Third time unlucky

[Eels Dude]

Going into golden point last night, the Maroons won the toss and Shane Webke opted to kick off rather than receive the ball. 2 weeks ago the same happened with the Broncos and Gorden Tallis. And of course we all remember our own golden point fiasco when Wagon opted to kick off. All three sides went on to lose.

I'm just wondering what those condeming Wagon over the decision to kick off thought. We've seen two of the most respected and experienced players in the game make the same mistake yet they are not being criticized as much. I'm just curious to know whether those who were highly critical of Wagon over the issue still think it was that dumb a mistake, and whether Webke and Tallis were also as ignorant?

 

[Hurriflatch]

yes, all 3 arer stupid

 

[Eelementary]

For a team in good form and with strong defence - absolutely; putting pressure and the onus to win on your opponent is the best move.

IN OUR CASE, however, it was stupid.

 

[strider]

For the 1,000,000,000,000th time - Waggy did NOT make the call to kick off.....he may have been the one talking to the ref, but it was NOT his decision to kick off....it was the coaching staffs call - which is most likely the case with EVERY team in NRL.....get off Waggy's back over this!

I'd be interested to see any stats about which team wins golden point games depending on who kicks off in extra time.

 

[Hurriflatch]

ok, whoever's fault it was isn't the point you need to ball to win

 

[Hollywood Jesus]

watched the game with 4 other people and we all said kick off. the "you can't score without the ball" thing is crap - you have to back yourself for one good set of six in defense and then you are in a prime position.

I'd say its easier to hold a team in their 30m zone than it is to force a ball 80m upfield off one set in attack. Kicking off is the way to go

 

[COACH STERLING]

watched the game with 4 other people and we all said kick off. the "you can't score without the ball" thing is crap - you have to back yourself for one good set of six in defense and then you are in a prime position.

I'd say its easier to hold a team in their 30m zone than it is to force a ball 80m upfield off one set in attack. Kicking off is the way to go

I'm not so sure keeping an opposition team in there own 30metre zone is easy after playing 80min of footy, maybe might be possible in the early stages of a game.

 

[The Colonel]

The "plan" generally is to kick deep, make them work it out and put pressure on their kicker. Try and get the ball at your end on about your 30 metre line and work it up. If you can travel about forty metres most competent goal kickers can kick from about 30 metres out.

 

[fish eel]

Be nothing worse than electing to receive and then putting the ball down in the ensuing set.

Its a 50-50 call really - and it is one thing that is really easy to be critical of in hindsight.

 

[bradeel]

i think the point here is little to do with the merits of kicking vs receiving at the start of golden point time. Eels Dude has raised the important question of whether or not it was fair for everyone to bag the living hell out of Daniel Wagon for a decision that was similarly made by two of the best players and leaders in the game today. And i think you'll find that Webcke, Tallis and Wagon's call would be backed up by plenty of other respected footy people in the game and in the media.

The fact is, the Eels lose a game, and every fan that own an Internet connection or a phone line gets on the chat sites or rings Ray Hadley with a million different scapegoats and excuses as to why we got done. Fair enough i suppose, because we are upset that our team has lost a winnable game, but surely you need to go easy on the players you choose as your scapegoat. If its not Brian Smith (who i agree is due a severance cheque), its Daniel Wagon, Matt Petersen, or Adam Dykes. Sometimes the blame is fairly attributed and at other times its clearly not. I think the Wags decision was a 50-50 call and you can't blame him for making it. Why don't you just blame David Vaeliki for falling over and busting his knee for the season - he created the hole that led to the Sharks winning try after all.

 

[Parraren]

Everyone is always an expert in hindsight :roll:

It's a 50-50 call, both decisions (to kick or recieve) have their merits.

 

[thedux]

The point is to put yourself in a position to score, which can only be done with the ball. The other thing is that all three captains are queenslanders so that is probably the real problem. ;-)

 

[eloquentEEL]

I don't think that the decision to kick-off (which I think is the right one) is the common factor in all 3 losing. I think the bigger factor would be that all 3 of the winning teams were playing better at the end of the match, and were full of confidence going into extra time... they would've probably won regardless of whether they kicked or received.