Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2019 13:50:59 GMT
Rugby players get tested regularly, for PED’s. The game has changed a great deal from the days of old, where players would regularly have a few pints before playing. They are all athletes now and the fitness and strength training is tough. Any player caught with drugs in them will serve a long ban if not a lifetime ban. It wasn’t that long ago that a Bath player was found to have cocaine in his system and was banned. He was from the local area too. I think rugby fans don’t dwell on things as much because it is a totally different mindset than football. Have you ever been to watch Rugby ? It’s great to be able to mix with away fans, have a drink while watching and have no trouble at all. I have a lot of experience with bodybuilders/weightlifting. A 12 week cycle of test and other androgens will put roughly 20 lb of muscle on, and then when cycling down with PCT and HCG you’ll keep about half when off roofs. Do this for a year or two in late teens and you build a frame which endures. It’s a common misconception that you lose it all when you cycle off. I can spot a guy who’s done a couple of cycles in his life. The other thing is HGH. This is naturally occurring and you can’t test for it. It makes your internal organs, hands and feet grow. Eugene sandlow is amongst the best natural genetics of all time www.google.co.uk/search?q=eugen+sandow&client=safari&hl=en-gb&prmd=ivsn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjF-f2vsc7lAhWUEMAKHUxfBdAQ_AUoAXoECA8QAQ&biw=375&bih=635&dpr=2That’s about as good as it gets without juice. A lot of those players have more mass than that. Steroids are endemic. People have forgotten what a big bloke used to look like versus today. A hell of a lot of regular people do it, and there is absolutely no chance in hell 90% of rugby pros aren’t using, or have used. Watch a game from before it went pro. They look like children compared to today. The common cover story is its diet and exercise improvements. That’s complete horse s***. Nobody can look like they do from diet and exercise. Nearly all male films starts use, Stallone used. Winstrol being very popular to create a chiseled physique. Lots of other sports use deca, it’s amazing for joint trouble. I think wasim Akram and others used deca. Cycling was legit, wasn’t it, before we found out. Anyone with a bit of gym experience can see on some players the blatant juicing or former juicing. Very, very hard to get that big without being extremely fat as well. To be that big, and lean, you need juice or HGH. Here is rugby in the 80s. www.toffs.com/media/catalog/category/EnglandRugby.jpgAnd now i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/11/02/11/20510066-0-image-a-8_1572694351249.jpgQuite a difference, and it isn’t whey protein coppers/solicitors , part time rugby players v full time athletes |
|
dido
Predictions League
Peter Aitken
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 1,883 
|
Post by dido on Nov 4, 2019 14:04:03 GMT
Loose jerseys vs. skin-tights.
|
|
Cheshiregas
Global Moderator
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2,149
|
Post by Cheshiregas on Nov 4, 2019 14:06:56 GMT
No you didn't. And I didn't mean to imply that you did, but it probably came out that way so apologies. Re the handbags - that I think is the key difference. Rugby supporters seem to accept defeat quite philosophically. My brother's a big rugby fan and for him it's about whether it's a good game or not, rather than the result. I find that strange. I played football rather than rugby (although played a bit of rugby at school) but got more involved with the latter when first my daughter (at the age of 10) started playing rugby with Chipping Sodbury and then my son started playing when we moved to Cheshire. The attitude right from a young age was about respect for the referee, team play, and that winning wasn't the be all and end all. Of course players went out to win, my son inherited my 'give it all you can' attitude but both my son and daughter enjoyed the camaraderie, the support given to the weaker members of the team and the fact that after a game you applaud the other team off whether you won or lost. I think it is that last point that reminds players that it is a sport not war! After growing up myself in the days of tribal football of the 70s and 80s this was quite refreshing. I'm not saying one sport is better than the other. It just appeals to different people. After going to a few international games I admit at the top level there are a lot of 'boorish' mostly middle class types and if I'm honest prefer it at local level. A visit to Twickenham for many is just part of the circuit of Henley, the Boat Race, Ascot, etc. But at the lower level it is definitely more mixed class especially when playing teams from areas like Ellesmere Port and poorer parts of Manchester but the attitude to the sport of respect is the same at all levels. It is also great that you can watch a game on the sidelines at an away ground and support your team without someone wanting to start a fight, although not saying it never happens! The one area where rugby does get it right is that referees explain their decisions to players when they stop play, captains are the only players that approach the referee and at the top level the TMO (VAR equivalent) is used for important decisions and the referee explains why he/she is going to the TMO. VAR just seems a confusing mess at the moment. |
