Golden Point.........again

[Frustrated Fan]

If you're good enough to kick one field goal in golden point time you deserve to win. Anyway, there would not be enough time for five field goals and a try.

 

[nrlnrl]

This has probably been a thread before, but after seeing the theme for Chooseday Night Football tonight, I was wondering what you guys thought about golden point ( for regular season games ):

A ) keep it

B ) dump it ( happy with 80 minute draws )

C ) change it

but explain how, ie - both teams must have possession for at least 1 set of 6 ( but errors result in a turnover ), must score a try to win, "drop off rule" every minute of extra time ( number of players per side reduced by 1 after every 2 minutes of play ) or other suggestion

 

[simostorm]

Keep it.. any extra footy that goes beyond 80 minutes i get to see at the games is good!

 

[fourplay]

Keep it as it is.

Field goals are a legitimate scoring play and an integral part of the game. Just as valid as a try.

Golden point is the most exciting 10 minutes of football where every hit up, every tackle, every decision can make or break the game.

Golden point can produce emotions like no other. It's edge of the seat thriller stuff. It even gets Wayne Bennett jumping out of his seat and fist pumping the air.

The word "meh" pretty much sums up a draw. It's boring. Golden point has produced some amazing rugby league fairy tales. It's where the truly great players stand up and take control and seize victory for their team.

 

[Paulie Jay]

Dump it. There's nothing wrong with a draw.

 

[Loudstrat]

A funny rule. I was against it - but it adds excitement on the day.

I hate the golden try thought though. Why ban field goals for part of the game? Or goals?

The problem with golden point is that teams have an obsession with scoring field goals, and not many players can do it sucessfully. I'd say Soward, Heather, Inglis, Luke Burt, and possibly Kimmorley, Prince, JT, and after last year Nathan Cayless are the only fg exponents in the game - if there are others there are not many of them.

I reckon when a coach wakes up and runs the ball on the last they would win most golden points games they encounter.

Anyone got any stats on whether tries, goals or FGs win the most golden pointers?

 

[perverse]

A funny rule. I was against it - but it adds excitement on the day.

I hate the golden try thought though. Why ban field goals for part of the game? Or goals?

The problem with golden point is that teams have an obsession with scoring field goals, and not many players can do it sucessfully. I'd say Soward, Heather, Inglis, Luke Burt, and possibly Kimmorley, Prince, JT, and after last year Nathan Cayless are the only fg exponents in the game - if there are others there are not many of them.

I reckon when a coach wakes up and runs the ball on the last they would win most golden points games they encounter.

Anyone got any stats on whether tries, goals or FGs win the most golden pointers?

add both dureau and mullen to your list... both of them barely ever miss and seem to pop a fair few over every year.

where you'd find the stats you're after are beyond me... but my general gut feeling says field goals would be the dominant play for the win in extra time.

 

[Knightmare]

I'd rather see 10 minutes of extra time, and whoever has the most points at the end of the 10 minutes wins. If both sides are still equal, a draw is a draw.

I hate golden point in its' current format- it's so predictable, you can often see who is going to win the game from 3 or 4 tackles out. Almost every time the side with the ball will get the best position they can for 5 tackles, then on the 5th tackle pot an easy field goal. *Yawn*

 

[Danish]

I defy anyone to yawn when their team is involved in a golden point match. It is simply impossible.

The 2 halves of golden point in the infamous 31-all draw between the roosters and warriors showed just how exciting golden point can be.

Keep it as it is. There is no better feeling in the regular season than after your team slots that "boring" winning field goal in extra time.

 

[Follow Me Up To Carlton]

There's nothing wrong with a draw.

Indeed, a draw can be more satisfying then a cheap, contrived "victory" in golden point.

 

[Big Pete]

There's nothing wrong with a draw during the competition rounds.

 

[wittyfan]

I've always been against it.

 

[dennis]

IMO golden try would be exciting.

 

[Green Machine]

B ) dump it ( happy with 80 minute draws )

Lock me in for B

 

[nrlnrl]

I defy anyone to yawn when their team is involved in a golden point match. It is simply impossible.

The 2 halves of golden point in the infamous 31-all draw between the roosters and warriors showed just how exciting golden point can be.

Keep it as it is. There is no better feeling in the regular season than after your team slots that "boring" winning field goal in extra time.

Roosters v Tigers from 2007 is on FS2 now

 

[Eels Dude]

It depends on my feeling on the day. The Eels v Souths game which went into golden point last year was damn exciting... but then there are other golden point games ruined by dodgy decisions and penalty goals to win the game.

 

[_snafu_]

Get rid of golden point and keep the draw.

 

[shear_joy9]

I like the golden point.

Losing teams should get 1point though.

 

[Ridders]

I'm fine with golden point in the regular season by don't want to see it straight after regulation time come September.

Would prefer extra time periods first, and then if there's no splitting the sides after that, then you can go to golden point.

 

[Benji Magic]

I'm happy with a draw but if they must have it I would prefer 5 mins extra time each way. Most Golden Point games are too negative with teams too worried about making an error and setting up field position. Refs also scared to make crucial calls for fear of ruining the game.