Well lets review here. First you stated that there was a rugby player who could run 4.59s in the 40m FAT. You gave no indication that the timing procedures were different from sprinting so therefore one would have to logically assume that you are saying he is faster than Ben. Then you said that this player wasn’t even the fastest rugby player, so one would have to logically assume that there are many people faster than Ben based on your statements. Then after I pointed out how ridiculous your statement was you completely backtracked and said that the times are not really FAT b/c they are really doing a rolling start 40m. You then proceed to claim that they’re not rolling starts even though they start behind the timing device and the timer doesn’t start until they cross it. And in your most recent post you say that the players are timed from first movement which means it is hand-timed and not elctronic at all! You also use the absolutely ludicrous rationale of one certain coach by saying that the rugby players start closer to the line than sprinters. This is the same line of ludicrous thinking of the coach who has athletes start as close to the line as possible because “you’re running the 100m dash not the 101m dash.” All this has shown that you are a total clown and should do more research before you slang bullshit. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
BTW prophet…
what is your feeling about starting tighter to the line for the 40… i have always used a track stance with one hand, but in a book elitefts is selling on the forty, they have the front foot 6" from the line. Although this will produce a longer first step, i feel it doesn’t lend to a good starting position, and it is difficult to not pop-up due to the hips being so crowded and high.
they also go on to recommend that you should take as long of strides at the start as possible, becasue they say that they have found that this produces the fastest 10-yard starts… huh?
has anyone found this to be true?
i would love any feedback…
Lil Coach H
And, at my college they eliminated the problem with the start, because the coach said, “go!” when we ran the 40… probably why i was a high 4.4 and low 4.5 guy… when i went to the hand pad with laser, i was a 4.49 guy… so i am not so sure about inaccuracy…
Well lets review here. First you stated that there was a rugby player who could run 4.59s in the 40m FAT. You gave no indication that the timing procedures were different from sprinting so therefore one would have to logically assume that you are saying he is faster than Ben.
“Logically”, I assumed you would know that electronic speed tests for team sports are generally done with the laser beams (I haven’t heard of any instances of a team using the starting gun and video equipment for timing). Fair enough, error on my part I should’ve specified to avoid confusion.
Then after I pointed out how ridiculous your statement was you completely backtracked and said that the times are not really FAT b/c they are really doing a rolling start 40m. You then proceed to claim that they’re not rolling starts even though they start behind the timing device and the timer doesn’t start until they cross it. And in your most recent post you say that the players are timed from first movement which means it is hand-timed and not elctronic at all!
I never stated they were done under a rolling start. For your information, I said they were done within 50 cm of the starting line. Do you know how short 50 cm is? This means basically as soon as they move the laser line is broken, hence why I used the term first movement (even though technically first movement would mean any kind of movement triggers the clock to begin, in which case you would probably use a starting pad device that xlr8 mentioned in his combines post. Yes, this means you start behind the starting device. I would like to see how you advise speed tests to be performed if the player is not to start behind the first laser.
You also use the absolutely ludicrous rationale of one certain coach by saying that the rugby players start closer to the line than sprinters.
I simply mentioned this fact because Charlie stated the differences between the 40yd and 100m timing procedures in a post on the original forum (I will give you the benefit of the doubt of not having been around back then) and this was mentioned as one of the key differences. I did not say how this variation in testing would affect the overall time.
All this has shown that you are a total clown and should do more research before you slang bullshit. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
…I concede.
or maybe far better “genetics”
is that sarcasm or are you for real?
Why am I arguing about football codes… I think I am going insane… 
Alright, alright… I see we’ve obviously had a misunderstanding here and I apologize for participating in such an unproductive discussion. I know better, but I regress.
Your deductions sound reasonable. Bunching close to the line is gonna create many more problems with mechanics than it will solve, so will consciously overstriding. Just do what is natural and use Charlie’s cues(pump arms vigorously at start, stay relaxed…).
US guys love their football, I accept that, but for people who did not grow up with it (the rest of the world) it seems strange and ultimately boring that it’s about more than 90% breaks, not matter how explosive the few seconds of real action are. And it seems even more boring to play it than to watch it - just imagine being a Center(!) or only to come on the field when it’s about a field goal and kick. However, it’s only a question of taste and as we know:
“De gustibus non est disputandum!”
But there are fast athletes in other sports, too. For example in soccer you’ll find a lot of guys (eg. Brazilians, like Roberto Carlos when he was younger) who run 100m in 10,5-10,6(only hand, but add 1/4 second and you still get remarkable times for athletes, who do not spezialise in sprinting).
You even had some teams with the whole sqaud running 100m sub11.
The US plays football, the Commonwealth plays Rugby, the World plays soccer… Peace 
just a contribution from someone who’s played both sports…what you all seem to forget it that rugby and football are first and foremost GAMES!!!which means that it does not matter how much speed power endurance you’ve got, you gotta have the specific skills,!! technique is first remember that…and that is the reason there aren’t many crossovers…I’d like to remind you, though, that a french rugby player named Tardits still holds the record for the number of career sacks for a Georgia Bulldog and went from never even heard of football to five years in the NFL…on the other side Lyle Thompson ( correct me if i’m wrong on the name) played DI football as a tight end and now plays in the english union professional division. so anyway crossovers exist, but the basic fact is that not speed , not power, it is skill and exposure to good coaching. Guys in the NFL have been playing since they were 6 years old and the same for pro rugby players…again technique is king…so this rugby vs football debate has really no logic to it
I fully agree, but some sports require more technical skills, some more basic physical qualities.
A good 60/100 sprinter is easier to turn into a good wide receiver, but will look extremely awkward in a basketball court or soccer field without years of special skills training from a very young age.
roberto carlos, said he could run 11 and smthing when he was in italy…and later he said less than 11…but standing and hand timed…add more than 1/4 of second.I can tell you that some conditioning coach in italy, in soccer, doesn’t even know the exact distance their players run…and look at the way some supposed 11 guys run…I’d be amazed if some of them break 12 electric…all the conditioning data in soccer are bullshit, if you come to italy you would see everyday on the tv the way they train…and you’d understand lots of things…
Well I don’t know about Italy, I read in an English newspaper he ran 10,6 hand - but I don’t know how exact the timing was and it was some time ago…so forget Roberto.
But I know a guy personally who used to play in a local junior soccer team without seeming to be so much faster than the rest and changed to athletics at the age of 16 - he started with a race before getting into real athletics training and ran 11,62 FAT.
The GDR National Soccer Team used to have only players capable of sub11 100m times from the 70s, and believe me they knew how to time, but maybe they lied - who knows.
Anyhow I dont’t care about soccer but the average international player is capable of 11,50 (exept some oldies at the end of their career;-))- if not he’ll seem slower compared to the others and you would judge him as slow watching him playing…