|
Rex
Predictions League
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 3,287
|
Post by Rex on Nov 4, 2019 16:55:06 GMT
No you didn't. And I didn't mean to imply that you did, but it probably came out that way so apologies. Re the handbags - that I think is the key difference. Rugby supporters seem to accept defeat quite philosophically. My brother's a big rugby fan and for him it's about whether it's a good game or not, rather than the result. I find that strange. As I said elsewhere, I'm a big rugby fan and I feel the same as your brother, I get to watch England a lot and really the game and atmosphere is what is important to me. I was in Cardiff in 2012 when Wales turned us over (that day probably the most electric atmosphere of any sporting event I have ever been to) and was at Twickenham earlier this year to see Scotland come back from 30 odd points down to lead only for England to draw level at the death, also a few years back on the last day when England had to go for it against France and put 50 odd points on them but still lost out. I loved all 3 games even though ultimately my team lost out. However, when it comes to football all I really care about is winning. If City got the better of us in a 9 goal thriller I'd be absolutely sick about it ,no matter how thrilling a game it was. Anyway, the point I am trying to make is, there seems to be something so inherently tribal about football that makes us feel like this and it is not down to the individual person. |
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,255
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Nov 4, 2019 16:58:17 GMT
I’ve mainly disliked rugby. Partly for its cringeworthy macho stuff like staring out the Hakka (grown men for Christ’s sake), partly due to rugby fans being mainly boring executives sneering at football, and partly due it being a game that requires large amounts of anabolic steroids to play. That is indisputable. Human beings never looked like that before 1960s and protein shakes and slightly better weight machines are not the reason. Anyway, I watched a few games recently When the WC was on and did find a few things I liked. It can be more flowing than football and pressure lasts a long time - in football, the game is broken up with a throw in or FK more. Anyhow, it got me thinking. When we lost yesterday, people were sad, sure, but nobody seemed anywhere near as dejected as losing a football WC final. I would be bereaved for days. In rugby, nobody seems to take it as seriously, it’s just a bit of banter. Football to me is life or death, it hurts when England lose big games. Sure; I’m a football fan, but even the rugby fans I knew were laughing and joking an hour after the result. I wonder why this is? Why do 2 fairly similar games elicit such a difference in culture and emotional control. I’m sure some will say “respect”. I’m not sure that’s it. In fact, I dislike the unquestioning obedience of rugby players and fans. That ref had a shocker but nobody, not even commentators say so. It’s a bit sycophantic if you ask me. Any ideas why the egg shaped game doesn’t eleicit so much partisan or emotional investment? In a way it’s a good thing. No fights or anger. Yet; it feels like some of the passion is removed. Ive never really got into Lugby, to play i guess may be exciting, but to watch is so utterly boring, and it comes with no life escape mechanism. In other words, I find having a little 'hate' in my sport helps me cope with the 's***fest' life throws at you from time to time. Unlike a lot of things in life, which after much repetition ( including sex) become 'samey' Not so, with football, when that ball hits the back of the net no matter how many times it happened before, the 'buzz' is still as electrifing, so for me its a no brainer! UTG I think you really need to broaden your horizons if a ball going in a net is better than sex or maybe I’ve just been lucky to have had the women in my life that I have. I could NEVER say football beat passionate moments or, as Borat would say, make sexy time, with any of them. Actually, I will just admit that I’ve been lucky |
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,255
