually playing. I will agree that Soccer lacks structure, and that scoring happens so infrequently that for many it is hard to stay interested. For the spectator, it is in many ways the opposite of Basketball where, for some, scoring actually happens too frequently. In Soccer some spectators get the sense that nothing is happening because the field position is less about which end of the pitch the ball is on, or who is controlling the ball. These are factors, but the overall structure of where on the field players are located and how they are repositioning is actually more important. That's why televised Soccer tends to be shot from a much wider angle. But how can you compare Rugby to Grid-Iron Football and say that nothing is happening. Rugby is constant action. The ball seldom dies. And when it does there is variety in the way that it is restarted. Unlike in Grid-Iron where the Ruck and the Scrummage (and line out actually) have been combined as the line of scrimmage. Every time the ball would have been contested in a Ruck play stops, everyone takes a break, the coach comes in to command the next move, the players line up again for another ruck-scrummage, and only then does play continue. After 4 of these without a 10 yard progression, a side is forced to turn over the ball. In Rugby when a player is going to be tackled they can pass the ball back to a teammate and the action continues. When a player is tackled they must release the ball and it is contested in a Ruck and play continues. Of course you might have gotten the idea that nothing is happening from watching "Rugby League" Which is kind of a split between Grid- Iron and Rugby. "Rugby League" is very similar to American Football in the 1910s and 20s without the forward pass. I agree Rugby League without the forward pass is less interesting to watch than Grid-Iron. There are 6 downs in Leage with a sudo-ruck formed each time a tackle happens, and no yardage requirement. Scrums don't exist, and unfortunately most of what a spectator sees is the backs catching and re-kicking the ball to the other side of the field. Sometimes it almost looks like a bizarre tennis match played with an American Football. There are actually 8 League teams in the US, all in eastern states. There is quite a bit of talk rumored by this League to give up the "League" rules in favor of "Union" (the real Rugby) Laws. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
