Jools - in any given game the team who leverages the conditions and available scoring options most effectively will win.
Drop goals are a valid, and integral part of that jigsaw, and it is the variety of options, and how they are put together that make this game so fascinating. They are a great way to introduce that extra tension into a match that is close, or to open up a game by putting the two-converted-tries-plus-a-point lead in place that might give the leading side the confidence to take risks, and will give the second place holders a bit of added incentive to score tries.
Calls for Drop Goals to be - er - dropped should be - ah - dropped. For mine I'd rather see the conversion dropped than the drop goal - at least the latter is defendable, and the scoring happens during general play. Conversions are really so so for me.
Mickey - check out all the posts through this blog that talk about the impact ex-laegue players have had. One more straw on the camel, perhaps?
Did anyone notice that it was a poor clearing kick by Matt Rogers that gave the English a lineout with good field position?
It seems the need for a player with a good kicking game was a problem then, and with current selections, a problem now.
You just knew when England won that lineout that they were going to setup Jonny Wilkinson for a drop kick and he would kick the winning goal.
Only the second final to go into extra time and won in identical fashion.
It's the only time that I was genuinely happy that England won a game of rugby, not because they beat Australia but because I felt they truly deserved the trophy.
Watched on Fox Sports the history of the rugby world cup and it's interesting listening to the comments from Martin Johnson. He admitted that they hadn't been playing well throughout the tournament in 2003 but made the telling observation that you don't have to play the best rugby to win the cup, you just need to keep winning the games that count.
The two teams that played the 2003 final knocked out the other two that were playing better rugby throughout the tournament.
So can the English Rose bloom again?
Ouch, the Z Drill hurts ... but then again it was one of the most nail-biting games ive watched. It was such a tremendous effort by both teams to play 100 mins of rugby with so much pressure.
Its hard to loose a WC final in such a way, but as they say "you win some, and you loose some". Stephen Larkham's drop goal in the 1999 WC semi-final against the Boks comes to mind.
MItch,
But you expect that in AFL and the skill level is great.
Seems to me in the "must win" attitude, PLUS the 3 points they give for dropped goals in rugby, the running game is diminishing.
Jools-USA
Zac,
Spare us important games won by drop goal in lieu of exciting running rugby.
Rather see a clobbering by numerous unanswered tries than this rubbish.
And you wonder why the crowds won't dig deep to watch kicking games?
Jools-USA
There is a detailed analysis of this final play in the 2003 World Cup in my history of the World Cup, 'Watching The Rugby World Cup' published by Allen and Unwin (plug, it's in the good bookstores now). The analysis was based on a long discussion I had with Clive Woodward about the final, especially what happened in extra time
Woodward told me that England had drilled a specific drop kick move, the Z Drill (a last play drill), in the expectation that the World Cup might hinge on this type of play. It's clear from the analysis that England got their drill right, and the Wallabies got their defence against the drop goal tactic completely wrong.
1. The Wallabies forced Steve Thompson, an erratic thrower at the best of time, to throw long because they double-teamed Martin Johnson. But curiously they didn't contest strongly at the end of the lineout.
2. The Wallaby pillars covering the ensuing ruck following the Mike Catt hit-up didn't pay any attention to Matt Dawson, the England halfback. The Z Drill actually called for a Dawson burst, if England were outside the 22.
3. After the Dawson burst the ball should have been passed back to Jonny Wilkinson. But Martin Johnson noticed that Dawson was still on the ground and that Neil Back would have to make the crucial pass. Johnson decided to take the ball up one more time (not really in the Z Drill) so that Dawson could position himself for the pass to Wilkinson.
4. The Wallabies could have been penalised for offside several times in the movement. This was an aspect of the Z Drill that appealed to Woodward. It could set up England for the drop goal, and also provide the chance for a penalty if the defending side beat the gun to get to the kicker.
horrible to watch. I suggest that The Roar runs a book on the number of drop goals kicked in the quarters,semis and finals of the World Cup this year, I'll open with 9!
I watched that match on (delayed) TV when I got home from work, after avoiding the sports section in the paper that morning and making the guys at work promise not to blurt out the score.
When Dawson went through the middle of that ruck, the Wallabies were screwed. I don't recall what I said to the TV but I'm pretty certain it isn't repeatable here.
For the life of me I will never understand why Sailor started on one wing instead of Joe Roff.