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Nov 4, 2019 17:20:44 GMT
While I would agree that there are many middle class people who seem to like rugby because it's 'the thing to do', to call it a middle class sport is way off the mark. I was at Dings v Old Reds yesterday and the crowd was as mixed as any football match. Take a visit to Avonmouth, Southmead, Whitehall, B***** Hill OB and countless others and see if you still think it's a middle class sport and as for the forest and Gloucester area, well that's another world altogether! Yeah and in wales it’s the opposite. Rugby is more WC and football more middle class, or always was. When I was at the pub on Saturday, it was all well to do students. I heard the accents. No (what others would term) chavs. One guy said “for fvcks sake” and then said loudly “sorry guys”. That’s the difference! If anything, I think football is a little too uncouth and rugby is a bit up it’s own backside. If only the two could find a happy medium. I didn’t realise it was a competition. I think it was Oscar Wilde made some witty comment about it but it eludes me right now so I reserve the right to edit when I remember. Ha, got it. Rugby, a game played by hooligans but watched by gentlemen, football played by gentlemen , watched by hooligans or words to that effect although it is now very different in that the game of football doesn’t have many gentlemen playing I am 5’ 11” and played blindside flanker but that would be too small to be scrum half now. I played after leaving school, first at Kingswood RFC then Barts RFC. Could have played at a decent level had I not been lured onto the rocks by the siren call of booze, herb, women etc. The only time I have ever seen evidence of steroids was at the old empire gym and LA gym. I never ever saw any pins or barrels in changing rooms nor mention of it. Many of us played Rugby one day the football the next. My only ever experience of real snobbery , amongst fans of rugby was when Bath came to them Mem. They would be moaning all bloody game. The mem could have an amazing atmosphere when Bristol played a local team. No roof but lots of noise from all parts of the stadium |
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,255
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Nov 4, 2019 17:28:39 GMT
But is there anything wrong with wanting to be part of something uplifting in this world of gloom, doom and despair? I couldn't care less about the rugby but it was good to have some happy people around for the little while things were going well. We moan about the 'day outers' turning up to our Wembley matches, but why shouldn't they so long as they're not taking tickets from regulars. We all need something to look forward to and lord knows there's little enough these days. Grab it while you can I say. Top post Angas I think you really have nailed it with that. Nice one ☝️ |
|
|
|
Post by a more piratey game on Nov 4, 2019 17:42:56 GMT
But is there anything wrong with wanting to be part of something uplifting in this world of gloom, doom and despair? I couldn't care less about the rugby but it was good to have some happy people around for the little while things were going well. We moan about the 'day outers' turning up to our Wembley matches, but why shouldn't they so long as they're not taking tickets from regulars. We all need something to look forward to and lord knows there's little enough these days. Grab it while you can I say. Top post Angas I think you really have nailed it with that. Nice one ☝️ I think Angas was referring to the sex bit  |
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,255
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Nov 4, 2019 18:02:52 GMT
Top post Angas I think you really have nailed it with that. Nice one ☝️ I think Angas was referring to the sex bit That made I laff |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 4, 2019 20:11:08 GMT
Depending on the opponent and sense of occasion I find international rugby can be as intense as any other sport for me personally and so too for the crowd- it’s a bit of an outlier, granted, but Wales v England under a roof in 2013 was electric just watching it on the TV.
The big difference, I believe is that the crowd for both rugby and football create an echo chamber. The tradition in rugby is that there is greater strength shown when taking defeat like a man rather than like (with all due respect) a child as can be the case with football. And it self polices from there, where football fans will whip each other into a frenzy about how hard done by they were and it was all the ref’s fault and the animosity escalates as it’s fuelled through sheer weight of numbers. By contrast you can kick off at a rugby match, of course, but the mature reaction from those around will quickly cool anyone who is acting like a plum down.
