Stransky vs Wilko Drop

[BigTen]

If you go by what drop-goal was better than it is easy - Stransky. It was further out and on an angle. When it comes down to pressure it would probably have to go Stransky again.

Even though Wilkinson did use his "weaker foot" it was right out in front of the posts - so the pressure that was there would have been somewhat smaller. And even had he missed it wouldn't have meant that England would lose - the game would have gone into a shoot-out contest. So that is the pressure gone basically.

Also with Wilkinson "choosing" to use his right foot instead of his preferred left I was certainly left with the feeling that he was "showing-off" more than anything else. He easily could have used his left. And I figure that he had spent bucket-loads of time practising with both feet.

If you look at it objectively it is pretty easy to say that Stransky's was the better drop.

And Rassie - I like how you said that "[South Africa] WERE the best."! Not anymore, huh!?

 

[Rassie]

Yeah, well , it`s obvious we WERE the best! Currently we suck! Why? It`s very , very simple: they`ve destroyed everything, four centuries of civilization and rugby it`s a part of it!
We will not be as good as we used to unless we`ll have our independent Boererepubliek!

 

[tituslechmakus]

what the f*** are you talking about ???

 

[Rugby_Cymru]

Even though Wilkinson did use his "weaker foot" it was right out in front of the posts - so the pressure that was there would have been somewhat smaller. And even had he missed it wouldn't have meant that England would lose - the game would have gone into a shoot-out contest. So that is the pressure gone basically.
[/b]

That's one of the most idiotic reasonings i have ever heard in my life.
Although, i'm sure you're experienced in playing in World Cup finals, so who am i to say that regardless of the situation there's always going to be pressure.
If Wilko missed it would have gone to a shoot-out contest. I've never personally seen one of these in my life, but by god, if it's anything like a football penalty shoot out then it's far more nerve wracking than anything else that happened previously.
I think if you were to summarise and look sensibly at it, Wilko had to make the kick to prevent having to go into nerve wracking shoot-out!
And who's to say England would have been so comfortable to take the win even if Johnny did miss. Why COULDN'T the ozzies have managed their own drop goal?

We could argue like this all day. It's just your personal opinion. Don't go patronising other people by saying, "If you look at it objectively it is pretty easy to say that Stransky's was the better drop."

It's not up to you to decide conclusively which drop goal was better with your 3 facts: -

- Further out
- Harder angle
- Boks would have lost if he missed.

It's a public vote.

I think if you look at it objectively then that defeats the whole point of this debate.

 

[BigTen]

Okay Rugby_Cymru,

I love it how you say this:

"...That's one of the most idiotic reasonings i have ever heard in my life..."

And then go on to add this gem:

"...Although, i'm sure you're experienced in playing in World Cup finals, so who am i to say that regardless of the situation there's always going to be pressure..."

Now, I am a big fan of sarcasim but when people have to resort to it in arguments it makes them look bereft of any meaningful merit.

Now I will give you this point:

"...there's always going to be pressure..."

Absolutely - now I didn't really mean that there was going to be NO pressure - obviously there was always going to be some pressure but Wilkinson is a proven scorer of drop-goals and it was right out in front of the posts. He had plenty of time to prepare for the attempt and it was well set up by the entire English team. Wilkinson had set him up in a good position and he was given a great crisp pass. This meant that he didn't have to contend with loads of opposition players right in his face. Now I know the Wallabies were racing up but they never really were close enough to put any additional pressure on Wilkinson. I am sure that Wilkinson would agree that it was one of the easier dropkicks that he has had.

Now even if he had missed chances are England may have had time to put another attempt - the Wallabies would have had a 22m drop and England would have another chance.

Also even if the game had gone into a shoot-out, which incidently not only have I seen before but I have also played an active part in one, England would have been the favourites. Australia hardly ever score drop-goals and I think that the Wallabies only had one player on the field at the time who had ever nailed one (and even then he had only scored one in his whole career) before.

