Team/Player with the most 40 20's

[hitman82]

It's not that bad, i think we had one two or three years ago.

Oh right, well that's much better :crazy:
We haven't had a good 40/20 kicker since PJ Marsh left. Jones didn't have much of a long kicking game.

 

[Brycey]

oh right that explains it now, thx

You think he just started balling his eyes out for no reason, actually that does make a lot of sense also.

 

[madunit]

worth noting carney finished the year with 5 last year, and i think was co leader with Joe Williams

they were 5 kicks credited to Joe Williams because the stats guys didn't know anyone else on the bunnies team.

 

[Champ]

Warriors have had 1 in 4 years.

1 what???...shower.

 

[hybrid_tiger]

Tigers have kicked 4 40-20's so far in there last 3 games from 3 different players :shock:

Surprising as in previous years we could not kick a 40/20 for sh1t.

 

[Paullyboy]

It baffles me how players at the NRL level dont do it more often. Most wingers are not back on the 3rd or even 4th tackles and it's not that difficult to achieve.

 

[Parra]

I was discussing this the other day.

Why doesn't a team just play to the 40 and then go for a 40/20 most of the time?

Why isn't the kick restart option taken every time there is a chance?

Of course, the team needs to be well drilled and the kicking skills must be there - but the rules allow these opportunities that are rarely exploited.

There would be a various benefits -
- dominant field position when the tactic works
-force the wingers/defenders back, creating space
-put the defenders in two minds - what will they do.

This is rugby-like in tactics, and a player like Beale or Turner do this sort of decision making dozens of times in a Super14 match - but NRL teams wont go near anything that is unpredictable.

What these tactics need is real 5/8's - not glorified locks playing as second receiver.

 

[hitman82]

1 what???...shower.

Was that meant to be funny in some incredibly obscure way?
I was referring to the number of 40/20s we have kicked, as per the title of the thread...

 

[stuke]

I was discussing this the other day.

Why doesn't a team just play to the 40 and then go for a 40/20 most of the time?

Why isn't the kick restart option taken every time there is a chance?

Of course, the team needs to be well drilled and the kicking skills must be there - but the rules allow these opportunities that are rarely exploited.

There would be a various benefits -
- dominant field position when the tactic works
-force the wingers/defenders back, creating space
-put the defenders in two minds - what will they do.

This is rugby-like in tactics, and a player like Beale or Turner do this sort of decision making dozens of times in a Super14 match - but NRL teams wont go near anything that is unpredictable.

What these tactics need is real 5/8's - not glorified locks playing as second receiver.

the main problem is that possession is so valuable in RL. one mistake and the opposition gets the ball, resulting in no chance to get it back for another 6 tackles, or the opposition make a mistake. look at RU, each tackle is a contest for possession.

RL has made possession so important that a lot of the adventurous play is being taken away from the game.

 

[stuke]

also interesting to see that the top expononents of the 40-20 rule are not from the 'top' clubs. shows that it is probably looked upon as a low percentage play and not truly utilised.

it is a shame though because it really puts the team on the front foot, guys celebrate and adds a little of the unknown to the game. as mentioned defence would need to drop wingers back early which creates some space out there.

maybe it is one rule that needs to be tweaked slightly to make more teams really go for it but you don't want to make it that easy that every second kick can achieve it.