The
golden point system has been a source of debate from the very first round of
games under the rule.
Introduced
in 2003, golden point was designed to do away with ‘boring draws’ and come up
with a more exciting way to finish games. One of the oft-used arguments against
drawn games was that no one came away from a draw feeling happy – it was more
like both sides lost. This in itself is a load of rubbish.
Don’t
tell me that the 12th-placed Balmain side of 1993 felt like they had a loss
when they travelled to Canberra to take on the second-placed Raiders in a game
they were expected to be flogged in. With 15 minutes remaining, the Tigers were
down 32-12, but scored four tries in the next 10 minutes before Tim Brasher
landed an amazing 76th-minute sideline conversion to level the scores 32-all.
Since its
inception there have now been 94 games that have gone into golden point.
Thirteen have ended in draws, while 53 of the remaining 81 games have been
decided by a field goal; only 18 golden point tries have been scored.
After
Round 1 in 2003, Brisbane coach Wayne Bennett slammed the concept, despite his
side beating Penrith 24-20 in regulation time and not requiring golden point.
His criticism then was that it was far too hot to force players to play an
extra 10 minutes in those conditions. He has been consistent in his criticism
of the rule ever since, and the implementation of golden point in finals
matches – instead of 20 minutes of extra-time – bit him hardest of all when his
Broncos lost the 2015 grand final in golden point.
The most
frequent argument against it is one that resonates most: golden point doesn’t
bring any excitement to the games; in fact, it kills the atmosphere as teams
stop all of their structures and desire to score tries to set themselves up for
pot-shots at a field goal.
There is
nothing exciting about four one-out hit-ups and then a field goal attempt.
Many
commentators had advocated for the introduction of a ‘golden try’ rule, but
this is nothing more than a moderate improvement to the existing golden point
rule. Also, it could be argued that it’s not entirely fair given that one team
has to kick off, so the receiving side gets first advantage.
Essentially, this
idea still puts too much of the result of a coin toss.
However,
there is a simpler system which was used to decide important fixtures for a
long time without criticism.
Extra-time.
If you want
exciting, here’s your answer. Ten minutes of extra-time. Doesn’t matter who
scores first or how; what matters is what the scoreline reads after the extra
10 minutes.
It will
do away with boring back-and-forth failed field goal attempts. It will entice teams
to throw the ball around. It will bring out second phase play and bring skilled
players to the fore at a time, thanks to the reduced interchange, of even more
tired forwards.
It may not appease the likes of Bennett, but it will certainly serve the initial purpose of making games locked up after 80 minutes more exciting.
**This article appeared on the Commentary Box Sports website**
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.