In the last six months, we’ve seen three games in the NRL that have challenged the validity of golden point.
First, there was last year’s grand final. While I was personally happy to see the Cowboys take out the win, the golden point aspect took the edge off the victory a bit.
Make no mistake – at the time, golden point made it feel all the more exciting. Plus there was a poetic justice in seeing Thurston land a field goal after what had to be the unluckiest conversion attempt of 2015.
Nevertheless, in retrospect, I’ve started to question whether golden point was really the way to go.
More golden point:
» Golden point has lost its gleam
» Roar and Against: Is Golden point the best we have?
» NRL to consider scrapping golden point for finals
Seeing the amount of flack that Ben Hunt has copped has had a lot to with that. In all the opinion pieces I’ve seen, the question always seems to be: what does it mean to win in golden point?
However, I think that an even more important question is – what does it mean to lose in golden point?
Given the resources that the NRL devotes to player wellbeing and mental health, I think that the agony Hunt has experienced over the last six months has to indicate that something is wrong with the game as it now stands.
Of course, we don’t want to turn the NRL into a nanny state. Players can sometimes single-handedly cock up the last few minutes of a game. That’s life.
But the stakes still seem too high in golden point. It doesn’t feel right that a knock on has the ability to win or lose a grand final, which is presumably why the NRL has ruled that 2015 will be the last year in which that happens.
The second match over the last six months to draw out the failings of golden point has been the tie between the Knights and the Raiders at Hunter Stadium in Round 3.
If part of the rationale golden point is to avoid a tie, then why does it only last ten minutes?
Sure, there are scheduling concerns as well as the physical wellbeing of the players to consider. With the interchange reduced in 2016, the argument goes, it’s unreasonable to ask the forwards to play for more than ninety minutes.
You’ve got to consider the mental wellbeing aspect as well though. From what I could see at Hunter Stadium, neither team came away with any sense of release. In fact, they seemed more frustrated by golden point than anything else.
And why wouldn’t they be frustrated? When you’ve gone through ten straight minutes of golden point without a point scored on either side, you’ve got to ask yourself – what is the point?
The third match that’s shown up golden point this year has been the clash between the Tigers and the Storm at Leichhardt Oval last Sunday afternoon.
As a Tigers fan, I’m probably a bit biased here, but it felt as if golden point didn’t really add any tension. While some commentators described the final four minutes as the most galvanising in the game, I found that golden point simply intensified everything that was drab, dour and depressing about the game to begin with.
Far from adding a bit of extra spark to the match, golden point just seemed to make it even more anticlimactic.
Certainly, if we want to avoid ties, we need a solution.
But in many ways the solution is staring us straight in the face. Despite all the issues raised above, there has been one golden point match in the last six months that has been really stirring and inspiring to watch.
I’m talking, of course, about the match between the Roosters and the Warriors at Central Coast Stadium in Round 5.
This was one time when it felt as if the golden point winners really deserved to win, for the simple reason that New Zealand resolved it with a try, rather than a field goal, thanks to Roger Tuivasa-Sheck’s consummate dodging abilities with the ball.
What that match made so clear is that a golden point earned with a try genuinely does feel like a golden point well earned.
For the future, then, the NRL should aim for one of two options.
Most simply, change the rules of golden point so that only tries are allowed, rather than field goals.
Alternatively, scrap the idea of golden point altogether and just go into overtime until one team scores a try. That’s what effectively happened anyway at Central Coast Stadium and it made for some of the best footy of the season.
I’m in two minds about whether penalty goals should be allowed. While it’s a more than legitimate way to score a couple of points, I also feel that by the time we get to golden point the teams really need to be proving their claim to the win in the old-fashioned way.
At the very least, make it a rule that once games go into overtime, there has to be a two or even four-point margin for the wing.
Of course, one of the big issues with indefinite overtime is the physical strain it puts on the big men.
Given how rare golden point is, however, I think that’s a sacrifice worth making, especially since working towards a try has the ability to energise a team more than working towards a field goal.
When a golden point win is so dependent on a field goal – and on errors from the opposing team – it creates an overriding sense that the result is finally a matter of chance. That, in turn, produces a different kind of demotivation and anxiety.
You only have to look at the golden points at Hunter and Leichhardt to see proof of that. Cooper Cronk, Trent Hodkinson and Mitchell Moses are three of the strongest kickers in the game, as well as three of the strongest under pressure.
Under the unreasonable pressure to win a game solely on the back of their boot, however, they all came undone. Sure, Cronk might have made good with his second field goal attempt but it was still weird to see the Storm’s resident iceman fail at first kick.
I’m probably feeling a bit sentimental about RTS now that he’s been ruled out for the season, but in many ways his try against the Chooks still feels like one of the most powerful and decisive wins this season.
Wouldn’t it be great if golden point always felt like that? However they choose to handle it, let’s hope that the NRL keeps that terrific match in mind when considering the future.
Bearfax
Guest
John I suggest you read the reasons given above why its different from a team scoring just before or after the bell as opposed in extra time. Question of equity.