"...We could argue like this all day. It's just your personal opinion. Don't go patronising other people by saying, "If you look at it objectively it is pretty easy to say that Stransky's was the better drop."..."

Well of course it is my own opinion - why would I waste my time on this forum if I didn't state my own opinion? And it is my opinion that Stransky's was the better of the two - I also think that if most people look at it like this then they would agree with me:

Consider this:

You go down to the park with a mate and make the following bet. The person that can nail a dropkick will win two-months wages from the other person. However one of you will stand where Stransky was standing and the other will stand where Wilkinson stood for their respective attempts. Now which kick would you prefer to do? And would it even make a difference to your decision if Stranky's position would get two efforts instead of the one with Wilkinson.

I know which I would choose and therefore in my opinion that one is the better drop because it was the more difficult one of the two.

And currently the polling would seem to indicate that the majority of people agree with me.

 

[187]

wilco's was better, stransky's drop goal wud've been pointless had the ABs been fully fit and not half drugged because they wud've been winning by 20 points!!!!

 

[tituslechmakus]

twice ... or maye be 3 times

 

[SaiNTLY SiNNeR]

wilkos was better, stranskys was a wonder no doubt, but wilko hitting one...

a) of his wrong foot
B) playing injured
c) last seconds

it was better, and the greatest moment in world cup history.....

 

[Erikhfp]

Stransky only did one thing good for SA rugby and that was that drop goal, he isn't the best Fly half and he isn't that good at playing rugby, but what he did on that day was the best thing ever done for SA rugby and that gave us a mayor boost. That is why it is the best drop goal, because of what it has done for a whole country

 

[Rockstar]

that team may have been the best England team ever....But never the best team ever!!!

 

[scousetiger]

as an england fan, id have to say that the wilkinson dropgoal was the better one!, but i supose for sentimental and for having a meaning larger than rugby, then its got to be stransky!

 

[wesleyfraser]

I went for stransky, but i guess thats because i'm a south african

 

[36crazyfist]

think stransky's one was better, but purely because 1995 world cup was one hell of a moment in SA rugby...

but likewise, the battle between aus and eng is a hell of a big one. think overall johnny is a better flyhalf, but on the day, stransky was better...

 

[stormmaster1]

gotta consider the one (or was it two) failed attempts by Wilko earlier in the match.

stransky's was better.

 

[AllezWasps]

Wilkinson for me. Years of planning building up to that.

 

[davo]

gotta consider the one (or was it two) failed attempts by Wilko earlier in the match.

stransky's was better.
[/b]

gotta agree with ya, Stransky for me

 

[mirlos]

I have to say Wilkinson´s. A fly half that can score drops with both his legs deserves a special recognition. An incredible skill is needed for that! And that last drop was with his right leg... Chapeau.

Rob Andrews in ´95 was also incredible.

 

[Otyget]

I'd go for Stransky any day.

He brought the trophy to his home country on home turf being the 1:st time the Springboks were able to enter the competition.

Now, in the name of all that's good and pure, I have to say that I can't recall where the last WC was held... but if I'm not wrong, which is very possible; please excuse me if I am, it was held in the Southern Hemisphere, right?

 

[Le Capitaine Asperge]

Yeah, i voted for Wilko's. So much pressure but he doesnt fail and leads england to victory... there s much rivalry between france & england but i must admit that was a beauty !

 

[Incredible Schalk]

Yeah, but you see, Wilkinson was part of the best team ever, playing in the best game ever, beating the second best team of the time in their own back yard to put thge icing on the cake of the best World Cup, Ever.


[/b]

Surely you are joking, that 03 England team the best ever? surely you need to have a half decent backline before you can be given such an accolade. Also the Aussies that year performed above themselves, the All Blacks were a far better team at the time but messed up in the semi. Afterall earlier in the year they had put 50 POINTS on the Aussies in their own back yard.