Time to cut a penalty goal's value?

[Darren]

WHEN a team has a "rocket launcher" instead of a goal kicker it is surely enough reason for the IRB to seriously consider reducing the value of penalty goals from three points to two.
A “rocket launcher” was how Springboks captain John Smit described fullback Francois Steyn, who landed three penalty goals from South Africa's side of halfway _ two from 60 metres _ in the Tri-Nations clinching 32-29 win against the All Blacks in Hamilton on Saturday.

The capacity to kick a penalty goal from 60 metres distorts the game.

It is a way of accumulating cheap points.

A team can be attacking 40 metres from the opposition line, commit an infringement, and be punished with a penalty goal.

In the majority of cases the punishment will far exceed the crime.

Knowing the opposition has a long-distance goal kicker like Steyn also influences teams to play conservatively.

The reversion to the longarm penalty for most offences this year has led to half the number of tries being scored and three times as many penalty goals being kicked compared to last year when the sanctions rule was trialled as part of the experimental law variations.

As a result, almost every team is playing a type of percentage rugby, kicking for field position to stay out of the range of the sharpshooters.

Having a kicker like Steyn on the opposition team means you have to play inside your opponent's 40 metre line or risk three points being scored against you every time you infringe.

That does not do a lot to promote rugby as entertainment.

Sure, the sight of the ball soaring 60 metres to the goal posts can be quite breathtaking, but not if it is repeated two or three times in the same game.

It is not rewarding some monumental effort by the kicker. Steyn's range is 50 to 60 metres. He is more comfortable kicking from that distance than 30 to 40 metres.

Rugby purists will argue if you devalue the penalty goal, teams will commit more offences.

But conceding two points is still a deterrent as is the threat of a yellow card.

A conversion is only worth two points whether the try is scored under the posts or near the sideline. It would make sense if all goals _ conversions, penalties and field goals _ were worth two points.

Steyn, by the way, can kick field goals from 50 metres out.

You could argue that you should not change a rule or a scoring system because of one player. Well, Springbok five-eighth Morne Steyn can kick goals from his side of halfway too.

Anyway, rugby league reduced the value of the field goal from two points to one largely as a result of the prolific South Sydney fullback Eric Simms.

There have always been prodigious goal kickers in the game. Wallabies coach Robbie Deans could easily bang a penalty goal over from 50 metres when he played for Canterbury and the All Blacks in the 1980s.

As goal-kicking techniques improve the range of goal kickers will also increase and long distance kickers will become more common.

If the IRB does not want games decided primarily by penalty goals, it has to reduce the value of the penalty goal to two points or reconsider the sanctions rule, which punishes most offences with free kicks rather than penalties.

It's not rocket science.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...015651,00.html

[welshrugbyfan]

AAAAAAAAAAAAGHHHHHH!!!!!

Leave the F***** game alone!!!!!!!

[Darren]

I added a poll to this one. I don;t think the value should be decreased just because someone is good at kicking penalty goals etc. If it's tries they want - why not increase the value of them? Or better yet, increase the value of a conversion - make it 3 points, this would bring it in line with the other kicking scores...

[Action Hardcore]

If the wallabies could do the same this article would never have been written.

[welshrugbyfan]

Tries aren't being scored because your watching the three top teams in the world play each other each week. Did any one stop and think their defence is also of top three standard. Put any of them up against NH teams and you'll see some try scoring.

I'm only a dumb arse forward and I can work this sh** out.

[Happy]

If the wallabies could do the same this article would never have been written.

possibly .. I'm surprised the article was in an Australian paper and not a kiwi one though

The trouble is kicking a goal whether it be penalty or drop from 50+ meters is undefendable and I think that is where people have problems with the amount of points being awarded!

[zimeric]

seems everyone likes the three point penalty.. its the drop goals points that need reviewing methinks..

[normie]

Too much tinkering can just totally stuff things up. These blokes are playing within the rules and not doing anything dangerous, like spear a tackle for instance. Trying to modify rules to counter the freaky skills of particular individuals is just micro managing.


