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

[natheel]

The golden point period adds excitement to boring games. That said, people get fixated on the "point" bit - and simply go for the point.

Bring back the draw. Boring games wil be boring games, but at least it's justifiable on the grounds of player welfare AND the integrity of the 80 minute time period which rules our game.

There was no excitement in watching the apparent 2 best halves in nsw failing at every attempt at fold goal on Monday night.

It's great seeing some players slotting them over like sandow does or cronk or even thurston those who can kick drop goals but there would be much more excitement if it went beyond that. Players getting that try/goal and trying to defend for the remainder of extra time

 

[LineBall]

No Golden point would be great.

Let the teams share the points after a draw. It helps make the ladder more interesting as well, teams positions can be determined more on wins and losses than on for and against.

Also, in finals games where they need a winner - just play extra time - 5 minutes each way, and let the winner be the team with the most points at then end of extra time. If still drawn after extra time - go double over time, etc.

 

[Red Bear]

Nothing wrong with a draw

 

[alien]

if its just a normal round game then teams should get 1 point each if the game is level after 80 mins

 

[Bluebags1908]

I hate golden point. It's a contrived result. Nothing wrong with a draw. Most of the time there is no team that deserves to win or lose which is why it's a draw in the first place.

It also makes the competition table less interesting, because teams on an odd number of points are few and far between - you don't see teams on an even number of points 'leapfrog' teams on an odd number or vice-versa on the ladder any more (although we might now see this with Cronulla this year). It all comes down to for and against because almost everyone has an even number of competition points.

I also don't like rules introduced into the NRL such as this one that doesn't apply worldwide. Rugby League laws should be the same worldwide. No other country or even other competitions in Australia use golden point.

In the case of finals where a winner must be decided - it should go back to the old days where teams play a fixed 20 minutes of extra time (10 minutes each way). It gives a chance to the other team that conedes points to come back, and that way the team which digs the deepest during extra time or was the best on the day wins after extra time instead of a lucky dip field goal.

Steve Jackson's classic barnstorming try in extra time for the Raiders the in 1989 Grand Final would never have happened under golden point.

 

[Bluebags1908]

The golden point period adds excitement to boring games. That said, people get fixated on the "point" bit - and simply go for the point.

Bring back the draw. Boring games wil be boring games, but at least it's justifiable on the grounds of player welfare AND the integrity of the 80 minute time period which rules our game.

Who says that a drawn game is necessarily boring?

Some drawn games are exciting, some aren't. Just like any other games.

 

[Desert Qlder]

If anything what we are seeing here is the response of a new administration to addressing the poor decisions made under previous control.

So many of us did not like the tenure of David Gallop because it was marked by decisions that were inherently reactive. The Golden Point was one such decision. After the drawn Origin game of 02 so much attention was given to the notion of a 'draw'. The debate at the time was emotional, irrational and led by those with less sense of the games history. Gallop reacted to this and the hasty response resulted.

Those of us on the other side of the debate railed against the decision, fearful of the outcomes it may produce. Needless to say those outcomes have come to fruition. We could foresee the type of negative football it would produce, the timidness of referees, the inequity of the haphazard nature of it and the middle-fingered gesture it gave to the games history and other leagues around the world.

Do you know how frustrating it is to here one of the loudest proponents of Golden Point - Phil Gould, speak out now against it? The words 'I told you so' truly are not enough.

So if the ARLC wish to make amends on these ghastly decisions taken over the last ten years then I am all for it. I'm hopeful now a draw during regular season games will now return to being an honourable result for two teams whose points are level after eighty minutes.

 

[Talanexor]

I really like Golden Point. It makes an already tense game even more exciting.

Most of the responses in this thread are missing the point. This isn't about the pros and cons of field goals, it's about referees being too afraid to actually adjudicate during golden point. If you scrap it or got rid of it in any way, we would still see the same inconsistent refereeing in the final 10 mins (we already do).

The real problem with golden point is players milking penalties to get their team a shot at a penalty goal. That's an absolute anti-climax, and a bad way to lose a match.

So how about this instead?

We do away with penalty goals for ruck infringements.

