Does McLeish or Hadden have the harder job?
- 20 Feb 07, 09:51 AM
I wonder who has a harder job, a football manager or a rugby manager? In fact, let鈥檚 get down to it, which is the better game, soccer-type football or rugby football? I think rugby is.
It was arranged for Scottish rugby boss and football counterpart to have lunch the other day, in a rather nice little bistro on .
Rather than sit with them, Andy Gillies (Five Live鈥檚 supremo north of the border) and I thought it would be a good idea if we just left them to have lunch together and then interviewed them afterwards.
And it was interesting - you can listen to it here
There are similarities. Both are in charge of professional teams, both have a club-versus-country problem, and both take on Italy this month. And yet there are differences.
Italy are the but ; Alex can release his team just an hour before kick off but Frank can鈥檛; and Alex probably gets paid a lot more money...
Even when it comes to being a player, I think footballers earn too much money. I went to watch Rangers with a friend a month or so ago and wondered how any of them had the cheek to take money.
Rugby players get injuries that are much more severe and although that hints at bravery it also smacks of madness.
Now, I didn鈥檛 play football but I like rugby union鈥檚 complexities and its intricacies, although I can see that it stops and starts too often. Complexities?
Well, you should try complicated lineout codes. I also like the physicality of rugby, and I think I like its honesty too. Not too much diving in the box, although there is far more chatting back to referees now.
Heck, come to think of it, I paid for Hadden and McLeish to have lunch and I haven鈥檛 claimed the expenses. I am working for telly this weekend, so in honour of that I am stuffing my face with pasta in readiness for the Italian game.
So come on then, which one of them has a harder job?
And, if it is not heresy even to pose such a question on a Six Nations blog, which is better - football or rugby union?
My own view is that rugby union is the harder game, but that an international football manager has the harder job - if only because everyone thinks they can do the job better than you!!
Wales 27-18 England
Comments Post your comment
Rugby is easier to coach, no question.
8 times out of 10 the best side on paper wins the game. This is most definately not the case in football.
However on Saturday I feel Hadden has the harder of the tasks as he is expected to win, whearas if Scotland lose 4-0 in Football it may be deemed as a fair result. Mcleish can't lose.
Complain about this post
I would agree with you there John. The pressure is definitely on the football manager more than the rugby. But rugby is indeed a superior game. The atmosphere at both games will be fantastic this weekend but I will be sitting at Murrayfield anticipating a very tight game
Complain about this post
I agree that the rugby coach has the easier job not only are the players more honest the way they do things but the fans seem more educated and are more realistic. We know and understand that we will never be in the top 4 but we also know that on our day we can beat anyone. The football fans and to some extent media forget how small we are in relative terms and rather than hoping for a good result they expect. Us rugby fans hope for the best and nothing more, we are happy to see our team trying their best. After all isnt that what sport is all about?
Complain about this post
I have played both Rugby and Football on a regular basis. Having since retired from performing in blood sports, I can tell you I sustained more injuries post matches from playing football than playing ruby.
However now that I've hit sixty, I think the old rugby injuries are starting to hit home. Neither is harder or tougher than the other. You get out what you put in. As far as who has the tougher job. As each is measured by success, it is partly dependant on each individuals resilience to criticism and ability to manipulate the media and also the quality of players available for the next match. Some times they luck in and most times the luck out.
Complain about this post
Having played both sports to a decent level i think they are both by far the most enjoyable to play and watch. Football is different in that the weaker teams can usually beat the big teams more often than in rugby. Also, despite both being team sports they also allow for individual expression e.g. ronaldinho, carlos spencer etc. The tingles i get when listening to 'The Flower of Scotland' in the build up before a six nations game is just about the same when watching Celtic in the Champions league. C'mon the hoops.
Complain about this post
Technically I believe Hadden has the harder role, although McLeish is under far more pressure due to the popularity of football being far greater in Scotland than rugby.
As for the two sports, rugby compared to football really is men against boys as far as playing is concerned, but although I love the passion of a 6 Nations encounter, I've never seen a better atmosphere than Anfield on a European night.