Peter L
Guest
Jools - in any given game the team who leverages the conditions and available scoring options most effectively will win. Drop goals are a valid, and integral part of that jigsaw, and it is the variety of options, and how they are put together that make this game so fascinating. They are a great way to introduce that extra tension into a match that is close, or to open up a game by putting the two-converted-tries-plus-a-point lead in place that might give the leading side the confidence to take risks, and will give the second place holders a bit of added incentive to score tries. Calls for Drop Goals to be - er - dropped should be - ah - dropped. For mine I'd rather see the conversion dropped than the drop goal - at least the latter is defendable, and the scoring happens during general play. Conversions are really so so for me. Mickey - check out all the posts through this blog that talk about the impact ex-laegue players have had. One more straw on the camel, perhaps?
MIckeyM
Guest
Did anyone notice that it was a poor clearing kick by Matt Rogers that gave the English a lineout with good field position? It seems the need for a player with a good kicking game was a problem then, and with current selections, a problem now.
Sam Taulelei
Guest
You just knew when England won that lineout that they were going to setup Jonny Wilkinson for a drop kick and he would kick the winning goal. Only the second final to go into extra time and won in identical fashion. It's the only time that I was genuinely happy that England won a game of rugby, not because they beat Australia but because I felt they truly deserved the trophy. Watched on Fox Sports the history of the rugby world cup and it's interesting listening to the comments from Martin Johnson. He admitted that they hadn't been playing well throughout the tournament in 2003 but made the telling observation that you don't have to play the best rugby to win the cup, you just need to keep winning the games that count. The two teams that played the 2003 final knocked out the other two that were playing better rugby throughout the tournament. So can the English Rose bloom again?
mcxd
Guest
Ouch, the Z Drill hurts ... but then again it was one of the most nail-biting games ive watched. It was such a tremendous effort by both teams to play 100 mins of rugby with so much pressure. Its hard to loose a WC final in such a way, but as they say "you win some, and you loose some". Stephen Larkham's drop goal in the 1999 WC semi-final against the Boks comes to mind.
swifty
Guest
Jools if this game didn't excite you then maybe rugby isn't the game for you
jools-usa
Guest
MItch, But you expect that in AFL and the skill level is great. Seems to me in the "must win" attitude, PLUS the 3 points they give for dropped goals in rugby, the running game is diminishing. Jools-USA
Mitch
Guest
Not that I am an AFL fan Jools, but people in Melbourne seem to dig deep to watch "kicking games" passed off as sport ...
jools-usa
Guest
Zac, Spare us important games won by drop goal in lieu of exciting running rugby. Rather see a clobbering by numerous unanswered tries than this rubbish. And you wonder why the crowds won't dig deep to watch kicking games? Jools-USA
Spiro Zavos
Expert
There is a detailed analysis of this final play in the 2003 World Cup in my history of the World Cup, 'Watching The Rugby World Cup' published by Allen and Unwin (plug, it's in the good bookstores now). The analysis was based on a long discussion I had with Clive Woodward about the final, especially what happened in extra time Woodward told me that England had drilled a specific drop kick move, the Z Drill (a last play drill), in the expectation that the World Cup might hinge on this type of play. It's clear from the analysis that England got their drill right, and the Wallabies got their defence against the drop goal tactic completely wrong. 1. The Wallabies forced Steve Thompson, an erratic thrower at the best of time, to throw long because they double-teamed Martin Johnson. But curiously they didn't contest strongly at the end of the lineout. 2. The Wallaby pillars covering the ensuing ruck following the Mike Catt hit-up didn't pay any attention to Matt Dawson, the England halfback. The Z Drill actually called for a Dawson burst, if England were outside the 22. 3. After the Dawson burst the ball should have been passed back to Jonny Wilkinson. But Martin Johnson noticed that Dawson was still on the ground and that Neil Back would have to make the crucial pass. Johnson decided to take the ball up one more time (not really in the Z Drill) so that Dawson could position himself for the pass to Wilkinson. 4. The Wallabies could have been penalised for offside several times in the movement. This was an aspect of the Z Drill that appealed to Woodward. It could set up England for the drop goal, and also provide the chance for a penalty if the defending side beat the gun to get to the kicker.
paul harris
Guest
horrible to watch. I suggest that The Roar runs a book on the number of drop goals kicked in the quarters,semis and finals of the World Cup this year, I'll open with 9!
Chris Beck
Guest
I watched that match on (delayed) TV when I got home from work, after avoiding the sports section in the paper that morning and making the guys at work promise not to blurt out the score. When Dawson went through the middle of that ruck, the Wallabies were screwed. I don't recall what I said to the TV but I'm pretty certain it isn't repeatable here. For the life of me I will never understand why Sailor started on one wing instead of Joe Roff.