Quote:
Originally Posted by Direckshun
Well I guess I'll have to take your word for it?
There is not a lot of time spent in rubgy "covering" someone. There's not a lot of time in rugby spent running routes or getting open. Everything is team formation vs. team formation. There are no forward passes in rugby, right? Unlike soccer and football, where that's the whole idea to advance the ball, thus necessitating all the downfield coverage and route-running. That's all soccer and football.
|
Sorry for the confusion, allow me to reiterate.
It is a
fact that Football came from Rugby, in fact, there was a time in football where the Forward pass wasn't allowed, which makes everything you just said that differentiated the comparison, moot.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pawnmower
well, i disagree with your definition of intellectual....& thought/thinking
it is more about harmony and getting your swing right than actually planning, strategy,drawing up and executing plays etc...
it is much more about FEELING than thinking...........there is no comparison the study and play calling and changing plays based on what the opponent is doing....
i agree that 98% of golf is internal....I just do not consider it 'thinking' or 'intellectual' .....it requires zero thought or intellect other than maybe club selection or whether or not to lay up or power over.........
As i stated , i call that zen, or harmony or feeling rather than
'thinking' or 'intellectual'.....getting your swing right
Its very similar to a baseball swing IMO.... if you think about it, its going to get ruined....it just has to come naturally (which takes a LOT of practice swings!)
|
Competitive golf, which you seem to have failed to read in my post, is more than Zen or Harmony.
Just playing for the hell of it, takes no intellect like you've stated.
Playing in an attempt to meet par, break par, or to compete and beat everyone, on the other hand, requires a completely different analysis to look at the game.
Trust me when I say this, playing all of the sports I've mentioned, you'll never think more or be subject to nerves more, than in competitive Golf. It is a sport defined by the thought.
Arbitrarily saying that it requires little thought other than club selection is the most ignorant and stupid thing I've ever heard in regards to the game.
In order to make club selection alone you must factor in the elevation change from tee/fairway/position to green, wind, moisture, shot shape, whether you'll be making a full swing or a 3/4 swing, whether you're imparting maximum backspin at all, or which shot type you're going for.
All of that requires a very analytical mind to be GOOD at, to be COMPETITIVE at. There's already more thought in the club selection alone, than I've ever spent playing any of the other 5 sports.
Almost everything by comparison comes down to second nature training, in fact, most team sports try hard to remove all "analytical thought" from the game, except for in the occurrence of rare skill positions; Quarterbacks, Pitchers, Point Guards, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Direckshun
I think to play football requires little intelligence.
Learn the playbooks, fine. But most of the mechanics probably come second nature. Same with every sport.
I'm talking about as a spectator.
|
You probably should have stated "As a spectator" loooooooooooong before you made this thread, and reiterated that point many times.
As a spectator, that's a hard one to define for "thinking".
What precisely are we trying to accomplish by "thinking" as a spectator?
Are we trying to anticipate play calling? General Outcomes? What?