Complain about this post
Technically I believe Hadden has the harder role, and his achievements (with remarkably limited resources) should never be underestimated, but McLeish is under far more pressure due to the popularity of football being far greater in Scotland than rugby.
As for the two sports, rugby compared to football really is men against boys as far as playing is concerned, but although I love the passion of a 6 Nations encounter, I've never experienced a better atmosphere than Anfield on a European night.
Complain about this post
Technically I believe Hadden has the harder role, and his achievements (with remarkably limited resources) should never be underestimated, but McLeish is under far more pressure due to the popularity of football being far greater in Scotland than rugby.
As for the two sports, rugby compared to football really is men against boys as far as playing is concerned, but although I love the passion of a 6 Nations encounter, I've never experienced a better sporting atmosphere than Anfield on a European night.
Complain about this post
Technically I believe Hadden has the harder role, and his achievements (with remarkably limited resources) should never be underestimated, but McLeish is under far more pressure due to the popularity of football being far greater in Scotland than rugby.
As for the two sports, rugby compared to football really is men against boys as far as playing is concerned, but although I love the passion of a 6 Nations encounter, I've never experienced a better sporting atmosphere than Anfield on a European night.
Complain about this post
An interesting conundrum indeed. Soccer has greater exposure and a far greater following so expectations are probably greater. Rugby is definetly harder and injuries, in the main, take longer to recover from due to the range of injuries and sheer physicality (your word JB) of the game. Soccer managers have, in theory, a greater number of players to select from but a larger public to answer to. Both have to put up with prima donnas, though I suspect less so in rugby, which might make the soccer job more difficult. An asset that costs six figures a week is clearly more readily identifiable in soccer than rugby and, therefore, prone to be dragged away from training for extra curricular activities such as advertising appearances and the like, making his manager's job a nightmare. Easiest job? - neither because whatever sport you follow the international manager carries the expectations of his nation and its supporters whether 5 million or 50 million. Get it wrong and your out! P.S. It always amazes me that the highly paid player, who is paid not just to play but to entertain and trains the whole week to do so, doesn't always carry the can for a bad performance - it's usually his manager!!
Complain about this post
Technically I believe Hadden has the harder role, and his achievements (with remarkably limited resources) should never be underestimated, but McLeish is under far more pressure due to the popularity of football being far greater in Scotland than rugby.
As for the two sports, rugby compared to football really is men against boys as far as playing is concerned, but although I love the passion of a 6 Nations encounter, I've never experienced a better sporting atmosphere than Anfield on a European night.
Are we going to find out more about what was said at the lunch?
Complain about this post
As a lad, I loved football and rugby with equal passion. Playing it, watching it, living and breathing it. Now that I've reached (whisper it) 40, my family has long since become my priority. But that said, I still love watching rugby - both live and on TV - while football has all but disappeared off my agenda. Why? The overbearing hype heaped on a bunch of overpaid, undereducated hooligans. I don't know who's worse, the players themselves or the media who make them think they're untouchable.
Complain about this post
"My own view is that rugby union is the harder game, but that an international football manager has the harder job - if only because everyone thinks they can do the job better than you!!"
The same thing applies to the coach of the Welsh rugby team, it seems that all 3 million of Welsh have a view which we believe is correct and you will struggle to find two of us that agree. Coach of the Welsh rugby team is probably a harder job than being the manager of the England football team.
Complain about this post
Assuming that your average correspondent is a rugby fan, I am surprised that you feel the need to ask. Some sort of insecurity perhaps?
Rugby as a sport seems to be much better at the management of fan expectation. A loss is acceptable as long as the team performs to their best (unless apparently you're English). Football seems to have a very unforgiving culture in terms of success. Scottish football at present seems to have expectations beyond their ability and as such managers are immediately under pressure. So I guess all things considered I would rather be a rugby coach.
