Ever seen baseball players fight? It’s one-in-all-in; they tear in from everywhere, dozens, even hundreds of these people, a squalling, brawling flock of angry birds, all leaping on each other and forming a giant organism of sorts, a human scrum of flailing arms and legs and heads and feet.
And when baseball players win something big, it’s not much different.
Be it the World Series or a pennant or the American Division East, or whatever these people play for, when baseball players win a Big Thing it’s one-in-all-in again, and everyone’s leaping onto the person who ripped off the final play in a big happy fat scrum of arms and legs, and heads, all of them yowling in ecstasy – we won I can’t believe it yippee. And so forth.
You can see them doing it, can’t you? And you needn’t have seen that funny movie with Leslie Nielsen to be seeing it in your mind’s eye.
If you’ve watched Fox Sports or ESPN and caught the denouement of a baseball series or the angst-filled pregnant moments after a pitcher bops a baseball off the batter’s bonce, then you’ll have seen mass celebration/punch-up.
They ‘clear the dugouts’ and a big mob of dudes gets jiggy in a funny, big ruck, a dry-humping man-orgy. It’s almost choreographed.
Wouldn’t happen in rugby league?
Yes, it would. Because indeed it does.
Because golden point.
Yes, golden point, which like Mickey Ds and Happy Days and Dr Pepper (which never really caught on because it tastes like cough syrup for Komodo Dragons) has come from America and given us much ‘entertainment’ with a cut-throat, winner-takes-all ethos that declares there must be a winner. You can’t have a ‘tie’, you must have someone who wins and someone who loses, yin demands it as does yang.
What happened was this: one day some suits and boots of our dear little National Rugby League went on one of those ‘study trips’ (cough, junkets) to the brassy old United States of America and brought back cut-throat, winner-takes-all golden point.
And they were very pleased with themselves for a while because Golden Point was new and fun and there was much leaping about at the end of tied games.
And it was all funky and fun, and better than both teams shaking hands and trudging off to kiss their sister.
But that was then and this is now, and golden point has become unfair and old, and bad.
For a start, the celebrations by the victors are ever more like baseball’s. Whoever rips off the final golden play is mobbed by his teammates, who leap like trout upon him.
You can ‘see’ them doing it now – Cam Smith, Johnathan Thurston, the nuggety little speedboat that is Cooper Cronk – stabbing the ball onto their hot little feet and slotting a single point, and running around until they’re feverishly leapt on by all their boys.
“Yippee! Two premiership points!” they exclaim, and there is much rejoicing.
Meanwhile, the other mob, who’ve smashed themselves up for the 80 minutes today known as ‘regular time’, once just known as the length of the damned game, those people walk off with nothing.
All that effort, same as the other mob’s. Big fat duck egg.
And that’s not fair. It’s not an equitable return. The team bops heads with another and earns parity after 80 minutes of hard slog and grind, but walks away with nothing because they were unlucky to call wrong in two-up.
Because that’s what golden point is: two-up. Unless some drunken backpacker launches the coins out of the ring, two-up is a binary result. And NRL captains could as well toss a coin.
The play in those last feverish minutes is a microcosm of the worst of rugby league – five tackles and a kick.
These are the tactics:
1) Rumble down field with your big blokes filling the legislated ten-metre gap between play-the-ball and ruck, and getting quick play the ball
2) Work the ball to the middle of the field with further big rumblers, centres and ‘edge forwards’. Get quick play the ball
3) Sling it back from dummy-half to whoever’s going to have a pot
4) Have a pot
5) Either a) leap about like baseball players fighting-cheering, or b) prepare to repel borders as the other mob proceed through steps 1-5 above.
And repeat.
Yes, television and radio types from Fox Sports and Triple M and dear old Aunty ABC dig it because their commentators can ratchet up the octaves in a final, excited orgasmatron of mad man-action, and hold those big long vowels loudly. It’s good fun, and good times, without question.
For golden point is entertaining. And rugby league is part of the entertainment industry. And so it’s about money, what the late Kerry Packer broke down as “eyeballs on screens”. And money is the ultimate arbiter of everything.
But it’s still not fair.
The vanquished – as the vanquished have since time immemorial – get royally shafted, certainly disproportionately given they’ve earned parity with the other team over the legislated 80 minutes of the game, and won nothing through simple pot-luck.
