Golden Point Change

[hindmarsh4pm]

Hey guys, came up with an idea for golden point games, let me know what you guys think.
When teams go into extra time, both teams no matter who wins get 1 point each, than the winning team gets the 2nd point. I think the team should be rewarded for going the full 80. They do that in the nhl, and at the end of the season that 1 point earned in golden point could help teams sneak into the finals.
So bascially all it is, regualtion time ends both teams get 1 point, team who goes on to win golden point gets the 2nd point. Simple.

Thoughts?

 

[yobbo84]

Hey guys, came up with an idea for golden point games, let me know what you guys think.
When teams go into extra time, both teams no matter who wins get 1 point each, than the winning team gets the 2nd point. I think the team should be rewarded for going the full 80. They do that in the nhl, and at the end of the season that 1 point earned in golden point could help teams sneak into the finals.
So bascially all it is, regualtion time ends both teams get 1 point, team who goes on to win golden point gets the 2nd point. Simple.

Thoughts?

You can't have one game worth 3 points and another worth 2 points. It doesn't work like that. What you need is:

Win - 4 points
Win GP - 3 points
Draw - 2 points
Lose GP - 1 point
Lose - 0 points

Therefore all games are equal and teams who can win in 80 are rewarded (as they should be).

 

[Mr Saab]

Thats great and all, but you must increase the total points awarded from each game to 3.
If you only have GP games having three points it will put an inbalance in the ladder.

 

[hindmarsh4pm]

well i just think its a little harsh that a team goes for the full 80minutes and does not get anything out of it, i reckon 3 points a win would be good

 

[Mr Saab]

Keep it at 2 points per game and remove GP.
Problem solved.

 

[hrundi99]

Yeah I proposed this a fair while ago.

It's the same as the NHL system.

I don't think the 3 point thing is an issue, you just have to adjust, as the NHL has done.

 

[hindmarsh4pm]

Keep it at 2 points per game and remove GP.
Problem solved.

i don't mind that, but seeing the nrl doesn't look like changing it, then the loser of golden point deserves something

 

[hrundi99]

Can anyone list the results of each of this season's GP games?

It'd be interesting to see how the ladder compares.

 

[sooperdooper]

Golden point is now a part of our game... say all you like but golden point gives us great memories and its when the best players stand up...
Eg: Lockyer v titans
Thurston v panthers

 

[Holla]

Get rid of the Golden Point Game Time.
What is so wrong with 1 point each after a draw.
I think it was only brought in because Wayne Bennett had a bitch about losing a SoO series because the 3rd game ended in a draw giving NSW a series win.

 

[Mr Saab]

I think it was only brought in because Wayne Bennett had a bitch about losing a SoO series because the 3rd game ended in a draw giving NSW a series win.

I think you are very wrong.
In 2002 QLD "won" the series on the GP draw in game 3.
Bennett doesnt like GP.
It was NSW and Gus jumping up and down complaining

 

[scuzzi]

Get rid of the Golden Point Game Time.
What is so wrong with 1 point each after a draw.
I think it was only brought in because Wayne Bennett had a bitch about losing a SoO series because the 3rd game ended in a draw giving NSW a series win.

f**king clown

 

[forward pass]

Why award points to losers?

The Eels didn't get a point on the weekend - and quite frankly - rightly so !!!

 

[_Johnsy]

You can't have one game worth 3 points and another worth 2 points. It doesn't work like that. What you need is:

Win - 4 points
Win GP - 3 points
Draw - 2 points
Lose GP - 1 point
Lose - 0 points

Therefore all games are equal and teams who can win in 80 are rewarded (as they should be).

If the NRL are going to persist with GP great idea. Yeah like it.

 

[eels_fan_01]

Why award points to losers?

The Eels didn't get a point on the weekend - and quite frankly - rightly so !!!

Agreed. I think people fail to realise that the draw will be rubbed out of the game competely and thank god for that. Leave golden point exactly the way it is.