The flipside of this is the example of Andy Robinson, I am a huge admirer of his and think that he had a tremendously dificult task with England after the world cup. His weakness was his inability to publicly admit that there were any problems. As a result, everyone assumed that it was him getting things wrong which put him under more and more pressure culminating in the French debacle last year and Argentina and South Africa this autumn.
Realistically (and with hindsight) he should have gone after last year's 6 nations salvaging a degree of pride and reputation (he is a better coach than his England results.)
As to which is the better sport. I had always enjoyed both sports equally that is until Premiership rugby got televised. Now I watch Rugby much more but, when watching football, find myself getting bored and flicking around the channels.
I guess this is due to the periods in football when nothing is happening. In rugby, possession always goes forward which always creates a build up of tension as the potential for scoring always exists.
I think that, if Rugby got to grips with the complexities of its rules the fan base could increase significantly.
Complain about this post
You can't really compare them. One (rugby) is a contact sport. One ( football), at least at the highest level, is not. I would agree with the honesty point though. Graham Souness made a similar point when he was interviewed by the Beeb at a recent Sale Heineken Cup match, when he was asked if soccer could learn anything from Rugby. Sometimes these days the key to winning a soccer match lies in how many of the opposition you can get sent off, and how well you can con the referee.
Complain about this post
get over it - the one dimensional egg-chasing pales compared to the true global beauty of football
Complain about this post
Hm. In one respect football must be better than rugby union since it has a far larger body of support and participation. I play football twice a week but don't play rugby now because we don't have enough players at the club to sustain a 3rd XV.
In other respects the notion of which is better is too subjective to say definitively one way or another.
I reckon, though, the Alex McLeish has the harder job - there are very many more voices to greet failure in football management than in rugby management so the pressure and demands are much stronger. On an international scale both guys have similarly limited resources on which to draw, but the resurgence in the football team's performances has placed greater weight of expectation on McLeish. Hadden has the 'luxury' that nobody expects Scotland to do well against Ireland, France, England, Argentina, etc., and a loss can be attributed to a shortage of players, funds, or whatever the current malady of choice might be.
Complain about this post
If you think there is more cheating / play acting in football, then you don't know much about rugby union.
Complain about this post
Now that you've managed to get the managers to meet, maybe you can get the players to play. I suggest you get the Scotland football and rugby teams to play contact football or touch rugby for charity. What a laugh that would be
Complain about this post
I think the difficulty of the job is directly proportional to the expectation of the country and the reality of that expectation. Where there is a real gap between expectation and the ability of the nation, that is when the job becomes difficult.
The English soccer team is a case in point. Every year the English media hype the team's chances out of all expectation. England, while having a very good side, have not competed realistically for silverware since the Venables era, yet every tournament they grace, they are lauded as favourites or near favourites by an over exhuberant English mdeia. Hence the English manager's job is incredibly difficult. And what might otherwise be called successes (narrow defeats in several semi and quarter finals) are deemed failures.
The Irish manager's job (in soccer), by contrast, is considerably easier. Expectation is far lower. Unfortunately, at the moment, the standard of Irish soccer is at its lowest in decades and, while expectation is not huge, it certainly surpasses the ability to deliver on the expectation. As a result, Steve Staunton's job is tenuous at best these days. Still he hangs on because expectation is lower.
I am sure the coach of the Finnish soccer team falls to sleep as soon as his head hits the pillow. Similarly, the Romanian national rugby coach will probably live until well into his eighties with a strong heart and a smile on his face.
Expectation creates pressure... as do unrealsitic goals. If a team or nation has low expectations, then the team's manager can never fail.
Complain about this post
For me Football is the ultimate spectator sport, a good game flows and is a joy to watch. It is the beautiful game. Conversely Rugby is the ultimate player鈥檚 game. Having played for a number of years I can honestly say that I enjoyed the raw physicality. After a hard game you feel like you have come out the other side of a real battle. Rugby is the better sport, football is the better entertainment.
Complain about this post
no doubt that rugby is the superior sport for many many reasons.
