Ambrosia Software Web Board: Bacon! - Ambrosia Software Web Board

moonunit4eva, on Mar 20 2008, 12:46 PM, said:

I dunno..this guy's pretty cool

Those pants look like they'd be quite uncomfortable.

-Pufer

And oversize shoulderpads were so 80's.

Jeremiah, on Mar 24 2008, 10:24 PM, said:

Or Gridiron.

You're not allowed to call it gridiron here.

-Pufer

And why do the players wear all that padding and then spend a lot of the game not playing?

Because American's are wusses when it comes to sport. Compare American football to rugby : )

Bacon rugby....

Rugby consists of a bunch of big guys smashing into each other and trying to avoid killing themselves for a while. Football consists of a bunch of guys doing crap that would normally kill them and then sitting around for a while. While there's more going on in a rugby game, you have to be smart about it to not kill yourself or your opponent. It's kinda like hockey in that. A lot of the aim of football is to try to ram the top of your head into your opponent's face when you're both running at full speed and see who's still standing afterwards. They're really probably pretty equal.

-Pufer

Football has more homoeroticism though, I'd bet.
Do rugby players smack each other on the bum before, after, and during the game?

This post has been edited by Rickton: 05 April 2008 - 03:47 PM

Edit: On second thought, a scrum involving nothing but topless women in skimpy rugby shorts might be NSFW even though it so clearly demonstrates the homoeroticism present in rugby and doesn't really show anything anyway. So here's a link instead.

-Pufer

This post has been edited by Pufer: 05 April 2008 - 04:27 PM

I'm just learning all about the culture of the UK this week.

I've always thought that women's wrestling (I mean real olympic wrestling, not WWF or UFC or whatever) would be extremely marketable.

Pufer, on Apr 5 2008, 09:08 PM, said:

Odd. All that link did was conveniently emphasise the lack of homoeroticism in a rugby scrum for me. I mean, any other situation with that many topless women in such close proximity would be sexually charged, but that picture is so completely asexual I can only attribute it to the nature of the scrum draining the sexuality from the picture.

In any other situation, a bunch of guys slapping each other's asses in public while wearing colorful tight spandex pants would be a comment on something beyond camaraderie, but it's really not on the football field. If you wanted to look at it that way, you could find some homoerotic content in there, just as you could in a bunch of guys getting all up on each other and pushing on other guys' asses in what amounts to a big group hug. Football doesn't have a monopoly on providing fodder for perceptions of homoeroticism, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it will, or even should, necessarily be perceived in that way.

There's actually a good reason for smacking ass in football as that's damn near the only part of a player that isn't covered with pads. You don't accomplish much by banging a guy on his shoulders or something to give him some love for a good play. You slap him on the ass because he couldn't feel anything else. It doubles as a good motivator, so it has caught on across sports, but it still makes sense.

-Pufer

Pufer, on Apr 6 2008, 04:37 AM, said:

See now, that's my point. Whilst Rugby and American Football might have equal amounts of danger, American Football players are armoured to the teeth, whilst Rugby players occasionally wear a mouth guard, and that's about it.

That's only because rugby has never risen to the level of danger where armoring the players was necessary. Nobody woke up one day and said, "Hey, let's pussify the sport!" They said, "Hey, a couple guys were killed this week, lets put some better helmets on these guys." 188 football contact deaths from 1960-1969, the period when they moved from leather caps to plastic helmets. Counting all levels of football, there are only three or four contact deaths a year these days, mostly from brain injuries (a couple dozen from heatstroke, and a lot from various other preexisting conditions add to the overall total).

There's a lot of head-to-head and shoulder-to-head contact in football, and it's always been legal. You lead with your head and shoulders from the front in football; the type of stuff that would get you kicked for dangerous tackling in rugby. If the ideal tackle is done by wrapping a guy up from the rear and spearing a guy in the face will get you suspended, you're not talking about the same thing here. You don't need armor for the most part in rugby, but the world's greatest rugby player wouldn't last ten minutes in a football game without that armor. Of course, your average football player would drop dead after those same ten minutes due to exhaustion if he were playing rugby.

-Pufer

Real men don't need armour. Simple as that

Real men wear pink shirts.

I have many. As well as a pink tie.

Back, Sack & Crack?

Jeremiah, on Apr 7 2008, 09:53 AM, said:

However, the vast majority of men wearing pink shirts are not real men.

You calling me a chick?

Lektor, on Apr 7 2008, 07:09 PM, said:

Yes.

Well, you can justify your attraction to me anyway that you want!