The optimum for me is a mixture of the two, unleash the emotion during the game, rage against the ref, mock the opposition fans but then at the end retire to the pub and embrace being able to discuss the game objectively with opposition supporters. Being able to do that is part of what makes us human imo, refusing to give in to petulance, boorish behaviour and bad sportsmanship simply because your team lost a game. Life itself should transcend sport in that respect. That aspect does get easier as you get older admittedly.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gregory Stevens on Nov 4, 2019 21:41:34 GMT
I have a lot of experience with bodybuilders/weightlifting. A 12 week cycle of test and other androgens will put roughly 20 lb of muscle on, and then when cycling down with PCT and HCG you’ll keep about half when off roofs. Do this for a year or two in late teens and you build a frame which endures. It’s a common misconception that you lose it all when you cycle off. I can spot a guy who’s done a couple of cycles in his life. The other thing is HGH. This is naturally occurring and you can’t test for it. It makes your internal organs, hands and feet grow. Eugene sandlow is amongst the best natural genetics of all time www.google.co.uk/search?q=eugen+sandow&client=safari&hl=en-gb&prmd=ivsn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjF-f2vsc7lAhWUEMAKHUxfBdAQ_AUoAXoECA8QAQ&biw=375&bih=635&dpr=2That’s about as good as it gets without juice. A lot of those players have more mass than that. Steroids are endemic. People have forgotten what a big bloke used to look like versus today. A hell of a lot of regular people do it, and there is absolutely no chance in hell 90% of rugby pros aren’t using, or have used. Watch a game from before it went pro. They look like children compared to today. The common cover story is its diet and exercise improvements. That’s complete horse s***. Nobody can look like they do from diet and exercise. Nearly all male films starts use, Stallone used. Winstrol being very popular to create a chiseled physique. Lots of other sports use deca, it’s amazing for joint trouble. I think wasim Akram and others used deca. Cycling was legit, wasn’t it, before we found out. Anyone with a bit of gym experience can see on some players the blatant juicing or former juicing. Very, very hard to get that big without being extremely fat as well. To be that big, and lean, you need juice or HGH. Here is rugby in the 80s. www.toffs.com/media/catalog/category/EnglandRugby.jpgAnd now i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/11/02/11/20510066-0-image-a-8_1572694351249.jpgQuite a difference, and it isn’t whey protein coppers/solicitors , part time rugby players v full time athletes Yeah, and Bradley wiggins took EPO for Athsma. Will agree to disagree with some of you on this one. Could you show me pictures of full time Athletes prior 1960s with that level of mass? You know if you don’t juice, you physically can’t recover quickly enough to train more than about 3 times a week. To build muscle you break muscle down and rebuild. You can’t accelerate that past that pace by training more. You will overtrain and it won’t do anything. Natty bodybuilders reach their peak in early 40s when they physically can run repair cycles enough to build good mass. It’s nigh on impossible to reach the mass of some of those players without juice. Training 5 days a week hard with weights to build muscle can’t be done juice free. You have to rest and recover. Juice just speeds that whole thing up. As I say; it’s mainly HGH for rugby players. Not all of those players have. But the ones with biceps over about 2.4 times their wrist size (and you can clearly see some of their biceps are miles beyond that) is anatomically virtually impossible with diet and exercise. Sorry; truth hurts guys. It IS because it’s professional. But not for the same reasons. I’f making 100k a year is dependent on running a few cycles, you’re going to do it. It’s all the way through all sport. Quite a few footballers have seen pins as have cricketers. I had all these same conversations about cycling. Shock horror. Professional competitive cyclists cheat to win. Of course, that couldn’t happen elsewhere, could it! www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/nov/26/rugby-steroids-olympic-games-riowww.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-truth-about-rugbys-drugs-problem-50bg9cct7 |
|
|
|
Post by toteend3 on Nov 5, 2019 7:55:46 GMT
Ive never really got into Lugby, to play i guess may be exciting, but to watch is so utterly boring, and it comes with no life escape mechanism. In other words, I find having a little 'hate' in my sport helps me cope with the 's***fest' life throws at you from time to time. Unlike a lot of things in life, which after much repetition ( including sex) become 'samey' Not so, with football, when that ball hits the back of the net no matter how many times it happened before, the 'buzz' is still as electrifing, so for me its a no brainer! UTG I think you really need to broaden your horizons if a ball going in a net is better than sex or maybe I’ve just been lucky to have had the women in my life that I have. I could NEVER say football beat passionate moments or, as Borat would say, make sexy time, with any of them. Actually, I will just admit that I’ve been lucky True! - Its been a long time since the 'thrill of the chase' i had fotgotten how good that was. Having spent many a long trip coming home from Paddington after an away game being hemmed in by insufferable Lugby bores, is another very valid reason why football gets my vote! |
|
|
|
Post by Gregory Stevens on Nov 5, 2019 11:17:44 GMT
Ive never really got into Lugby, to play i guess may be exciting, but to watch is so utterly boring, and it comes with no life escape mechanism. In other words, I find having a little 'hate' in my sport helps me cope with the 's***fest' life throws at you from time to time. Unlike a lot of things in life, which after much repetition ( including sex) become 'samey' Not so, with football, when that ball hits the back of the net no matter how many times it happened before, the 'buzz' is still as electrifing, so for me its a no brainer! UTG I think you really need to broaden your horizons if a ball going in a net is better than sex or maybe I’ve just been lucky to have had the women in my life that I have. I could NEVER say football beat passionate moments or, as Borat would say, make sexy time, with any of them. Actually, I will just admit that I’ve been lucky Most people have had good secks. I think it’s broadly over rated. I’d take Dagenhams goal over anything with a woman any time. Dagenhams buzz lasted several hours. I usually want to sleep and her to leave 45 seconds after secks 😆😆 |
|
TaiwanGas
Paul Bannon
Tom Ramasuts Left Foot.
