1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Take the 2!

Discussion in 'Rugby League Forum' started by KJEagle, Sep 16, 2013.

  1. KJEagle

    KJEagle New Member

    +5 /0
    Great game on the weekend. I took my boys and although we lost there is no way we could be disappointed with Manly's effort.

    In finals there is an old saying 'Take the 2' and in hindsight we should have done that on the weekend. It might also make the Roosters reluctant to give away penalties on their line.
    • Like Like x 2
    • Dee Why Eagle

      Dee Why Eagle Well-Known Member

      +481 /5
      I thought exactly this at the time.
      But who knows - final score may have just been 4-2.

      For what its worth, I think I can guess what Wayne Bennett would have instructed.
    • The Eagle Has Landed

      The Eagle Has Landed Well-Known Member

      +485 /8
      I was about to post the same thing.I totally agree and with the penalty count being 12-5 to Manly surely Killer could of slotted half of those.
    • bob dylan

      bob dylan Well-Known Member Premium Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

      +6,440 /192
      I have just watched the game for the first time and we need to take the points at every opportunity in these finals games.

      What a great game btw, awesome display by both teams.
      • Like Like x 1
      • Daddycool

        Daddycool Well-Known Member

        +297 /2
        In hindsight, yes..... they should have taken a couple of shots at goal. But if the roosters had scored, all we'd have heard was; "they've given up", "they can't crack them and the roosters fed off that confidence to score more points".
        They were unlucky not to get over the line, but it wasn't from a lack of trying.
      • Chip and Chase

        Chip and Chase True Supporter Staff Member Administrator Premium Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

        +8,608 /80
        I thought the same thing at the ground. But in fairness a couple of those penalties were back to back jobs where we got one penalty followed quickly by another, so it's not like 12 individual opportunities if you know what I mean.

        2 of those penalties I could have kicked so we would have least forced golden point. I suppose the lack of a real quality goal kicker makes you think twice about those options.

        What I don't understand is why there was no sin bin applied on Saturday ? There was 2 or 3 occasions when they deliberately slowed play and gave away a professional foul but the refs didn't have the guts to sin bin them. When you look at the joke of a sin bin that Houston from the Knights copped yesterday the cynic in me thinks they will only sin bin in games where the score isn't close.
      • Kiwi Eagle

        Kiwi Eagle Moderator Staff Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

        +3,894 /65
        There wasn't any time watching it live that I thought we should have taken the 2, we were already 4 down and who knows how many opportunities you will get in prime position. A lot of the time I'm happy to take the 2 but never felt that way the other night

        Remember the 2011 GF, Warriors got a penalty and took the 2. Couple of mins later we get a penalty, kick for touch, and Brett scores the opening try of the game. Was a good option there and I felt similar the other night
      • MadMarcus

        MadMarcus Local Lunatic 2017 Tipping Competitor

        +8,383 /74
        I agree with you Kiwi. It always felt like we were "just about to score". Hindsight is a wonderful thing, but at the time I thought we were making all the right calls.
      • weev

        weev Well-Known Member

        +849 /22
        Some of those penalties were deliberate off-sides to run up and snuff our attach in the red zone. Just kick one of them and you would see them play correctly - then we may have scored (at 4-2 a penalty is huge). If we kicked just one their penalty count, on the defensive line, would have been zero from then on.
        • Like Like x 2
        • StuBoot

          StuBoot Well-Known Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

          +1,065 /9
          By that reckoning, why didn't we try and bang a field goal over?
          We were tackled inside their 20 something like 37 times, take only a third of those and we win 12-4.

          But seriously, not many sides take a shot when they're down by 4, down by 8 - maybe, down by 2 - yes.
          As Kiwi wrote, a lot of the penalties were back to back and early in the count so if you don't take the first one, why would you take one two tackles later or two tackles after that?
          It's not like we never looked like scoring.
          If it's 0-0 then yes, maybe take a shot but no-one could ever have thought it'd end up only 4-0.
        • weev

          weev Well-Known Member

          +849 /22
          Um, because a field goal is worth only one point...

          They wouldn't keep up repeating the professional fouls (and hence hampering the attack) at two points behind...
        • HoldenV8

          HoldenV8 Well-Known Member

          +10,539 /173
          I have to admit, watching the game on Nein (GO actually....and NOT in HD) I found myself wondering 2 things. Why didn't we take a penalty goal or two, and why were the refs allowing the Roosters to get away with 2 or 3 professional fouls in a row, all usually within 10 metres of the try line, and not once was Mini as their captain warned about possible sin bins if it kept happening.

          Taking the 2 is a hard one. I also remember Maloney's goal in the 2011 GF which was quickly followed by Snake scoring the first try. Besides that, 4 points is better than 2 so I can understand going for a try. On the other hand if we had taken the 2 points on offer a few times it might have stopped the Chooks from defending offside and might have opened the game up. But who knows?

          As for the non-sin binning of players (such as again James Maloney who continually got away with holding onto a players legs LONG after the ref had called held)...I wish I knew why, especially after I saw a Knights player binned against the Dogs. I guess it goes down to what individual refs believe is a sin bin offence. It sucks because there is no consistency in the rulings, but that's nothing unusual.
        • StuBoot

          StuBoot Well-Known Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

          +1,065 /9
          Weev, you conveniently left out my following paragraphs that started with "But seriously"

          I was trying to make the point that with hindsight there were plenty of opportunities to score some points.
          No one thought 4-0 was going to be enough to win but it was.
          I'm normally a "take the 2" advocate but the way the game was and the nature of the back to back to back penalties I thought going for the 6 was justified.
          If we were struggling to into their 20 then by all means take the 2.
          Think of the uproar here if we'd taken the 2 and lost 4-2?
          Lyon would be accused of not having a go, after all we only needed one try to win and I rather go down swinging.
        • SeaEagleRock8

          SeaEagleRock8 Sea Eagle Lach Staff Member Premium Member 2017 Tipping Competitor

          +10,565 /215
          The only kick we didn't take that we should have was the obvious bomb from the last play in the match. It's not as though we had a slick set play planned, we just threw it willy nilly. I have no doubt Storm would have gone for the percentage play. A learning experience no doubt for our young decision makers. (Or was it Lyon's call?)

        Share This Page