Who has the toughest job? Does either have a tough job? Most people would give up a limb to have either of their positions! If you have to choose its probably McLeish as he has 2,000,000 others picking the team and tactics. Frank only has 200,000 max doing the same. Although not relevant to this blog can any of the other 199,999 inform me why Marcus Di Rollover and Die is playing AGAIN!
Complain about this post
I think you only need to look at the worldwide popularity of football compared to rugby to see that football is by far the better and more popular game.
I would also agree having played both that football is better.
I also think they are as difficult as each other.
How you can say rugby is more intricate ive no idea, half of rugby is big men running into each other, and did you see the first half of the arsenal bolton game on weds? breathtaking stuff.
And there is as much cheating in rugby aswell, its just easier for the ref to keep up with the ball.
Complain about this post
You're wrong..... I'm afraid... Rugby can never recreate the kind of asthetic beauty of football. Moments like that Argentinian World Cup goal.
Rugby has its merits.... but there is a reason that football is the world's game.
Complain about this post
Good question John, but to answer you I think we first have to define "harder job".
If you mean, who has to shoulder the most weight of a Nation's unrealistic sporting expectations, then I would have to say McLeish is the masochist of the two. Unfortunately, I am old enough to remember the last time Scotland qualified for the World Cup and, until then, I believed such a feat was inevitable. Since then the Nation has been cruelly robbed of the hysteria and subsequent glorious depression that accompanies our minor footballing achievements. I miss them so much and am resigned to supporting Ireland and (dare I say it!) even England these days to quench my thirst for football during major international competitions. Therefore, in my opinion, McLeish has the biggest hill to climb. He will probably accumulate more column inches in the press than Hadden and enjoy the greater adoration of a Nation in exchange for success. But, should he fail in any way, I have no doubt he would be thrown to the lions without mercy.
Hadden, on the other hand, has a difficult job for other reasons. Supporters of Scottish rugby are generally more tolerant and realistic when it comes to potential achievements. On our day, we feel we can beat most teams and the occasional victory against the powerhouses of the Southern Hemisphere fills hearts with pride and is usually the subject of a song or two. However, it is fair to say, qualifying for international rugby events is not the biggest of issues for Scotland. The scale of international competition is far less than McLeish has to worry about and a quarter-final spot in any rugby event is almost taken for granted.
Hadden's biggest task will be helping our squad of talented, young players achieve their true potential and grow both in skill and confidence over the next 3-4 years. I love supporting Scotland and will be one of the first to raise a glass to Hadden should he succeed.
However, we have to remember that we are not the largest country in the World. Although football is more widely played and no doubt provides a larger pool of potential resources, I believe Hadden has an equally tough job on his hands when it comes to developing the stars of the future. What does it say about the state of the game in Scotland when 9 of the first team to face Italy play for Edinburgh? Has the success of a Club been narrowed down to who is willing to pay the most money these days, or are other Clubs just lacking in home-grown talent?
Complain about this post
Great idea , having Hadden and Mcliesh together.
I think Mcliesh will have a harder time following up Smith and Hadden hasnt really been set upon by the media for any failings and I dont think its fair to say the better team always wins in rugby. The team that turns up and is more fired up usually win unlike football where a freak goal can mean the diffeerence from being a hero to a villan.
Complain about this post
Agreed, Rugby is the harder game but football management is the harder job. Rugby is only played at a serious level in 6 Nations across Europe (no offence to Georgia or Romania) where as Football is played across Europe and the World and to a much higher standard making it harder to make your team the best.
Complain about this post
Rugby is a far superior game, it is played with a spirit of respect, players call the referree 'Sir', although there is some 'underhandedness' it is never done to deliberately get an opponent in trouble, in fact rugby players often defend opponents when the referree gets involved.
Soccer reflects all that is bad in our society, no respect, swearing at referrees and opponents, cheating, nasty dirty underhand tactics.
When a soccer player gets tackled he rolls around on the floor for ages trying to get an unfair advantage. When a rugby player gets tackled he gets up and gets on with it.
Give me rugby any day, soccer bores me senseless.
