The penalty goal at the end

[Juro]

There are about 2 minutes to go in the game. We get a penalty on half way. We are leading by 1 point.

Should we have:
a) gone for the penalty goal, or
b) keep the ball in hand and try to run down the clock?

We all know how this ended. But what were you thinking at the time?

 

[Guest]

I was thinking take the 2 points. Given the way Richards strikes the ball, I had full confidence he would kick it dead even if he missed. His line drop out in yesterday's game went 62 metres on the fly, so I figured he'd kick it further off the tee, which he did, it sailed an easy 65 metres, plus the time he took soaked up an extra 30 seconds.

 

[tigerbenji]

I thought we should of kicked for touch & kept the pressure on them, But i was wrong.

 

[GNR4LIFE]

It was a dumb decision regardless of whether Richards could have kicked it. The fact he kicked it made it even more dangerous as it gave Parra the chance at a short restart with a minute on the clock. Had they got it back they would have got a full set. It was a terrible decision, which will get glossed over seeing as how it didn't cost us, but it easily could have.

 

[joebob]

I thought he should have deliberately missed it. Happy with taking the option to waste time, but if he missed the kick then the re-start then would have been a drop out from their 20m instead of a kick from a tee from the halfway. The 2 points for the penalty goal were meaningless but the 30m could have been costly - plus much easier to get a good kick from a tee as opposed to a drop kick. The second kick off was a beauty (low and hard) and we were lucky to get the ball without knocking it on.

 

[Sabre]

I was thinking 2 points.
Onlu problem would have been if he had hit the posts.

 

[Blake93]

I didn't agree with the decision at the time but it worked out in the end. As willow said, even if richard's missed, the ball would go dead anyway and we would either get the ball back or the eels would have to go 90 metres in the final set.

 

[Mona_Lolesi]

Agree with the earlier post that kicking the goal was actually worse off because they got another short kick off.

Last year it would have been fine because they didn't stop the clock in the final 5 minutes of play. Maybe the change hadn't factored into their thinking?

It is a concern that the team was worried they couldn't kick down the field, walk it down, and then soak up 1 min 46 seconds in the process?

 

[bonstonker]

we had the ball in our hands.i wouldn't have given the eels a chance to touch it again.
so kick for touch for me.
and anasta not to kick on the last would be my orders.

 

[simonthetiger]

we had the ball in our hands.i wouldn't have given the eels a chance to touch it again.
so kick for touch for me.
and anasta not to kick on the last would be my orders.

Agree with all of that Bon….II thought it was a strange decision.

Surely the smart option was to NOT give Parra a chance to contest the ball...we were already in front.

When they kicked off again I was in agony and only an excellent piece of play from Simona saved the day....

Very strange and I dont get the logic of it.

 

[Jerry_Seinfeld]

I was thinking take the 2 points. Given the way Richards strikes the ball, I had full confidence he would kick it dead even if he missed. His line drop out in yesterday's game went 62 metres on the fly, so I figured he'd kick it further off the tee, which he did, it sailed an easy 65 metres, plus the time he took soaked up an extra 30 seconds.

When pattys time is up he should go straight to the NFL to be a kicker over there and if they bring one back on him he has the pace and size/strength that any other NFL kicker does not have.

 

[tig_prmz]

we had the ball in our hands.i wouldn't have given the eels a chance to touch it again.
so kick for touch for me.
and anasta not to kick on the last would be my orders.

i was thinking the same.

 

[tigerbenji]

I dont think Potter was to happy @ us taking the Kick for Goal. Listened to B S B to-day & got that impression.

 

[Goose]

I was torn, there was too much time to run down the clock without Parra getting a set, but I was thinking if he kicks it, they have to score a try to win it, and cant simply level up with a field goal…..like everyone else I was concerned with the short kick restart giving them a set in our half.

I was internally debating with myself right up until we secured the ball of the kick off :slight_smile:

 

[TimmyB]

Good decision.

Even if the Eels had regathered from the kickoff, we were 3 points ahead and could have given penalties away with impunity. We could have laid all over the ruck and denied them quick play the balls without worrying about the damage of any ensuing penalties. There is no way they would have scored on the back of slow play the balls. I'm sure we would have got away with it.

 

[Tigerdave]

I thought we took an unnecessary chance tbh, we should have hung onto the ball and just played it out

 

[Gary_Bakerloo]

Can't wait for the day he has a crack from his own 40m line.

 

[simonthetiger]

Imagine scenario…...we are a point down......get a penalty in the middle 40 metres out.

The siren goes.

Up steps Pattycake for the win.

 

[Eddie]

Thought it was dumb. Was hoping he missed it and kicked it dead.

They very nearly regathered for restart which would have given them 1 full set uo our end,

There was 2 minutes to go. For me take the tap, kick it into touch. Gives them 40 seconds to go the length.

I can understand people having varying opinions on this. My gut was to keep it down their end even if the lead was 1 and not 3.

 

[tig_prmz]

just listened to brooks' interview. he said it was the coaches' call to kick the goal.