Aaron
Guest
Why not just have each win worth 3 points rather than two for each match for every round then if there is a draw at end of regular time for any regular season match both team gets one point, whoever scores first in golden point then gets the third point. If still drawn after golden point just the 1 point each is rewarded, as neither Team are rewarded the 3rd point if no outright win. Teams are rewarded if they are as good of each other at end of regular time, and if good enough to get the win in extra time get the extra point that would of been rewarded for an outright win. The extra dimension that will add to the end of season will be good meaning it does not go just on for and against, allowing teams who have lost as many games as each other but loose a few in golden point will have extra points thus rewarding them come end of season on the ladder. Then the question would be do we only have 10 min of golden point and be happy with 1 point each or continue playing to see who gets the 3rd point. But also the fact that not each team is played twice is still allowing an unbalanced point allocation at end of season take who ever played the Knights last year almost guaranteed 4 points compared to someone who played the top 4 twice not so guaranteed but that's another topic There are 2 ways to look at this ; So in short each match is worth 3 points 3 for win at end of regulation time (80mins) 0 for loss at end of regulation time (80mins) 1 point each team for draw at end of regulation time (80mins) Whoever scores in golden point gets the third point. No change to score in extra time 3rd point not rewarded. Or 3 points available in each match 2 points available each match guaranteed at end of 80mins if you Win you get two points Loose you get no points Draw get 1 point each If draw you play golden point to get a final overall winner of the match If you have won at end of regular time outright or win in golden point you get 1 "bonus point' rewarded for the win If still Drawn no extra points rewarded
Matt Cleary
Expert
But there is a result. A draw. And in regular season play, it's the fair result. One point each. And there can be some crackerjack exciting draws. Give em extra-time, as you must, in a final. But this sudden-death drop-goal comp, it's not equitable for the loser. Now, excuse while I wake up here in Canada to the news that Canberra lost 42-10 to Cronulla.
Slickeel
Roar Rookie
For golden point the loser should be rewarded for a draw at regular full time. GP winner then receives the extra point. No winner one point each as per the draw. Couldn't be any fairer.
smn
Guest
No. Drawn games are pointless. 80 minutes for no results.
Riggs
Guest
Win Golden point- 2 Comp points Lose golden point- 1 Comp point No result- 1 point each No golden point in finals. Done
geoffrey evans
Guest
I think that is a good result.
geoffrey evans
Guest
I totally agree alanc, why is there a need to have a winner in regular season. ! point each is the better result and you do not have to have a winner.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
But what happens if it is still tied after GP time. It does happen often enough. Each team gets one point, then again this is what happens with soccer.
Cadfael
Roar Guru
That is my big bugbear with GP. The referees let the rules go out the door so they can't be blamed for affecting the result. By not policing the rules, the referees are affecting the result. Penalties are very rarely given within kicking range.
Matth
Guest
If you want fair, well every team is equal in the competition, so let's just cancel the season, give them all one point each, and then everyone's a winner and everyone's a loser. I like extra time. I'd prefer that or golden try, but I hate draws. And I like three points up for grabs each game. If even after 80 then each team gets a point and then play for the additional point. Regular time winners get all three.
Davico
Roar Pro
Gee you picked the big guns of sport there!! Hate to burst your bubble but but apart from Golf and Waterpolo all the sports you mentioned have a structured scoring system in order to prevent a draw from being an outcome. Not sure if you are a member of a golf club or just watch professional golf on the box, but it is not standard practice to play extra holes in competition at your local golf club in which 99% of the participants in the sport play. As for Water polo, there is no set rule as to whether there can be a draw or not, and rules change depending on which country you visit, if it is professional, collegiate, school etc.