You can still tap or kick for touch, but unless the defenders do something SERIOUSLY wrong (ie head-high tackle, taking out a kicker while he's in the air etc) you can't take a shot at a penalty goal.

 

[Jason Maher]

Finally another f *cking person gets it. The introduction of golden point makes no sense at all. Everyone is sitting around parading their ideas of what we should do but can anyone give a legitimate reason why there needs to be a forced winner?

A game doesn't all of a sudden become boring because both teams ended on equal points. If anything it builds the hype for the next time they face off against each other.

No golden sh*t. Extra time. Finals only. Ye'know, when a winner is actually necessary.

This. Origin and Finals should have 10 each way, followed by Golden point if scores are still level. Regular season games should be 80 minutes. 2 points for a win, 1 for a draw, 0 for a loss or a bye.

 

[The Engineers Room]

So how about this instead?

We do away with penalty goals for ruck infringements.

You can still tap or kick for touch, but unless the defenders do something SERIOUSLY wrong (ie head-high tackle, taking out a kicker while he's in the air etc) you can't take a shot at a penalty goal.

I like this idea. I have been supporting this. Extend the differential penalty that occurs at scrums to more penalties. Add to it that teams can elect to play on. So the penalty is called the player raises the ball up or makes a signal to the ref and it is zero tackle. I think we remove the kick for touch also. Make the differential penalty a free kick only (tap) not a penalty kick (that can be kicked into touch or kicked for goal).

It doesn't solve the golden point situation but it could help if the first to 4 points or whoever is leading option is taken. And even if it isn't, its a good rule change anyway.

 

[dogslife]

Michael Maguire says it should stay. If Kearney and Furner come out in support, then that's enough indication it should go

 

[The Engineers Room]

If extra time stays for normal season games I want the winner to get 2 and the loser to get 1. None of this three for a win in other games crap. It's a bonus point.

 

[adamkungl]

Bring back the draw.

 

[ellskimore]

I would have thought its an easy one to fix?

Golden Try - first try to score wins

Otherwise if a drop goal or penalty goal is kicked you play out the extra 10 minutes. First past the post wins...

If scores are still locked up at the end of the extra period then have your draw... nothing wrong with a draw at the end of the day.

I actually like this idea. However I think the best option is go back to the draw. during finals play extra time like they did in the old days without it being 'golden.' I still remember that finals game between the dogs and the eels in the 90's. It can be a spectacle without the golden part of it.

 

[Loudstrat]

There was no excitement in watching the apparent 2 best halves in nsw failing at every attempt at fold goal on Monday night.

That's because they didnt have Farah to create try scoring opportunities either.

Who says that a drawn game is necessarily boring?

Dunno. I didnt. I said it makes boring games interesting. Drawn games can be exciting. Not when Penrith and Parra play off for the spoon though.

 

[Newcastlerabbit]

Get rid if it.A draw worked well for over 90yrs without a problem.

 

[The.X.Factor9]

Golden point is great, love the chaos.

Also most hilariously stupid moments occur in golden point.

Coaches only cry when their team draws or loses in golden point.

 

[1 Eyed TEZZA]

Golden Point - It's fine the way it is. Can stay the way it is.

Golden try - Stupid because a team can win with a field goal in the 79th minute but not in the 81st.

1st to score 4 - Again stupid because a team can win with 1 point in the 79th minute but not the 81st.

Extra time - Match goes for 10 minutes extra regardless. I like this option. It leaves the field goal valuable but also means that the field goal isn't the first or last point scoring option.

Draw - Nothing wrong with it. If we went back to it, I wouldn't complain.

Ref's are reluctant to blow a penalty at the moment because they know it will probably decide the game.

I would like to see the extra time. I think it will keep that level of suspense for the fans, opens up the point scoring options and it will make refereeing decisions a bit less vital. The best balanced option.

 

[Babyface O'reilly]

Bottom line, a draw is a legitimate result.

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

I would have thought its an easy one to fix?

Golden Try - first try to score wins

Otherwise if a drop goal or penalty goal is kicked you play out the extra 10 minutes. First past the post wins...

If scores are still locked up at the end of the extra period then have your draw... nothing wrong with a draw at the end of the day.

We have a winner!