John Hutchinson
Guest
I think Golden Point is fine. What is the difference in a Team dropping a field goal after the siren in regular time and two minutes into extra time??? I think that both Teams should get a point for being tied at the 80th Minute with extra time played to earn the extra point. When two teams can fight out a draw and yet effectively one will (in all likeliness) walk away without anything to show for it can only be disappointing. It also would make the Finals makeup just a little less predictable (when getting towards round 20), if there is potentially 3 points on offer in a game, rather than 2.
The power of Will
Roar Pro
Well the point of golden point is to determine a winner, this is fairly obvious Billy,
Noel
Guest
Oh God, there's another Noel.
Bearfax
Guest
Noel, there is a big difference. In a full game both sides have opportunities throughout a match to score as they will. There is no significant advantage to either side because at half time they switch sides, the other side kicks off and they both play in more or less the same weather conditions ie wind. In a sudden death situation the advantage is to the team that wins the toss because not only do they receive the ball first but they also get to choose the more advantageous weather condition. Imagine a situation where a gale is blowing behind the backs of one team. Their chances of winning are increased dramatically. To me if you are going to have extra time, it must be seen as equitable, that is two halves of 5 or ten minutes and the teams switch sides at half time. The winner is not determined by the first scorer, but by the score at the end of the extra time period. If its then won by a field goal, at least both teams have had the opportunity in equitable terms.
Noel
Guest
What is wrong with everyone in the NRL viewing public , fior gods' sake a field goal in the dying seconds of regular time is the same as a field goal in golden point . It's a rule , just respect it until it goes . then I am sure there will be something else to whinge about .
Bradley Jurd
Roar Rookie
I'm all for extra time in finals, but not in the regular home & away part of the season. I feel teams sometimes deserve not to lose and get a point each. Maybe I'm more of a traditionalist, but I like the old format of extra time, 10 minutes each way. But if still equal, play golden try, which wasn't the case.
Geoff Evans
Guest
I agree with about not needing extra time in season games but think that in finals all draws are to played a full 10mins each way and if no score in that time have a golden try to decide the game.
Gr8rWeStr
Guest
I remain a firm believer that there's no need for extra time in normal season matches, a draw is a fair result at the end of 80 minutes. Where a result is needed, i.e. finals, I agree with moving away from a single field goal being enough. Perhaps a minimum of 3 points is required for victory. To speed things up, you could alternate giving teams the ball on their attacking 20 and give them 7 tackles to score. More of a scoring shoot out.
turboddewd
Guest
Agreed, good observation Planko. 7 tackles and a quick tap means every time a team misses the FG that the other team can get within range of the FG.
planko
Guest
The problem with Golden point now is the 7 tackle starts on the 20.. Basically if you take a shot and miss you have basically lost the game. You are probably better off running on the last... Especially brooks he was almost 30 metres out he would have been better of kicking slightly over the line and tackling the player in the 20. Unless you are very very confident of getting the FG
steveng
Roar Rookie
The Golden Point fiasco is useless and unnecessary!!! Simple as that, there should definitely be a draw in RL as there is in any other sporting event(s) in the season proper (but not in finals and grand finals) we don't need it and most fans don't want it. But then again the NRL doesn't listen to what the fans want they just do their own thing.
turboddewd
Guest
mate, the bottom line is that we cant have extra time going forever, finals games need a result. FGs are a legit part of the game....always have been. We cant abolish them. What people forget is that extra time will ALWAYS have FGs. in extra time you would take the FG first as your insurance policy in case scores are locked at end of game.
Edward Kelly
Roar Guru
To continue a theme: Whats the point of another Golden Point article. Russell its also there because fans like it.
Bearfax
Guest
I think if the extra time process is to continue, what needs to happen to escape this field goal contest, is to play the game throughout the full period of extra time. Therefore if its ten minutes or five minutes each way, you play the full period. Teams will not be just satisfied with a field goal except in the last minutes. First scorer wins is fundamentally unfair, because one team automatically gets an advantage by winning the toss, because they get first service of the ball and they play with the better weather conditions eg wind. If the game is to be made fair, both teams must be able to play out the game with equal opportunities.
turboddewd
Guest
I believe the NRL will copy the NFL and allow play to continue after a FG in extra time. So that each team has a possession. Last week the Tigers missed a FG and blew it, they lost to Melbourne clearly. NRL fans needn't worry about FGs, its not like rugby, they are rarely part of the game.
a
Guest
I think they should just play the full 10 minutes
Baracuda
Guest
My preference would be for draws but if there is a notion hell bent for win/losses there is a solution Play 5 mins each way for regular season and finals series with unlimited time to take affect for the latter if no result is reached after 10 mins Regular season point scoring criteria Win - 4 points Extra time win - 3 points Draw - 2 points Extra time loss - 1 point A problem would be how do we make the NRL more streamlined with Super League and international rules? Does the super league adopt this? It's certainly not in the RLIF laws book, after all international rules use draws
Russell
Guest
The Golden Point is there so Matty, the people on the sofa and the Footy Show can make fun of Wayne Bennet, obviously!