Complain about this post
It seems to me that far too often rugby fans who, admittedly, 'didn't play football' can decide that the game they love and have played for many years is better.. without having any comparison. Baffling. As I'm mainly a football fan I'd love to see football take a leaf out of rugby's book in regard to the respect shown to the officials. This article hints at horrific injuries as 'bravery' as if that makes it a better sport and I thought the stigma attached to rugby as a hard man's game is something it wished to lose. Oh, and as for the complexity of lineout codes (which I've tried but failed to fully understand) - try deciphering football's current offside rule...
Complain about this post
i feel that i can more readily identify with rugby, its players and its coaching staff. soccer and its 'stars' has been elevated to a level that is in my opinion unust. to my mind rubgy is more honest,more enjoyable, more humble and more entertaining.
professional soccer is far removed from those that play in small towns and leagues at the weekends wheras there is not such a big chasm in rugby between the suppporter, small team player and big star. take irelands gerry flannery as an example. he sometimes plays for shannon in front of a crowd of maybe 400 people and would then be seen working in his bar that evening. what soccer player at the top level of the game is so close to the community.
i love playing soccer but unfortunately i have less and less time for soccer players (i know there are obvious exceptions).
it has to be said too that rugby has only been professional for ten years and it is growing in popularity wheras soccer has much more of a history of being professional. even todays rugby stars wouldnt have grown up wishing to be professional as it so so new so perhaps in time rugby will go the way of soccer (although personally i doubt it)
verdict
prefer rugby
rugby harder job for a coach on a technical level but soccer much more pressure and therfore a harder job to be successful in.
Complain about this post
Which is the better game? In my opinion it's football, football owes it's global success due to the fact that all you need is a ball, or indeed anything that can be kicked around (we used to play with bottle tops at primary school where balls were banned). You can play on your own with one friend or several friends.
Rugby would be difficult to play on your own, you can't throw the ball against a wall and catch it due to its shape, sure you could practice kicking it through the H but then you'd have to keep retrieving it.
Football owes it's success to it's simplicity. I also beleive it requires a far higher skill level than Rugby, i've played both, i was good a Rugby because i could catch and run fast, football requires far more than this.
Complain about this post
What drivel. What a pointless article. Particularly in the run up to a 6 Nations weekend.
He has some some cheek having a go at footballers for taking the money, while he gets paid to write dross like that.
Complain about this post
i think football is probably slightly easier, players have a more versatile ability to play in different positions, however, it is probably harder to pick a team, in rugby the team pciks itself pretty simply, unless they screw up, teams don't change much, i think that indicates the differences. but i think that football is a far harder at an international level for one simple reason. i a football fan and a rubgy fan. personally i think club football beats club rugby, there is far mroe gossip and so on, and it all seems rather tidy and easier to follow. however, on an international level, i watch football teams playing and think, they have no passion, no spirit, no fight, and when i watch international teams in rugby, they are fearce, they wan't to play for their country, are much more patriotic, and make a managers job easier, because he needs less to galavanise them. think of england soccer, their team should absolutely annihilate many teams on the itnernational scene, but they lpay pathetic football. i don't disagree that rugby si pretty mcuh attack and defense and football is thus more complex, but the footbalers themselves are the ones that make it complex
Complain about this post
What drivel. What a pointless article. Particularly in the run up to a 6 Nations weekend.
He has some some cheek having a go at footballers for taking the money, while he gets paid to write dross like that.
Complain about this post
Rugby is clearly the better game. More honesty, more dynamism, more drama, more spectacle, more physicality and more courage. Generally, the better team on the day ends up winning as well. Not so in football.
Football managers clearly have it harder, simply because there is more money involved and it is more popular (greater media effect). Rugby managers will find it harder and harder the more there is at stake, but it will never reach the levels of football.
A footnote: football is more popular because it is a simple game. Rugby has many intricacies, which the majority can't be bothered to understand.
Complain about this post
I'm sick of this constant rugby vs football debate. It's the same at every level, kids are encouraged to play rugby or football, but rarely both.
