Declining A Kick At Goal

[firechild]

Travis Burns when playing for Penrith turned down a shot at goal against Manly several years ago because the try had brought them to within 4 points, they were going to need another try either way.

 

[Wizard Sleeve]

Peter Wallace tried doing it a few years ago in a Panthers match against the Tigers... but he had to go through with it... I'll let the SMH match report from 25/5/07 explain it...

http://www.smh.com.au/news/lhqmatchreport/tigers-extend-winning-streak/2007/05/27/1180205061832.html

Nick Youngquest scored ?

 

[DJShaksta]

Dragons have done it in the past under W.B. as well. Think the margin was bigger than 3 though.

Sharks did it once in the Stuart era.
Went on to win the game.

Scratch that, the Stuart one was where he told Covell to purposely miss a penalty goal attempt.

 

[Wizard Sleeve]

Sharks did it once in the Stuart era.
Went on to win the game.

Scratch that, the Stuart one was where he told Covell to purposely miss a penalty goal attempt.

Cheers , for the life of me I couldn't remember what the Ricky / Sharks one was . I knew there was a controversy but couldn't find it anywhere .

What was the theory again behind the miss ?

 

[Danish]

I don't see why Gidley didn't just have a really quick attempt to be honest. In the 10 seconds or so it took him to explain they were declining the kick, he could have just whacked the ball on a tee and had a pot shot.

If it goes over, bonus, if not, well then clock still stopped very quickly so no harm done.

IMO this new rule about stopping the clock needs work. As the ref is not the judge of time then they also should not be the sole deciding factor in when it stops. I'd prefer the time keeper review the clock and if a few seconds is lost because a ref forgets to signal time off, or waits too long after a try is scored, then they add back on the missing time.

For the knights game yesterday the clock should not have advanced a single second from when the try was scored to when the ball was subsequently kicked off, as it was never in play and given the declining of the kick the clock should have been officially stopped the entire time. That actually would have given them an extra 10 seconds or so of time which would make the decision to decline more valuable as that gives an extra tackle on the ensuing set.

 

[Danish]

[/B]



Cheers , for the life of me I couldn't remember what the Ricky / Sharks one was . I knew there was a controversy but couldn't find it anywhere .

What was the theory again behind the miss ?

The thinking was the sharks would still keep their lead, but the opposition would have to attempt a short drop out attempt from their 20 instead of a short kick off from half way.

Basically meant that even if they recovered it they would be too far out for a field goal attempt.

 

[Wizard Sleeve]

The thinking was the sharks would still keep their lead, but the opposition would have to attempt a short drop out attempt from their 20 instead of a short kick off from half way.

Basically meant that even if they recovered it they would be too far out for a field goal attempt.

Ahh yes , very smart ploy by Stuart / Covell . Wonder if Ricky complained about it being against the spirit of the game .

 

[TheVelourFog]

Travis Burns when playing for Penrith turned down a shot at goal against Manly several years ago because the try had brought them to within 4 points, they were going to need another try either way.

don't understand this thinking, what if they get a penalty within kicking distance? Could have tied the game.

 

[Sea_Eagles_Rock]

don't understand this thinking, what if they get a penalty within kicking distance? Could have tied the game.

Agreed...

It ensures your opponent doesn't give away a penalty to slow the game down to win. That was what I couldn't understand at the end of SOO1. Why wouldn't you hold down and give away a penalty to burn extra time if you have lead of more than 2.

 

[Canard]

Agreed...

It ensures your opponent doesn't give away a penalty to slow the game down to win. That was what I couldn't understand at the end of SOO1. Why wouldn't you hold down and give away a penalty to burn extra time if you have lead of more than 2.

Because the opposition wouldn't go for two they would go for a try obviously, its a pretty big risk to back your defense in an NRL game saving a try with repeat sets against you let alone an Origin game.