The worst thing about golden point

[nick87]

Yeah that's a fair call too, inside the 20, its almost always an attacking kick.
You should cop a 7 tackle set for rolling an attacking grubber a metre too deep.

 

[Walt Flanigan]

Yeah that's a fair call too, inside the 20, its almost always an attacking kick.
You should cop a 7 tackle set for rolling an attacking grubber a metre too deep.

Good idea in theory but unfortunately I could just see refs constantly sending these up to the video ref when they can't tell if they were inside the 20 or not.

I think the 7 tackle set is just a sh*t rule TBH.

 

[Hutty1986]

It shouldn't be around in finals games or Origins. It's just a lottery that cheapens big games.

 

[fourplay]

Golden point is the best and most exciting 10 minutes of any game. Happy it is here to stay.

 

[adamkungl]

The 7 tackle rule is a shit rule under every circumstance and has no reason to exist ever.

 

[Rod]

The first 80 minutes of Knights/Raiders was very good, especially considering the quality of us (Knights) it could have been pretty bad. Then the ensuing golden point was complete crap and ruined what had been a very good game.

The tactics and execution from both teams was horrific. If it wasn't for the Inglis FG I think the Raiders trying to kick a 50+ penalty goal when you could just get 6 tackles camped on our line was one of the dumbest decisions in quite a while.

As others have said the 7 tackle rule is stupid also and only makes golden point worse.

The only reason golden point can be exciting sometimes is because of what is at stake, not because of the actually quality of footy. It's fabricated excitement. A coin toss would be 'exciting' if it meant the winning team got the 2 points.

 

[Band On The Run]

If extra time is absolutely needed, just forget the golden point rule. Make it 10 minutes of high intensity point grubbing with right of reply.

So if you score a field goal, then you've got to defend it. If there's a controversial penalty 20m in front, take it but then defend it - at least refs won't feel as shy. If you score a try, then your chances of winning have gone right up - but you still have to defend it.

Golden point is arse and a bad advertisement for football.

I was talking about this with someone last night. The right of reply. If we absolutely have to have extra time (and we don't), I think if a team scores in extra time, the other team should get one more set of 6 to try and reply. This would at least add some degree of fairness. At the moment it's terrible.

I understand why Golden Try may not work, but the above could realistically work.

You got that right!

Either scrap it or have 5 each way (not golden point), so teams can try & construct a try, instead of needing to go for a miracle play!

Scrap it totally. the odd points are good for separating the teams on the table.
But more importantly any kind of extra time used to be reseved for finals footy (where there has to be a winner) . Watching extra time in a semi final was a awesome before GP was introduced. Now its just another game.

A draw is a f**king draw, there's a reason we went to school to learn what it meant

I think most people agree :

Reg Season: Draw
Finals/Origin: 10 mins Extra time followed by Unlimited golden point

Tests are interesting. I'd say
Standalone (eg ANZAC): 10 mins Extra time followed by Unlimited golden point
Pool match/series match: Draw
WC/Series final: 10 mins Extra time followed by Unlimited golden point


Basically Golden point should never be the first option.
You could argue for golden try, but I always prefer K.I.S.S - Keep It Simple Stupid. Draw or full length extra time.

My preference would be if they just scrapped golden point extra time and left it as a draw for regular season games and extra time for finals and origin.

But that will never happen so I say make it golden try.

The NFL has moved to a silver point or right of reply haven't they?

I wonder if they forget or if it's actually not coached. It's just insane to me how low percentage their plays are.

But if it was up to me I'd just get rid of it. This was a classic solution to a non problem. Draws during the regular season were always rare and they didn't hurt anybody.

The first 80 minutes of Knights/Raiders was very good, especially considering the quality of us (Knights) it could have been pretty bad. Then the ensuing golden point was complete crap and ruined what had been a very good game.

The tactics and execution from both teams was horrific. If it wasn't for the Inglis FG I think the Raiders trying to kick a 50+ penalty goal when you could just get 6 tackles camped on our line was one of the dumbest decisions in quite a while.

As others have said the 7 tackle rule is stupid also and only makes golden point worse.

The only reason golden point can be exciting sometimes is because of what is at stake, not because of the actually quality of footy. It's fabricated excitement. A coin toss would be 'exciting' if it meant the winning team got the 2 points.

100% Agree with all these.

Draw for regular season, 5 mins each way for origin and finals

 

[Bring it home Knights]

The worst thing about golden point is the way it has negatively effected finals matches. Having a team lose a final or gf in golden point is a massive blight on the game. The old system of having 10 minutes each way was a terrific set up which is now discarded to allow for golden point....

 

[Lambretta]

Are you saying NRL is mindless shit?

Golden point is

No, what I was saying is that TV ratings aren't always a measure of what works. Like I pointed out - people tuning in may be there thinking something else is due to come on, such as the news.

Plus, what evidence do you have that games which go to Golden point rate better than games that don't?