 

[Dogs Of War]

I think once golden point period has started, it should be played for the full 10 minutes. This way teams can score a field goal, but the game hasn't finished yet. Thus the other team still has an opportunity to equalise, or go score even more points than the other team. At the end of 10 minutes if the score are still equal, then the game ends as a draw.

 

[Gus22]

The only thing I dislike about golden point is that it changes the way the game is played. The GP situation rewards mistake free, low risk, boring, grind 'em out, hit up after hit up type football. It disadvantages teams that rely on flair, taking chances by actually passing the ball out to the backs. GP is about gaining field position via your meat-head props in order to give your designated kicker the best chance at popping a match winning field goal.

That's not Rugby League!

IMO a better way to go would be to retain the extra period but play it as a tie-breaker (similar to tennis) where a team needs to win by 2 points or more. This way it still allows teams with good meter makers to grind their way up field for a FG attempt. The only thing is they have to do it twice. Alternatively, teams could chance their arm & actually attempt to score a try to end the game. Deliberate penalties for slowing down the play the ball or ruck infringements would not be risked as a penalty could lead to a match deciding penalty goal.

If anything this method may lead to more games being drawn as scoring 2 points in a tense 10 minute period would not be easy. As some have stated sharing the points after an epic battle that goes beyond 80 minutes may just be the fairest result.

 

[eels_fan_01]

The only thing I dislike about golden point is that it changes the way the game is played. The GP situation rewards mistake free, low risk, boring, grind 'em out, hit up after hit up type football. It disadvantages teams that rely on flair, taking chances by actually passing the ball out to the backs. GP is about gaining field position via your meat-head props in order to give your designated kicker the best chance at popping a match winning field goal.

That's not Rugby League!

IMO a better way to go would be to retain the extra period but play it as a tie-breaker (similar to tennis) where a team needs to win by 2 points or more. This way it still allows teams with good meter makers to grind their way up field for a FG attempt. The only thing is they have to do it twice. Alternatively, teams could chance their arm & actually attempt to score a try to end the game. Deliberate penalties for slowing down the play the ball or ruck infringements would not be risked as a penalty could lead to a match deciding penalty goal.

If anything this method may lead to more games being drawn as scoring 2 points in a tense 10 minute period would not be easy. As some have stated sharing the points after an epic battle that goes beyond 80 minutes may just be the fairest result.

Ive seen many teams win golden point on flair and ive seen many teams play hit up type football as you call it, for the whole 80 minutes of a game or the last 20 minutes or whatever. Whats the difference?

 

[Tekken Lord]

Originally Posted by Dogs of War
I think once golden point period has started, it should be played for the full 10 minutes. This way teams can score a field goal, but the game hasn't finished yet. Thus the other team still has an opportunity to equalise, or go score even more points than the other team. At the end of 10 minutes if the score are still equal, then the game ends as a draw.

I'd prefer it if it was that way as well, ten minutes of tense nerve racking footy. To me someone kicking a field goal in GP doesn't feel like they deserved to win, they should score the points and defend it then they deserve it, and it'll be good to watch.

 

[Gus22]

Ive seen many teams win golden point on flair and ive seen many teams play hit up type football as you call it, for the whole 80 minutes of a game or the last 20 minutes or whatever. Whats the difference?

Have you really? Because I haven't. Most GP periods sees teams playing for field position in order to end the game with a field goal. Anasta caught the Tigers unaware last week because he chanced his arm. It worked & they won. Had he been tackled & the Tigers gone on to kick a FG the very next set, Anasta would have been roundly criticized.

What's wrong with it (GP) is that it bastardizes Rugby League. It elevates one facet of the game to a disproportionately important level. In some games I've seen you may as well bring the touch line 10m on either side as teams will rarely stray beyond those boundaries in trying to get from point A to point B in the most efficient manner.

The philosophy of GP has its merits, & I enjoy the sudden death nature of it. I just think it could be done better & be more in line with what the object of the game is fundamentally about - scoring tries!