Rugby lovers...which do you think is more dangerous - Rugby League or Union...tell me why?

Question

Rugby lovers...which do you think is more dangerous - Rugby League or Union...tell me why?

Answer 1

I agree with Linda bunny. There are more chances of a serious injury occurring in ruck and mauls (if they collapse) and since League has uncompetitive scrums and no mauls to speak of, it is slightly safer. On the other side, when the game is played with a consideration for these then both are very safe to play.

Answer 2

They are both dangerous in differnt ways.  With Rugby Union the real danger is not the rucks and mauls it is the contested scrum.  You are much more likely to see a permanent Spinal injury in Union.  The rucks and mauls can be dangerous though.  League however allows you to shoulder charge which can be bad for ribs head etc.  Also for some reason they spear tackle a lot compared to Union.

So both are dangerous but you are more likely to end up in a wheel chair in Union.  So Union has my vote

Answer 3

Union is slightly faster paced and slightly more dangerous. But overall no sport is dangerous if played right just for a laugh why not include AFL

Answer 4

I think Union with all the more complicated rules, mauls/rucks, etc.  But they are all the same if not played carefully and not looking out for yourself.

Answer 5

Rugby league only really has the tackle in which players can get hurt. Rugby Union has the tackle, scrums, rucks, mauls & lineouts. Definately rugby

Answer 6

I think that Union can be more dangerous,as with all the weight that you can end up with on your back,especially if your at the bottom,but in league the men are'nt as heavy and once tackled they are usually up and away in a matter of seconds.Lets put it this way, i would'nt want to be punched by any one of them.

My son plays both union and league.