True, this style of play can get irritating and frustrating - I remember a drop goal of Steyns at subiaco a few years ago (v Sharks I think) he kicked it from the Force half and it would have gone through the ozzie rules goal posts if they were there.

I think it's just something that we have to put up with (only if the opposition is doing it)

[AndyS]

My only argument with penalties/drop goals now are that the equipment, grounds and training have made them more achievable and it is having an effect on the shape of the game. But I don't think that has anything to do with the values (although I would either change DGs to 2 points or allow the option of a DG conversion for 3 points - one or the other for the sake of consistency). While there have always been freaks that got away good shots, the probabilities were low. Now they are much higher, and the downside is minimal when missing means the ball just gets kicked back from the 22 anyway. So for mine, I would:
a) make dropgoals exactly the same as any kick in general play, where if it goes dead it is a choice betwen a 22 drop out or a scrum at the place it was kicked.
b) restart all penalty attempts at goal from the half, whether it was made or not.

Neither of these would stop Steyn destroying teams from 60m, and nor should any rule change. But it might make him or his captain think twice about the amount of risk taken in the approach, because at the moment there isn't much.

[Burgs]

I've long held the view that it should be 1 for a drop goal and 2 for penalty, as have many that I have spoken with over the years since tries were lifted to 5 points.
Steyn is an exceptional talent and is working within the rules so good luck to him, but there is to much emphasis on points accumilation, kicking for territory and all that other techo shit to get in kicking range, rather than just having a good hard dig to score a try and if you happen to get the chance to have a shot then so be it.

[James]

If the wallabies could do the same this article would never have been written.

Yes it would have. Just not here. We'd see similar sentiments at www.thewholeallblacks.co.nz or www.thewholegloucester.co.uk

Stuff changing the penalty rules. Look at Steyn's Morne and Francois. Neither have much talent outside of kicking. If the Boks want to play either or those two, other teams will just have to make up for it by playing better players or having better discipline. Now I don't like the idea of a 60m penalty but they don't happen that often and even then they aren't a guarantee of making it- especially if there is a strong breeze. Plus its not going to be an issue for next year as Francois is off to France so presumably out of the Boks.

The number of tries in this years Try-Nations (its try nations not penalty-nations ) has been a bit low but I suppose in hindsight it was always going to be. South Africa took the longest to adapt to the ELVs so it figures that they'd find it easiest to go back to the old laws. Australia and NZ who seemed to relish it a bit more have been far from crash hot since the change. A full years S14 with the old laws will see a closer competition and hopefully noone will have any need to complain.

If we did see a change in tactics and see someone like Morne Steyn taking more than 5 drop goal attempts in a game, I would probably suggest something change about it. As it is things are fine but if there were any more it probably would make things suck a bit.

[welshrugbyfan]

People have been kicking penalties from 50m for the last 25 years. So 1 bloke can kick it 10 M more and we all want the point system changed.

Trys aren't being scored in the tri nations because the defence is the best your going to see. This has not been a problem since those f****** ELV's came along and disrupted what was a perfectly fine game.

Leave the game alone if people don't like it they can F*** off and watch another sport. Ooh this sport is too confusing, thats cause your bloody stupid and haven't got the intelligence to learn the rules anyway. Actually go and watch the mungo game, they score heaps of trys in that because the defence is so shit. 5 blokes tackling a guy and he still crosses the line time and time again.

Rant over..

[shasta]

Actually go and watch the mungo game, they score heaps of trys in that because the defence is so shit.

I thought you knew what you were talking about for a little while there. Then you had to go and spoil it right at the end, didn't you.

[KalaFan]

I actually think watching Stein bang them over from 60 or go for drop goals from half way out on the sideline is almost as big a spectacle as someone scoring a try. It's like watching someone kicking a massive goal in a game of footy, it gets the crowd going

[James]

I certainly don't complain when Cameron Shepherd takes a shot from 50m out although I would definitely prefer they kicked it into the 22 for a line-out instead.