rakshop
Guest
I can guarantee that the Knights who travelled 2000 kms to the Warriors would have preferred the draw as well. I can guarantee that the Bulldogs who travelled 10 kms to Allianz last night would have preferred the draw. All teams that lose would prefer the draw..... I dont really know a team that would prefer to lose than draw. Thats not really an argument.... more a statement of the bleeding obvious. However, I do take on your point about certain circumstances draw being as good as a win. Thats a valid argument. Domestic football is a good example. But domestic cricket is not. Sheffield Shield does not award points (apart from first innings points) for a drawn match. Oh by the way.... T20 cricket has the super over. So no not all 5 of the premier domestic leagues have draws. The question is whether the entertainment value of golden point outweighs the perception that a draw is a good or fair result. Everyone wants the NRL to grow and expand, and have the resources (ie money) to keep the talent in the NRL. Remember it wasnt that long ago that we were losing players to the Super League and Union. To do this, its needs to be entertaining. Regardless of whether you think golden point is good or otherwise, you have to admit that it adds the entertainment value of the game. If you think otherwise, watch the recent AFLW game between GWS v Fremantle and tell me the end of the game was exhilarating. That match ended in a draw, and listen to the tone of the players, commentators and spectators at the end of the match. It was deflating. The spectacle of golden point adds to this entertainment. And if the trade off for entertainment means that poor old Canberra travelled 2500kms only to walk away with nothing this week, then so be it. Because, as a viewer, I got to see one of bizarre and memorable ends to a match that anyone has ever seen. It makes the NRL more marketable. All the clips I mentioned above makes the NRL more marketable. And in today's commercial reality, you need to be marketable to successful. I would rather see one team running on the field celebrating a win in golden point than 26 players slumped on the ground with a blank expression on their face after a draw. Neutrals want to watch Jarryd Hayne celebrating, they want to see Shaun Johnston faking a field and beating 5 defenders to score, they want to Shaun Timmons kicking a BS and ugly field goal. They dont want to see 2 teams laying on the ground with heads down with 'all that effort for a draw' expression on their face.
andrew
Guest
Didn't say you said T20 was played in the US. I just stated it wasn't a US sport and also a sport that didn't use ties. Soccer is different, and it is a world wide sport - but it is also a sport with low scores and small margins. As a result of that the best team on the day often doesn't win or has to settle for a draw, so given the sport and its fans accept that, what is the point of playing overtime when there is a greater than 50% chance the score and result won't change? In addition to the above sports (including basketball and baseball which are in the top 10 sports in the world, not just the US), tennis, golf, water polo, badminton, squash, volleyball - they all play extras points, holes, sets etc to get a winner. You will find the vast, vast, vast majority of sports play to get a result. One of the few that don't, Test cricket, is often ridiculed for the fact you can play for five days and not have a winner. So it isn't US centric, it is world wide that most sports are played to a result.
William Dalton Davis
Roar Rookie
Actually cricket used to go until there was a result rather than be played over a set number of days. In the limited overs formats there's such a small chance of a draw that they don't really need extra time (though t20 does in fact have it). AFL doesn't have extra time because unlike the NRL games are going for 3 hours and like cricket a draw is incredibly unlikely. However the finals obviously have extra time. draws are a large part of football. Much more so than any of the other major sports, and much more likely to occur than in any of the major sports. As for JTs field goal attempt being disgusting. Unorthodox maybe, though He did hit the black dot more or less. Seen far worse attempts in the 35th minute of a game.
Davico
Roar Pro
+1
Davico
Roar Pro
Didn't say T20 was played in the US CHAMP!!! Think you will find that both Basketball and Baseball were both invented in the US and the original rules of Baseball made it clear that there should be a result. Biggest sport in the world is Football (Soccer for you CHAMP) in which the draw is accepted in all leagues globally in the regular season. Maybe you need to broaden your horizons from US centric sports CHAMP!
Magnus M. Østergaard
Roar Guru
Rugby League is being played, its just a different version in GP. However in Extra Time, rugby league DOES get played.
spruce moose
Guest
Our game is much better off without it. You are delusional if you think people are going to talk about the Cowboys and the Raiders for years after. It will be forgotten by 2019 at the latest. Of the 5 biggest sporting codes in Australia, only NRL needs to debase itself and go all American with the idea of no draws. I mean in cricket, there are times when escaping with a draw is as good as a victory. I can guarantee that the Raiders, who travelled 2500km to go up to the stifling heat of Townsville would have preferred a draw over a golden point loss. A draw under those circumstances is as good as a win. Rugby league is not being played in extra time. It's just 26 people breaking the rules (well, 30 when you include the four referees who just watch as if they are in another town) and pot shotting until one goes over. JT's field goal attempt was disgusting, not memorable. Shaun Timmins' field goal was even worse.
Jimmmy
Guest
Someone who remembers what drawn games really feel like.
spruce moose
Guest
You forgot about a rule that should sit somewhere between rules 3 and 4. Rule 3.5: Commit as many infringements as possible when other team has the ball because referee WILL NOT blow the whistle. Infringements should include, but not be limited to: Not being square at the ruck, be well inside the 10 (crossing the line of scrimmage before the play the ball would be preferable), and third man flop on the tackled player.