Games drawn after 80mins

A

alex

New member
There's a poll on NRL.com this week about "How would you like to see games with level scores after 80 minutes determined?"

Three options are:
1\. Golden Point
2\. Golden Try
3\. Call it a draw

I voted for golden try. What does everyone else think?

Also, what are people's views on Sheens' suggestions from a little while back. Make each game worth 3 points instead of 2\. If games are level at the end of 80mins and go into extra time, the winner in extra time gets 2 and the loser gets one, cause after all, no team was leading after 80mins. I'm a fan of this idea.

Thoughts?
 
@alex said:
Also, what are people's views on Sheens' suggestions from a little while back. Make each game worth 3 points instead of 2\. If games are level at the end of 80mins and go into extra time, the winner in extra time gets 2 and the loser gets one, cause after all, no team was leading after 80mins. I'm a fan of this idea.
Click to expand...

So am I Alex…

Seems so logical doesn't it...
 
@Kaiser said:
@alex said:
Also, what are people's views on Sheens' suggestions from a little while back. Make each game worth 3 points instead of 2\. If games are level at the end of 80mins and go into extra time, the winner in extra time gets 2 and the loser gets one, cause after all, no team was leading after 80mins. I'm a fan of this idea.

So am I Alex…

Seems so logical doesn't it...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

It's the logical move, hence the NRL won't do it…

As a fan, I'd feel much better walking away from a tough extra time game knowing that they at least got one point. I'm sure the players would be in favour of it too.
 
There's nothing wrong with a draw. Sometimes it's an appropriate result. But if extra time must be played, I'd like to see them make it 5 minutes each way, regardless of whether either team scores
 
The best solution for me is that after 80 minutes if the scores are still level, the game is extended by 2 x 5 minutes halves. No golden point, no golden try, whoever is leading after 90 minutes wins. If they are still level then the game was destined to finish that way.
I think this is the fairest and indeed the most exciting way to handle OT.

As for Sheens suggestion, I can see a couple of problems.

#1 Was he saying that every game should be worth three points? If he was then that cant be a fair outcome - Imagine Saints and Cronulla faced off in the worst game of the year. Terrible defense, terrible attack, terrible ball handling etc… Saints win with a lucky try in the last minute of play = 3 points. Meanwhile Tigers and Manly go to war and spend the 80 minutes smashing each other in defense and scoring brilliant team tries. They are level at fulltime and Tigers win in extra time = 2 points. Now Saints would back up the following week because their game was easy = 3 more points. Tigers would be sore and sorry from their brutal match and go down. Saints would now be 4 in front of us -more than 1 win.

#2 Just say that we came to the end of the season and we won our game moving us to 45 points - equal 7th with Brisbane and Roosters. We are feeling pretty confident because the only game left in the round is the monday night game between the bronc and the roosters. We are miles in front of both on for and against so the winner leapfrogs us and the loser drops out of the 8 - we should be safe. The game goes to extra time and there is a winner. Both teams leapfrog us and we miss the finals. We are kicked out of the 8 by a team that lost.

#3 What happens if the score after OT is still level? do both teams get 1 1/2 points?

Extreme examples I know but they would turn the competition into a mess if they happened. The way of the world dictates that there are winners and losers....you shouldnt be rewarded for losing. Leave that to the AFL.
 
1\. He was saying every game should be worth 3 points. And I actually think it is a fair call. If you have to go to extra time to beat a team then maybe you don't deserve as many points as the team that did it in normal time.

2\. That would just be how the dice rolled and you'd take it on the chin.
\
\
3\. Each team would get one point as neither team could claim the win.

I don't really count an extra time win as a real win. If it's a draw at the end of 80 both teams should get points no matter what. Rugby league is decided on the best team after 80 mins, not 90.

I've always thought golden point is unfair to the losing team and in my opinion either bring back the draw after 80 or implement the 3 points for a win model with no golden point just 2 x 5 min.
 
I personally don't have a problem with a drawn game it's far fairer than one team losing out completely after competing for 80 mins but because one team happens to pop a field goal over they get all 2 points.

I grew up with Football (soccer) and it has never been a problem. Bring in golden point in inthe semis but have a draw after 80 mins during the regular season.

or if after 80 mins both teams get at least one point and if there is a winner they get 2 and the loser gets 1.
 
1st option - Draw. The only reason we have Golden Point is because of Sports Betting.

2nd option - Golden Try. I don't watch Rugby League for field goals and penalty kicks…
 
The game is supposed to be 80 minutes.
Only play golden point 'IF' a definitive result is required, and then make it 2 x 5 minute halves (other variations, 2x10, 2 x8), regardless of a team kicking a field goal 30 secs in.
 
@stryker said:
@TiggaPlease said:
2\. That would just be how the dice rolled and you'd take it on the chin.

I doubt that very much…I'd expect an uproar.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Why?
Itd be tough luck and wouldve occurred numerous times during the season, only difference here in your scenario its the final round….cop it on the chin.

Extra time skits me...refs put their whistles away

People i think have forgotten with a draw the old way there was usually a team that was lucky to scrape home with 1 point, while the other was generally ruing the fact they blew 2 and had to settle for one. Draws were rarely "even" contests as such
 
I hate the idea of golden try. It's stupid, very stupid.
1\. There is no punishment for giving away a penalty, as a penalty goal means nothing. After every line break you will have players lying all over the ruck
2\. If a field goal/penalty goal can be kicked in normal time, why not extra time? It would be like having a tie in cricket and going to a super over (like they do in 20/20) and saying you can only score runs from 4s and 6s.
3\. Teams won't throw the ball around, they'll knock it up 5 tackles then put up a bomb and hope.

I say, either end it as a draw or keep it as it is now (I fail to see the problem with it now) but change the way points are given
4-normal time win
3-extra time win
2-draw
1-extra time loss
0-normal time loss
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Members online

... and 4 more.
Total: 1,092 (members: 54, guests: 1,038)
Back
Top