Why can't we just accept that these are both great games beloved by many people for a variety of different reasons. This is as pointless a debate as which is better: carrots or peas???
Complain about this post
I have played both since being a little nipper whilst enjoying both I was swayed to rugby. I feel that the combination of skill/strength/speed/smarts required make it a more challenging game to play. As for who has the hardest job between Hadden/McLeish...well firstly I would strongly disagree with some previous suggestions that to coach rugby is easier, there are far more facets to a game of rugby and a much bigger skillset to try and hone due to the higher level of speciality skills required for the positions. However, I think the public side of the job would be much tougher for the soccer manager. The media focus on football, especially in the UK, is massive. You only need to check the sports section of any daily newspaper and compare the column inches given to each sport!
Complain about this post
Rugby is clearly the better game. More honesty, more dynamism, more drama, more diversity, more spectacle, more physicality and more courage. Generally, the better team on the day ends up winning as well. Not so in football.
Football managers clearly have it harder on the whole, simply because there is more money involved and it is more popular (greater media effect). Rugby managers will find it harder and harder the more there is at stake, but it will never reach the levels of football. Technically though, I think the rugby manager has the harder task given the greater diversity and complexity of the game.
A footnote: football is more popular because it is a simple game. Rugby has many intricacies, which the majority can't be bothered to understand.
Complain about this post
I'm sick of this constant rugby vs football debate. It's the same at every level, kids are encouraged to play rugby or football, but rarely both.
Why can't we just accept that these are both great games beloved by many people for a variety of different reasons. This is as pointless a debate as which is better: carrots or peas???
Complain about this post
Whoever suggested a charity match between rugby and football players must be eating silly pills. The slightest touch above the waist on one of the footballers would see, at best, the 'victim' throw himself to the ground clutching his head and screaming and, at worst, being stretchered off only to come bounding back on two minutes later. The rugby players would also win the drinking contest after the game but probably end up going home with a worse-looking companion at the end of the night.
Complain about this post
Rugby is clearly the better game. More honesty, more dynamism, more drama, more diversity, more spectacle, more physicality and more courage. Generally, the better team on the day ends up winning as well. Not so in football.
Football managers clearly have it harder on the whole, simply because there is more money involved and it is more popular (greater media effect). Rugby managers will find it harder and harder the more there is at stake, but it will never reach the levels of football. Technically though, I think the rugby manager has the harder task given the greater diversity and complexity of the game.
A footnote: football is more popular because it is a simple game. Rugby has many intricacies, which the majority can't be bothered to understand.
Complain about this post
Rick Anderson my friend (number 27), I am not having a go at all footballers. Sport at the highest level is about hopes, expectations, entertainment, belief etc. I watched a bad game, I think some football games are brilliant and this isn's some random article knocking football.
Keep rucking
JB
Complain about this post
Andy 28 - I suspect the reason you think you were good because you could catch and run fast was that the other 14 players in your team in fact were able to create time and space for you to do these things! Having played and being of a fairly good standard at both rugby wins everytime. It combines aspects of all sports and puts them together into, in my humble opinion, the ultimate sport. Football is more popular because as someone put it, simplicity. All it takes is a ball and 2 willing bodies, you have a game.
I used to be an avid football fan until spending some time in Australia where I opened my eyes more to not just RU but RL and aussie rules. Sports where honesty and sportsmanship still exist at the highest level. In all sports there are always ways of trying to gain an advantage, but the way it occurs in football these days puts me off with the blatant diving (how do the refs not notice this?!), trying to get opposition sent off etc. Why don't they 'man up' a bit?!?!
As for the public side of the job, McLeish's task is harder by a mile due to the greater popularity and media focus on football. However, they do get compensated handsomely for this extra pressure! Anyway, can't wait for 6 Nations super saturday this weekend!!
Complain about this post
"More popular" doesn't equate to "better". It's a lot harder to have a knockabout at lunchtime in rugby than it is to have a scratch game of soccer. More people are prepared to subject themselves to the level of contact permitted in soccer than are prepared to commit to the level of impact expected in rugby.
