Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
Drop-goal 'should be one point'
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="The TRUTH" data-source="post: 124791"><p>Yes and do you remember the final score?.... even if drop goals were worth 1 point back then, the Wallabies still would have won the game by 6.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You didn't score a single try in that match and even without De Beer's 5 drop goals you still would have lost the match? <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite11" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll Eyes :rolleyes:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":rolleyes:" /> :lol: ..... or maybe because it took drop goals for you guys to beat Argentina,Western Samoa and Australia in the previous world cup?</p><p></p><p>I do ,however, vividly remember a number of the pommie posters on this forum whinging about the Yarpies excessive use of the drop goal in the second test of last years November tour.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So because it takes skill, it should be awarded 3 points?</p><p></p><p>So does a 20m cut-out pass. So does a sidestep. So does a perfectly timed grubber kick. You don't get points for any of those. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite11" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll Eyes :rolleyes:" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":rolleyes:" /> </p><p></p><p>The fact is that drop goals are worth 60-70% of a try, and can be near impossible to defend against. </p><p></p><p>The main aim of rugby is to run with the ball over the tryline. That's what makes rugby rugby and not soccer. I'm pretty sure that if they weren't seen to be against the spirit of the game in some way, we'd see a lot more of them because they are awarded quite a few points in the overall context of a game.</p><p></p><p>Penalties are worth what they are, because the threat of conceding 3 points is a good deterrent to prevent teams consistently conceding penalties.</p><p></p><p>I just dont see the merit in rewarding a team 3 points for their inability to breakdown the oppositions defense.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Now, can one of the smart cookies that voted to keep them at 3, please give us a good reason for your decision?... i mean, besides the sour grape crap. </p><p></p><p></p><p>yours in anticipation...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="The TRUTH, post: 124791"] Yes and do you remember the final score?.... even if drop goals were worth 1 point back then, the Wallabies still would have won the game by 6. You didn't score a single try in that match and even without De Beer's 5 drop goals you still would have lost the match? :rolleyes: :lol: ..... or maybe because it took drop goals for you guys to beat Argentina,Western Samoa and Australia in the previous world cup? I do ,however, vividly remember a number of the pommie posters on this forum whinging about the Yarpies excessive use of the drop goal in the second test of last years November tour. So because it takes skill, it should be awarded 3 points? So does a 20m cut-out pass. So does a sidestep. So does a perfectly timed grubber kick. You don't get points for any of those. :rolleyes: The fact is that drop goals are worth 60-70% of a try, and can be near impossible to defend against. The main aim of rugby is to run with the ball over the tryline. That's what makes rugby rugby and not soccer. I'm pretty sure that if they weren't seen to be against the spirit of the game in some way, we'd see a lot more of them because they are awarded quite a few points in the overall context of a game. Penalties are worth what they are, because the threat of conceding 3 points is a good deterrent to prevent teams consistently conceding penalties. I just dont see the merit in rewarding a team 3 points for their inability to breakdown the oppositions defense. Now, can one of the smart cookies that voted to keep them at 3, please give us a good reason for your decision?... i mean, besides the sour grape crap. yours in anticipation... [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
Drop-goal 'should be one point'
Top