I don't see what's wrong with a draw. I hate it in Oz when they start 'golden pot shot at a drop goal'. The team that wins is the one who earns the first penalty.

Nah, 'cos it's unfair to the teams that actually win within the 80 minutes. If we went to Golden Point last night and Wigan would've won, they would have needed more than the allocated time, than Cas and Saints did to secure 2 competition points. Likewise, it would've been unfair to Leeds - that they would've lost beyond the time Hull and Hull KR did.

Besides, celebrating the draw for Wigan was contextual in so much they had to score 14 points in the last 10 or so minutes. Leeds weren't exactly celebrating it, were they?

Agreed completely.
A draw is sufficient, although, as seen in the tri nations 06 in those rare occasions you do see golden point it can be brilliant

how about both sides receive a point for a 80min draw then you play golden point and the winner gets a extra point?



obviously its not the only factor..but why would'nt the game be the same on both sides of the world?? its like the interchange laws...its 10 in the NRL ,to our 12,meaning their players have to be fitter and the coaches have to be cleverer than ours......giving them them the edge....i mean if we wanna beat them then thats at least start playing the same rules as them..

If the "golden point" is so wonderful, why not just play until the first team scores with the normal 80 minutes and then that's it.

Would save so much time, energy and potential injury to players.

The is no argument for me.

[sizeGolden point SHOULD be introduced into Super League[/size

Works well in the NRL.

Adds a bit of excitement.

One side is guaranteed a win.

nah, i'd have 5 different players from each team taking a conversion from touch, bit like a penalty shoot out.
Less of a lottery than golden point, may even improve the general state of kicking.

If the font is that large and in bold, you must be right... if you find people disagreeing with you, do you find that talking louder usually works?

I'd have no problem with Golden Points being introduced for play-off and cup games. But for a regular season game? I can't see what it would achieve it terms of making the game more exciting. After all, once it hits 80 minutes all you'll get is 5 drives and a DG attempt until someone succeeds.

exactly, that's why my idea is better

which sees a huge leap in intensity with neither side wanting to give away any defensive yards...


also a golden point win would get more media (news) coverage than a draw imo

Extra time to force a winner should not be used in a league fixture. There is simply no need. Both teams have avoided defeat and a point on the league table rewards that. It is used for cup ties and playoffs as there is the need for one of the two teams to exit the competition and using extra time avoids fixture congestion that would come from replays. In the case of the playoffs there is not really time to fit in replays.

Golden Point is IMO a bad idea. You can have a game that is full of free flowing attacking rugby and then when the 80 minutes are up and the scores are level it turns into each team taking it in turns to drive it one man at a time up the centre of the pitch until within 30m at which point they attempt a drop goal. A team could have just forced a draw by scoring a try like the "wide to West" one from a few years back and the match would still degenerate into the same repeated push for a drop goal from both teams until one got a solitary point. If extra time is played having a Golden Try scenario where a team must score a try to win rather than just a point would be a better alternative. It may take longer for it to be settled but the extra time period would then at least remain as interesting to watch as the preceding 80 minutes. I would still only use it for the cup and playoff games though.

It would have made last night very exciting and entertaining especially for someone who is not a regular. It is something different to the other sports in this country and I think it would work.