Both sports have aesthetic moments, but soccer probably edges the oval ball game. Rugger demands more commitment.
In the end, for me, as a spectator, soccer's hideous indiscipline spoils the spectacle.
McLeish has the harder job, no question. Greater expectation, greater challenge from the opposition, more difficult charges.
Complain about this post
I may be missing something here, but are Scotland Playing Italy at football this weekend? I can't find it on any fixture lists.
As for the debate, I attend both sports, and I have to say that rugby players are much more proessional than football players, but footballers are paid a lot more. To quote Bill Beaumont, "Rugby is a hooligan's game played by gentlemen. Football is a gentleman's game played by hooligans".
Complain about this post
As a fan of both Scottish football and rugby, I find it difficult to choose one over the other. They are different games, requiring different skills and levels of fitness.
I may be wrong but I assume that both these sports are the most widely played in Scotland. Football has it's powerbase in Glasgow and the west coast whilst rugby has traditionally come from Edinburgh and the Borders.
In my opinion the only thing that separates the two managerial positions would be the amount of media coverage. The Scotland football manager will always come under more scrutiny. In fact I am sure that Alex McLeish is far more recognisable than Frank Hadden in the streets.
So to answer your question, is one better than the other? I don't think it matters. Both sports have their die hard fans but I think when someone is good enough to represent their country in any sport we should support them. After all when they put on a blue shirt they represent Scotland and as such they represent the nation and the people. It's only fair that the nation should support them.
Complain about this post
John,As a bluenose from Partick,but a life long Rugby Fan and player for the past 39 years I can only say that there is one game and that is Rugby,as much as I like to see the Team from Ibrox winning( Partick upbringing)I would never be upset the way I get when Scotland or my Club lose at Rugby.One last point I can never get the same feeling watching Scotland play Football that I do watching them play Rugby,and of course we are tougher than them.Alex.
Complain about this post
A poor team can beat a better team with a lucky goal and then hold on. In rugby 9/10 the better team will always win. So hadden hs the harder job. Also a draw can be a good result in football. Not so in rugby
Complain about this post
i rekon rugby is a better game but as football is unfortunately more popular, it has the harder job. i get very annoyed at footballers rolling around the grass wen someone breathes on them. the worst of the lot is centre backs wen they do it and if the player is british i get embarased, alot
Complain about this post
I agree that rugby is a much better game. I'm not so sure about the "it starts and stops too often" bit. The set pieces and so on are a crucial part of the game, and also they provide a short period of rest which is invaluable. 80 mins non-stop?
Also with people saying they can do a football managers job better, this happens with rugby. People always second guess coaches and have their own views (sometimes quite strongly voiced). There are always discussions going on along the lines of "why has HE selected HIM? HE is obviously much better!" This will happen to anyone who has to make public decisions of that sort.
Complain about this post
John, I'm a big fan of your articles normally (right back to the early 1990s in Scotland) but I don't think I agree with you on this; and I'm a rugby man.
I think that rugby is the harder game in that physically you need to be harder to deal with all the knocks etc.; but that with the exception (and a huge huge exception) of neck injuries, football gets the more serious long lasting injuries due to the severity of knee and leg injuries (look at Michael Owen etc.). I'm no expert about this, so if anyone has any medical evidence about this that would be interesting.
I do think though that, due to the ability of football to have an upset (e.g. a draw with the Faroe Islands), but the greater expectation (the team should never lose) I think that football is the harder game to be the national manager for.
That said...give me rugby anytime.
Complain about this post
One big rugby/football difference is expectation of a win against the opposition. Who are our peers and who should we be guaranteed to beat? I think that this is far less certain in rugby. Scotland should never lose or draw against anyone outside the three southern hemisphere teams or four of the six nations; and even then a defeat is a real problem.
In football there is expectation against everyone except Gemany, Italy, Spain, Portugal, England, Argentina and Brazil, and yet many other sides have players of a very high standard, capable of turning a game around (just think of Ghana, Sweden, Denmark, Holland, Turkey, Ireland, U.S.A, and others).
