Golden Point - Article

[oozy]

List of National Rugby League golden point games
From Wikipedia for what it's worth.
..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_National_Rugby_League_golden_point_games

 

[Frenzy]

It did touch the ground i thought. On the line. When returning the ball, the line is in the field of play. I thought he got it on the line. I could be wrong but. Either way, if its a wrong call it sucks, but at the same time, we never get the wrong call our way so ill take it

This is why I am unsure BWB. I thought it had changed but I don't have a degree in rule deciphering LOL

It states in the laws of the game now

The Touch Lines are in Touch, the Touch in-Goal lines are Touch in-Goal, the Goal Lines are in the In-Goal area and the Dead Ball Line is beyond In-Goal.

 

[BlackWhiteBlue]

why after all the GP games does the retorter bring it up now,

Easy because the name Cronulla sell's papers.

Hagan has been flogging this opinion for a while, he writes an article every few years.
I dunno why golden point is such a problem. It sets aside a winner. We have lost our fair share no doubt. But i also remember the Roosters game last year was called a draw because noone scored in extra time.

I think it was Andrew Johns who suggested the 3 points scoring system. 3 points to the winners of the games. 2 points if you win in extra time, 1 point to the side that loses in extra time. Probably the only smart thing to come out of Johns mouth.

Could take that idea further and if the game goes to extra time and a side wins with a try, they get the 3 points and the losing side none. If its decided by the field goal in extra time its a 2-1 split. Gives incentive to play footy instead of AFL

 

[BlackWhiteBlue]

This is why I am unsure BWB. I thought it had changed but I don't have a degree in rule deciphering LOL

It states in the laws of the game now

The Touch Lines are in Touch, the Touch in-Goal lines are Touch in-Goal, the Goal Lines are in the In-Goal area and the Dead Ball Line is beyond In-Goal.

I am sure if the ball is being returned, then if the ball touches the goal line they are deemed to be over the line (into the field of play) but if thats wrong, and he put the ball on the line its grounded in goal

 

[Gil]

List of National Rugby League golden point games
From Wikipedia for what it's worth.
..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_National_Rugby_League_golden_point_games

I counted 14 won by a golden point try

 

[SharkShocked]

Hagan has been flogging this opinion for a while, he writes an article every few years.
I dunno why golden point is such a problem. It sets aside a winner. We have lost our fair share no doubt. But i also remember the Roosters game last year was called a draw because noone scored in extra time.

I think it was Andrew Johns who suggested the 3 points scoring system. 3 points to the winners of the games. 2 points if you win in extra time, 1 point to the side that loses in extra time. Probably the only smart thing to come out of Johns mouth.

Could take that idea further and if the game goes to extra time and a side wins with a try, they get the 3 points and the losing side none. If its decided by the field goal in extra time its a 2-1 split. Gives incentive to play footy instead of AFL

It isn't smart because you are awarding different points to losers in different situations. A loss is a loss is a loss no matter how it is obtained.

I prefer what someone said earlier, let them play an extra 10 minutes if Fox/TV wants their 'heightened' entertainment value, but allow the game to go for the full 10, none of the golden point stuff, that way some teams will settle to go 1 in front, some teams will look for the try AND MOST IMPORTANTLY. A referee can award a penalty knowing full well that the other team will still have the option to win the game and that the game doesn't end immediately.

I can't believe they haven't amended in this fashion.

 

[slide rule]

Just call it a draw and 1 point each.

For finals play a set amount of time each way.

Easy, fair, fixed.

 

[BlackWhiteBlue]

It isn't smart because you are awarding different points to losers in different situations. A loss is a loss is a loss no matter how it is obtained.

I prefer what someone said earlier, let them play an extra 10 minutes if Fox/TV wants their 'heightened' entertainment value, but allow the game to go for the full 10, none of the golden point stuff, that way some teams will settle to go 1 in front, some teams will look for the try AND MOST IMPORTANTLY. A referee can award a penalty knowing full well that the other team will still have the option to win the game and that the game doesn't end immediately.

I can't believe they haven't amended in this fashion.

