At least someone seems to agree with me. Which is a good thing. I was beginning to lose faith there for a minute.

Because it sends out the message that winning is not important. Why bother trying for the win in the last few mins when a draw will do.


There should always be an outright winner. Always.

It’s nice to know that you agree with yourself. Life must be so contentful for you at the moment. Do you talk to the mirror regularly?

Not really, all this catching and biting stuff is smoke and mirrors for true idiocy most of the time.

It already is Phippsy lad. All playoff & Challenge Cup games (except the Challenge Cup Final) is subject to a golden point decider if the game is drawn after 80 mins.

It's fine as it is and doesn't need expanding.

Fell for the bait. #losing

Not a case of it "should". It already IS.

When there HAS to be a winner, you should use golden point.
In the league, there doesn't have to be a winner.

In a league competition, keep draws. It's not fair if one team gets the win in what would be like Fergie time if it were introduced to a league game. If both teams are evenly contested at the end of 80 minutes, it's a point each. I think that's pretty fair.

Only when the tart that's just ballsed up starts crying like a girl.

You are thinking Stuart Pearce too huh?

Leeds beat the Bulls on Friday fair & square why should the Dragons get extra time to do the same or vice versa?

So one of the teams gets the win.

You are aware that that doesn't actually answer the question?

Neither team could do it in 80 min why should teams not good enough be given extra time, if you cant do it in the alloted time you dont deserve the extra point, if the Rhinos beat the Bulls in 80 why should the Dragons get 90?

Golden point doesnt prove anything other than you can kick a drop goal. If you cant score more than the other team in the regulation 80 minutes then you shouldnt get 2 points. Simple.

Psst.
It doesn't need introducing as we already have it.

after years of watching english rl i would have agreed with most of you in the past,but having watched the golden point in the nrl it does make the finale exciting and you get a great finish..golden point for me

right.....


if its a draw after 80mins both sides get a point..but you play golden TRY extra time and the winner gets a bonus point

simples

Bradford vs Cats would still be going on now if that was the rule.

so......

Nope. A game is 80 mins long. It doesn't need to be any longer except when a winner is needed ie a knockout game. A winner is not needed in a league game.

....make it so it lasts for an extra 20 minutes, if no side scores, it's a draw.

I think it should be first 'score' wins.

As someone said the Catalans v Bradford game would still be going on now if it was golden try.


Just because it's golden point it doesnt mean the fixture will be settled by a one pointer though. Sometimes the defending side are expecting the attacking team to kick the field goal only for them to give away a try.

what about winning by 2 clear points?

I just think first point wins... whether it's one, two or four.