The real test between the two sports is how many defeats can a coach sustain until he's sacked?
Complain about this post
I reckon the rugby manager does. Does the fact that the SRU are in debt make his life a lot harder? while the football coach is earning a lot more?
Complain about this post
For those of you who wanted medical facts rugby is a harder sport. The 2005 Kucera study found that football had an injury rate of 4.3 per thousand exposures. An exposure is one pratice or game for one person. So in a pratice where 20 people showed it would be 20 exposures. An injury was defined as causing a participant to miss all or part of a game or pratice. The 2005 Comstock/Knox study for rugby found an injury rate of 6.6 per thousand exposures. An exposure was defined the same way, but a more strict definition of an injury was employed for rugby. A rugby injury was one that required medical attention and ended possible participation/play for one or more days.
Enough of that though. I played both sports while I was young and I love them both. However, rugby is by far the better sport to watch. To play I'd favore football though because it really is much easier on the body. Incase anyone is woundering I played centre/flanker in rugby and defense in football.
Complain about this post
This a matter of opinion as a previous writer said,carrots or peas?From a managerial perspective the football manager has the most pressure,as the expectations for Scottish football remain high,despite the total lack of evidence to support this.I remember when Scotland used to approach each World Cup campaign with the knowledge that we would probably qualify,beat someone well above our standing and lose to some unknown country and fail,but fail gloriously,with the excuses that,if only we'd beaten Iran or Zaire we'd have frightened everyone and reached our true place in World football.Now we don't even reach that lowly expectation.In rugby the expectations of the supporters and the media are much more realistic,yet we can on our day beat the World Champions.Keep on rucking!
Complain about this post
I can't watch football, and how it can be called the beautiful game is way beyond me. Rugby is beautiful, maybe some think it is disjointed, but the restart methods are all part of the game. The players are intelligent and play as a team. Yes cheating happens, but as we all knowwe play the ref. At least the cheating is not crass like that of football. And all the nancying about that football players do. I thoroughly detest football, it's players are overpaid, unintelligent idiots and it's fans are thugs. If football players were more like rugby players, intelligent, hardworking and honest, and the fans more like rugby fans who can mix and mingle in the ground and go drinking together before during and after the match. If the media didn't glorify football as the only sport on earth worth bothering about, maybe, just maybe I would watch a match or two.
As for the coaches, both have it tough, but for different reasons, ultimatly the football caoch has the tougher job, because the media expects more, the fans expect more and he is not given the time to really develop his style and team before he is sacked.
Complain about this post
Alex Mack, number 47, my old friend. How are you? how are Hyndland? Are you still driving past my house early in the morning.
Hope all is well
JB
Complain about this post
Well after reading Brent Cockbains Q&A on the 成人论坛 website how many top class football players can give you a couple of recipes for cured ham and talk about growing pumpkins. Rugby has to be the better sport because the players are easier for the supporter to relate to. I have watched both sports now for about 30 years but more recently totally turned off by football which is now media dominated and far removed from ordinary people.
Complain about this post
In reply to number 57 John Hyndland and myself are doing well,and yes I still drive by your house early so remember to keep putting your Blue Recycling Bin out.Is it the big 50 for you this year as well,it is for me and I hope to still be playing next season.Good to see your Boy back doing the business.
Complain about this post
Both rugby and international football in Scotland have the same problems - lack of participation at grass roots, club v. country fighting, lack of money (caused by expensive imported players in football's case) etc. etc.
Both sports need to be recognised by the Scottish Exec for the role they play in encouraging a healthy life style amongst the young, and lifting the mood of the nation when they do well.
Debates over which sport is better are irrelevant - Ireland manages to produce premiership footballers like Keane and Duff AND rugby players like O'Driscoll and D'Arcy when both sports live in the shadow of gaelic games, because they recognise the importance of sport.
John Beattie - am I correct that you have a role in Sportscotland? Do you think there is recognition that BOTH sports are important in the scottish exec?
Complain about this post