Should we have taken the 2?

[jirskyr]

I haven't seen this come up for discussion yet - penalty against Storm for tripping, off what was a fairly speculative bomb 47th minute.

We are leading 12-10, they opt not to take the 2 from in front.

I would have taken the 2 at this time, even though we were only 2 ahead. It was essentially free points and we were doing a decent job of working the ball into their territory on our sets.

I know we almost scored that set off the Rowdy forward pass, but I think strategically you take those points. Melbourne give away penalties fairly purposefully and I think you should take the shot when you can.

 

[WestsSupporter]

No.

We were only in the lead by 2\. Lead of 4 is useless when there are over 30 minutes to go. Teams are taking the penalties under the following conditions.

To increase lead to 6 (one converted try, guaranteed draw).
To increase lead above 6 (other team has to score at least twice, no matter what).
To increase lead to 12 (at least two converted tries).
To increase lead past 12 (other team HAS to score 3 times no matter what).

Arguement for taking it:
When leading by 4, other team won't take a penalty if you concede one in front of the posts.

 

[jirskyr]

My argument was Smith was kicking badly and Storm were scoring tries out wide.

 

[bigsiro]

OBVIOUSLY WE TAKE THE 2!!!!
We are not the best attacking team nor are we the best goal-kicking team, so to reject gift points when they are presented to us in this fashion is moronic.
If we had been on the attack for 3 sets then in that case taking the points would have been a concession that we can't score, but this situation was completely different.

Brisbane were up by 4 early against Newcastle and even they took the 2! Against Newcastle! In the 16th minute! and they won by 50!

 

[Tiger_Watto]

I always took the 2, unless there was an opportunity of a quick tap.

I dont think we were in control of the game at that stage. Melbourne were making good meters and looked to be building to something.

The option to take the 2 was a good call.

 

[Russell]

I would not have taken the 2\. I think they did the right thing.

If Rowdy scores (as he should have) I don't think they would have caught us.

 

[Sabre]

No.

We were only in the lead by 2\. Lead of 4 is useless when there are over 30 minutes to go. Teams are taking the penalties under the following conditions.

To increase lead to 6 (one converted try, guaranteed draw).
To increase lead above 6 (other team has to score at least twice, no matter what).
To increase lead to 12 (at least two converted tries).
To increase lead past 12 (other team HAS to score 3 times no matter what).

Arguement for taking it:
When leading by 4, other team won't take a penalty if you concede one in front of the posts.

That's short sighted though.
Say we don't take the 2 if we then go on to score a try at some stage, then miss the conversion that's a 6 point lead.
If we do take the 2 then go on to score a try and miss the conversion that's an 8 point lead.

We should 100% have taken it. Especially when you get to go back on the attack straight after anyway.

 

[InBenjiWeTrust]

All because of that inexperienced captain Woods, oh, wait a minute … :slight_smile:

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

Should have taken quick tap, one pass and then field goal attempt.

 

[maxxy86]

No we didn't need to take the 2….but a repeat set would have been nice.

 

[steve-o]

We got that decision correct - we didn't need to take the 2 at that point.

However when Kennar got binned, we should've gone for the try.

 

[Chevy]

I felt at the time we should of taken it,a gift 2pts is better than 0.

 

[GoldXR50Leroy]

We got that decision correct - we didn't need to take the 2 at that point.

However when Kennar got binned, we should've gone for the try.

Yeah the 2 points should have been for a conversion following a Penalty try, Gus was right.

 

[tig_prmz]

we should've gone for they try with 3 minutes to go. we had them.