Comparison of Australian Rules Football and Gaelic Football

A Comparison of Australian rules football and Gaelic football is possible because of the games' similarities and the presence of international rules football, a hybrid code developed to allow players from both codes to participate in tests.

A key difference between the codes is that the highest level Gaelic Football is strictly amateur, whereas Australian rules football offers professional (Australian Football League) and semi-professional (VFL, SANFL, WAFL, etc.) levels of competition. Players have successfully made the transition to top levels in both codes, and because Australian rules football is played at the professional level, there is a strong financial lure for players to switch from Gaelic to Australian football.

Read more about Comparison Of Australian Rules Football And Gaelic FootballTable of Comparison, Field, Duration, Advancing The Ball, Tackles and Blocks, Gaining Possession, Penalties, Scoring, Players, Origins

Other articles related to "australian, football, gaelic football, gaelic":

Comparison Of Australian Rules Football And Gaelic Football - Origins
... See also Origins of Australian rules football, History of Gaelic football and Relationship between Gaelic football and Australian rules football ... The Australian game was codified first by the Melbourne Football Club in 1859, whereas Gaelic football was codified by the Gaelic Athletic Association (GAA) in 1887 ... Gaelic football was not officially organised in Australia until 1956 ...

Famous quotes containing the words football, comparison, australian and/or rules:

    ...I’m not money hungry.... People who are rich want to be richer, but what’s the difference? You can’t take it with you. The toys get different, that’s all. The rich guys buy a football team, the poor guys buy a football. It’s all relative.
    Martina Navratilova (b. 1956)

    When we reflect on our past sentiments and affections, our thought is a faithful mirror, and copies its objects truly; but the colours which it employs are faint and dull, in comparison of those in which our original perceptions were clothed.
    David Hume (1711–1776)

    Each Australian is a Ulysses.
    Christina Stead (1902–1983)

    If you do not regard feminism with an uplifting sense of the gloriousness of woman’s industrial destiny, or in the way, in short, that it is prescribed, by the rules of the political publicist, that you should, that will be interpreted by your opponents as an attack on woman.
    Wyndham Lewis (1882–1957)