Joined: June 2014
Posts: 1,327
|
Post by TaiwanGas on Nov 5, 2019 11:50:38 GMT
Rugby is a game that is there to remind us just how exciting football actually is.....(class of 73' Rugby only schooling, free tickets to Bristol Rugby, nah, Gas all the way!).
|
|
kingswood Polak
Without music life would be a mistake
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 10,255
|
Post by kingswood Polak on Nov 5, 2019 11:57:32 GMT
I think you really need to broaden your horizons if a ball going in a net is better than sex or maybe I’ve just been lucky to have had the women in my life that I have. I could NEVER say football beat passionate moments or, as Borat would say, make sexy time, with any of them. Actually, I will just admit that I’ve been lucky Most people have had good secks. I think it’s broadly over rated. I’d take Dagenhams goal over anything with a woman any time. Dagenhams buzz lasted several hours. I usually want to sleep and her to leave 45 seconds after secks 😆😆 I am speechless, for a change. A knowledgeable woman will keep me in the sack where as football buzz is transient. Each to their own I guess |
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2019 17:19:44 GMT
Most people have had good secks. I think it’s broadly over rated. I’d take Dagenhams goal over anything with a woman any time. Dagenhams buzz lasted several hours. I usually want to sleep and her to leave 45 seconds after secks 😆😆 I am speechless, for a change. A knowledgeable woman will keep me in the sack where as football buzz is transient. Each to their own I guess youve got a point, you fall in love with your team and thats it till you snuff it |
|
|
|
Post by toteend3 on Nov 5, 2019 17:21:06 GMT
IF KEIRA KNIGHTLEY WAS TO BECOME AVAILABLE FOR SOME JIGGY JIGGY, THEN IT MIGHT BE A CLOSE RUN THING. BUT THAT IS NEVER GOING TO HAPPEN, I AM THEREFORE OF THE OPINION THAT THE 'DAGENHAM BUZZ' WHICH LEFT ME IN HEAVEN FOR THE FOLLOWING SIX OR SEVEN HOURS, WHEREAS SECKS CAN LAST AS LONG AS SIX OR SEVEN MINUTES!
AS LUGBY IS TOTALLY IRRELEVANT MAYBE THE QUESTION SHOULD BE RUMPY PUMPY V GOLDEN GOALS?
|
|
|
|
Post by Gregory Stevens on Nov 5, 2019 18:50:40 GMT
Most people have had good secks. I think it’s broadly over rated. I’d take Dagenhams goal over anything with a woman any time. Dagenhams buzz lasted several hours. I usually want to sleep and her to leave 45 seconds after secks 😆😆 I am speechless, for a change. A knowledgeable woman will keep me in the sack where as football buzz is transient. Each to their own I guess She’ll keep me in the sack for all of 12 seconds. A football game is 90 minutes Go figure :-) [br |
|
|
|
Post by Gregory Stevens on Nov 5, 2019 18:52:43 GMT
While we are on the topic, what beats both secks and football:
I had an operation recently and I was lucky enough to have quite a bit of fentanyl and morphine. Both of which I can recommend as insurmountable better than both.
It’s just a shame all the jacking off old men in phone boxes bit if you make a habit of it. And it’s quite moorish.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 6, 2019 1:19:34 GMT
|
|
