Short Kick-Offs

[bigsiro]

Can someone please tell me why short kick-offs are not attempted at every kick-off?

 

[hobbo]

The games all about field position
The odds are usually against the team kicking off regaining possession IMO

_Posted using RoarFEED V.4_

 

[dazza65]

Coz field position trumps possession except when behind with minutes to play

_Posted using RoarFEED V.4_

 

[innsaneink]

%ages

 

[happy_tiger]

If anything drilling a ball and trying to find touch off the kick off is a better ploy in my opinion

You get 2 bites of the apple that way

The receiving team risks knocking on the quick moving loose ball and if it finds touch you automatically get the ball back

 

[pHyR3]

If anything drilling a ball and trying to find touch off the kick off is a better ploy in my opinion

You get 2 bites of the apple that way

The receiving team risks knocking on the quick moving loose ball and if it finds touch you automatically get the ball back

it's a lot harder to pull off than it looks, the opposition players will close the gaps very quick (as im sure you know).

also you don't get a chance to chase after it since there's no hangtime if you drill it.

personally i prefer pat richards kicking off every time, dont understand why other teams dont do this… :unamused:

 

[bigsiro]

Re the above arguments and similar objections:

(1) I agree that with short kick offs the odds of possession surely lean towards the receiving side but it is still a contest and a betting man's chance that we may win the ball. The %'s we are therefore talking about are: Any % chance of gathering posession vs 100% chance of surrendering it.

(2) The first tackle from a standard kick off return is normally around the 25 metre mark. The first tackle from a short kick off is around the 45 metre mark. So, the risk of not winning the football (from the short kickoff) is only a risk of 20 metres.

Rugby kick-offs prove that you don't regain every time. But then again, rugby is WAY more about field position, yet they still try it EVERY time!
Why?
Because the real equation is winning possession vs losing 20 metres. But, it's greater than that, because if we are to win possession then we start our set on their 40 metre line.

I certainly don't expect everyone on here to agree with the idea but I think it is definitely worth a shot if it the reward far outweighs the risk. Which I believe it does.

 

[tigertye]

If anything drilling a ball and trying to find touch off the kick off is a better ploy in my opinion

You get 2 bites of the apple that way

The receiving team risks knocking on the quick moving loose ball and if it finds touch you automatically get the ball back

it's a lot harder to pull off than it looks, the opposition players will close the gaps very quick (as im sure you know).

also you don't get a chance to chase after it since there's no hangtime if you drill it.

personally i prefer pat richards kicking off every time, dont understand why other teams dont do this… :unamused:

Sandow was trying to do what Pat does with the kick-offs in tonight's game a few times. Don't be surprised that many coaches will try to get their kickers to copy Pat's technique. I heard a stat that we were getting the ball back 20% of the time. I'm actually pretty amazed teams haven't mixed up their kick-offs more over the years, whether with more short kick-offs or trying to belt it over the side line to regain possession. Very underutilized part of our game IMO.

_Posted using RoarFEED V.4_

 

[BrissieTiger67]

Re the above arguments and similar objections:

(1) I agree that with short kick offs the odds of possession surely lean towards the receiving side but it is still a contest and a betting man's chance that we may win the ball. The %'s we are therefore talking about are: Any % chance of gathering posession vs 100% chance of surrendering it.

(2) The first tackle from a standard kick off return is normally around the 25 metre mark. The first tackle from a short kick off is around the 45 metre mark. So, the risk of not winning the football (from the short kickoff) is only a risk of 20 metres.

Rugby kick-offs prove that you don't regain every time. But then again, rugby is WAY more about field position, yet they still try it EVERY time!
Why?
Because the real equation is winning possession vs losing 20 metres. But, it's greater than that, because if we are to win possession then we start our set on their 40 metre line.

I certainly don't expect everyone on here to agree with the idea but I think it is definitely worth a shot if it the reward far outweighs the risk. Which I believe it does.

But an avg 50m advance from 60metres out puts them on our 10m line for the final tackle. Where as running from their 25 m line 50 metres means they will have to either put up a kick or run a backline play most likely to come up with a repeat set or try. For me that's a significant 20 metres.

Also I feel pat manages to get them high enough we are getting down the fieeld quicker the same way a short kick off is intended. I think more kickers wiill try that.

 

[Demps]

Short kick offs every kick off is something you see if you play any rugby league online, on PS3.

Cheap.

Not realistic.

As mentioned, it's all about field position - same reason why they kick on the fifth instead of just getting tackled and handing the ball over.