Yes and no. I think making it to extra time can deserve its rewards. Look at our game V Cowboys. we were 18-0 at half time. Complete turn around then win in extra time. I think a 3 point dividing system has its merits. And like I said, go to extra time and can get the 3-0 by scoring a try, or 2-1 by taking a field goal. Its like the NFL. either take the 1 point for a goal kick after a touch down, or play an extra down and go for more points.

Either way, im happy enough with teh system now. the team with the most points wins the game. It just sucks we had 15 minutes of missed field goals to determine the game.

 

[DeathMoth]

golden point, more like gay-den point.

they should make it golden try. field goal fests are just rubbish

 

[SharkShocked]

I don't see how you could credit one side for 'making' extra time and gets beat by a field goal and another who gets beaten by a field goal in regular time.

To me that is absolute stupidity.

I just wish the 'Golden' aspect of extra time would disappear. If the argument is that they 'want a result' the 10m of extra time can potentially give them the result the same manner as GP. If its for the 'excitement' factor, well that died off long ago when it became a field goal a thon.

Play the 10 see what happens and you'll also have less complaints off rules that were getting policed in regular time being thrown out the window come extra time.

 

[BlackWhiteBlue]

I don't see how you could credit one side for 'making' extra time and gets beat by a field goal and another who gets beaten by a field goal in regular time.

To me that is absolute stupidity.

I just wish the 'Golden' aspect of extra time would disappear. If the argument is that they 'want a result' the 10m of extra time can potentially give them the result the same manner as GP. If its for the 'excitement' factor, well that died off long ago when it became a field goal a thon.

Play the 10 see what happens and you'll also have less complaints off rules that were getting policed in regular time being thrown out the window come extra time.

Well yeah. There is probably arguments for every case isnt there.

A team can get flogged 50-0 and be counted the same as a team who goes for 80-90 minutes toe to toe with their opposition, and loses at the hands of a 'fluked' we can call most of them, field goal.

But on the other hand, both teams do not win so arent worthy of points.

Im not saying i whole heartedly agree with the whole thing. **** i hate the field goal, i'd go as far as saying rub it out of the game all together

 

[Gards]

Sharks have played in 13 GP games for a W/D/L record of 6/1/6.

Wow I thought our record was much worse and definitely not even!

Just call it a draw and 1 point each.

For finals play a set amount of time each way.

Easy, fair, fixed.

You are correct but it's all about TV ratings. Not the integrity of game

golden point, more like gay-den point.

they should make it golden try. field goal fests are just rubbish

I agree that GP is a field goal lottery festival and get's quite embarrassing to watch. But how does golden try work cause you would just have defenders fouling attackers to prevent a try. Would only work if the ref has the balls to blow a penalty and that a penalty goal also counts as a win but just not a FG. As stated above though my preference is no golden point scenarios, just normal extra time or a flat out ol fashioned draw

I don't see how you could credit one side for 'making' extra time and gets beat by a field goal and another who gets beaten by a field goal in regular time.

To me that is absolute stupidity.

Yea a big no from me for splitting points 2-1 or whatever. Too many things about it that arn't right. Novel idea though.

 

[SharkShocked]

I don't really hate the field goal, I just think it's value to END a game in extra time isn't right.

Some field goals have been incredible viewing and amazing skill so I wouldn't be an advocate of rubbing them out of the game. Anasta's to take it to OT, Meritt's win at the SCG. Some are absolutely great.

The problem is this necessity to have it as a 'Golden' point over time, and I don't understand it. If you give the players the extra 10 minutes to sort it out, I personally believe you will get just as many results as you currently get but with better football, because you will get different approaches from different teams and differing scenarios where a team scores the field goal, then a team goes for a short kick off and might look for a try or a repeat set etc.

It has to purely come down to the fact that Fox/TV networks want the game as Golden point so that people were given more entertainment more drama, I personally believe in my scenario you will get more permutations of different sorts of drama as different events unfold in the extra time.

Not the bore fest of Golden point that currently exists.

You get the added value of a team that gets a field goal scored against them to retaliate.

I just don't like the idea of any type of playing being enough to end the game. Particularly when you throw in the absurdity that is the current NRL refereeing in GP.

 

[Gibs]

I counted 14 won by a golden point try

To expand on yours Gil

71 golden point games

40/71 from field goals

14/71 from tries

7/71 from goals

10/71 drawn