Why are drop goals always at the end of games?

Sandwich

Or put anotherway, why does no team base their strategy around scoring a string of dropgoals throughout a game. (Rob Andrew, Diego Dominguez, hugo Porta were famed for occasionally scoring 2 or 3 in a game).

Anyone remember a team going out with the express strategy of scoring 10 of them?

Given the number of games we have seen decided by last minute drop goals, it seems that teams feel they only 'resort' to dropping a goal when time is running out, or even in the very last play. Yet when a team is within 2 points of the opposition, a decent amount of them are scored. What is the conversation rate of such a strategy? Why do teams wait until it is panic stations before gearing the team towards scoring that way?

BigTommyBomb

To have a good chance of scoring a drop goal you need to have a ruck close enough to the opposition try line to set yourself up. If you can get that close why not continue for a try and you might get a penatly in the process. Taking a drop goal everytime is just throwing away posession.

copacetic

also they are not bloody easy to score. generally certain kickers are very good at them and use them all the time, eg Ulster this year. However even very few world class kickers can score from them consistently so as big tom says why throw possesion away unless desperate.

RuggieBear

South africa used a drop goal strategy to negate the flat defensive alignment of England in the 1999 world cup. I think de beer kicked 5 drop goals in the 2nd half

Sandwich

RuggieBear wrote:

South africa used a drop goal strategy to negate the flat defensive alignment of England in the 1999 world cup. I think de beer kicked 5 drop goals in the 2nd half

Good one, Id forgotten that. And it worked for them.

On wasting posession : whats wrong with 3 points if you can keep scoring them? A regular complaint from coaches is about their teams not closing the deal and getting tries, 'we made the opportunites, spent x plays/minutes/much of the half in their 22 but didnt come away with points' etc. For every attacking position in the opposition 22 how many result in a try? How many could have resulted in a drop?

On the difficulty of scoring them. The ball doesnt need to be taken right under the posts before kicking. If the ruck/scrum is at all inside the 22, and 10 yards either side of the posts I think most outhalves have a better than 50/50 chance of scoring.

Hence my original question - it seems that when they are attempted, they are scored more often than not (and I am writing about international level rugby here not J4).

zAbbo

Pop it from the half way line, ala Rob Kearney

I remember some game, and this french lad was trying DG's every time he got the ball, to the displeasure of his forwards who had spend 10mins getting him the ball, of course he missed, and they look pissed

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

Diamondmaker

daveirl wrote:

This post has been deleted.

I think thats the bottom line. Back then, who was it? SA had an excellent DG kicker and now they have this young Stynes fella, kicks them from anywhere.

Jonny too was and excellent kicker and won the WC from penalties and 3 or 4 in the WC final was it not.

If a team has a player that is an excellent kicker they may seek to use him as in the above 2 scenarios. More often than not however kickers are not good enough to pop at them other than absolutte last resort.

Must be in the culture in SA they seem to breed quite a few...

Those who can do, the rest, ehhh...dont.
Its down to guys not being good enough and therfore its not a worthwhile strategy, kicking away possesion as said by BTB.

Tim Robbins

Sandwich wrote:

Good one, Id forgotten that. And it worked for them.

On wasting posession : whats wrong with 3 points if you can keep scoring them? A regular complaint from coaches is about their teams not closing the deal and getting tries, 'we made the opportunites, spent x plays/minutes/much of the half in their 22 but didnt come away with points' etc. For every attacking position in the opposition 22 how many result in a try? How many could have resulted in a drop?

On the difficulty of scoring them. The ball doesnt need to be taken right under the posts before kicking. If the ruck/scrum is at all inside the 22, and 10 yards either side of the posts I think most outhalves have a better than 50/50 chance of scoring.

Hence my original question - it seems that when they are attempted, they are scored more often than not (and I am writing about international level rugby here not J4).

They are much more difficult than they appear. Rugby is all about keeping your head up, especially when you have the ball. When drop kicking, you have to dip your head and look at the ball and you will be creamed unless you do it all in a split second.
They other major factor is possesion, when you lose the ball, your team have to fight to get it back. At the end of the game this doesn't matter as much as it's like a last throw at the dice.
Also in Rugby you should be always trying to score 7, not 3.

Snickers Man

Until 1947 the value of a drop goal was four points. And in those days, the value of a try was only three. So why didn't people kick drop goals all the time way back when?

Because the ball was made of leather, absorbed water like a sponge and was frequently bent out of shape very early on. The majority of points in those days came from tries. It was just too difficult to kick accurately enought.

When Ireland won the Grand Slam in 1948, they did it without scoring a single penalty goal!!!! All points in all four matches came from tries and conversions!!!! Imagine a team winning a major championship like that today.

Nowadays, with balls made of water resistant plastic and inflated mechanically to consistent pressures, the advantage is so much with the kicker it is untrue.

My suggestion for improvement, if the drop goal becomes too much the focus of a game, is not to devalue it but to make the ball heavier. A weightier ball will make it that bit more difficult to score from kicks and will encourage more running play.

Snickers Man

Diamondmaker wrote:

I think thats the bottom line. Back then, who was it? SA had an excellent DG kicker

Jannie de Beer

Diamondmaker

Snickers Man wrote:

Jannie de Beer

Percy Montgomery has also a few DGs from FB. Is there something more to this Springbok DG skill....

Tim Robbins

Snickers Man wrote:

My suggestion for improvement, if the drop goal becomes too much the focus of a game, is not to devalue it but to make the ball heavier. A weightier ball will make it that bit more difficult to score from kicks and will encourage more running play.

I would like to see a conversation devalued to one point myself.

Diamondmaker

Tim Robbins wrote:

I would like to see a conversation devalued to one point myself.

Why???

That effectively values a try at 6 point. ( AGAIN )

This used to be the case! Why change back the 7 pt try is greatly to do with the improved game in modern era......

daveirl

This post has been deleted.

zAbbo

When did the bonus point system come into play ?

That puts more emphasis on scoring tries, there is also the 'negative' affect of putting yourself in a try scoring position, but instead playing it back to the pocket.

I wouldn't be overly impressed if Ireland employed that tactic.

razorblunt

Don't the Argentineans have a guy can't recall his name but he pinged a few over from the halfway line during the 2003 World Cup think he was the full back.

Sure it's basically a knock on anyway;)

Tim Robbins

Diamondmaker wrote:

Why???

That effectively values a try at 6 point. ( AGAIN )

This used to be the case! Why change back the 7 pt try is greatly to do with the improved game in modern era......

Sorry, I would increase the try to six and reduce the conversion to one.

BigTommyBomb

Sure it's basically a knock on anyway

Haha. Good point.

If kickers started to take 10 drop goals a game I'm sure the IRB would step in to change the rules. Nobody would want to watch a game like that.