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
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="TRF C A Iversen" data-source="post: 433883" data-attributes="member: 12312"><p>This seems like the exaggeration of the anti-drop goal league. Teams like England and South Africa tend to average around one a game, they play games where they don't get any. People have been harking back to 1999 (yep, 12 years ago) to Janie de Beer and his five in a game. Outside of that occasion it doesn't happen all that much. Even then it took five of them to get 15 points (1 point more than two tries), so a phenomenal amount of skill was on display there.</p><p></p><p>There are games with 8-10 penalties in them too, but people don't mention them much as being boring and really, seriously, they are. Justifiable or not, they are much much more boring, but they are necessary.</p><p></p><p>Teams winning World Cups solely on drop goals? I doubt it. When England won their World Cup, they also scored a try (the same number of tries Australia scored in that game).</p><p></p><p>If you guys want to blame anything, blame the rules that allow defending to be too consistently solid. That's why DG's happen. In a deadlocked defensive situation, where you've tried running rugby, running rugby, running rugby, what else can you do? That's exactly what happens when the AB's have run into solid defence at previous World Cups, <strong>they aren't able to execute a set play like a Drop goal to break the deadlock or to get our nose in front</strong>. 1995, 2007.</p><p></p><p>I'd rather not lose the world cup because we don't want to do something that simply must take a reasonable amount of skill. If the final is lost by a penalty kick from 48m out, is that really that much better?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TRF C A Iversen, post: 433883, member: 12312"] This seems like the exaggeration of the anti-drop goal league. Teams like England and South Africa tend to average around one a game, they play games where they don't get any. People have been harking back to 1999 (yep, 12 years ago) to Janie de Beer and his five in a game. Outside of that occasion it doesn't happen all that much. Even then it took five of them to get 15 points (1 point more than two tries), so a phenomenal amount of skill was on display there. There are games with 8-10 penalties in them too, but people don't mention them much as being boring and really, seriously, they are. Justifiable or not, they are much much more boring, but they are necessary. Teams winning World Cups solely on drop goals? I doubt it. When England won their World Cup, they also scored a try (the same number of tries Australia scored in that game). If you guys want to blame anything, blame the rules that allow defending to be too consistently solid. That's why DG's happen. In a deadlocked defensive situation, where you've tried running rugby, running rugby, running rugby, what else can you do? That's exactly what happens when the AB's have run into solid defence at previous World Cups, [B]they aren't able to execute a set play like a Drop goal to break the deadlock or to get our nose in front[/B]. 1995, 2007. I'd rather not lose the world cup because we don't want to do something that simply must take a reasonable amount of skill. If the final is lost by a penalty kick from 48m out, is that really that much better? [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Rugby Union
General Rugby Union
Drop Goal
Top