What's the best way to decide games that are level after 80 minutes? Is golden point the perfect balance, is golden try a better option, or is the good old-fashioned draw the way to go? The NRL.com experts have their say.
NRL.com's experts view
Brett Kimmorley (Former NSW halfback)
I want to see golden try. It can go for 10 minutes of extra time (and no more). You can still kick field goals and penalty goals which might be enough at the end of the 10 minutes, but if you score a try you win the match then and there. If there is no golden try then the team ahead on the scoreboard wins. If scores are level and there hasn't been a try then it's a draw.
Paul Suttor (NRL.com editor)
See above. The Kimmorley idea is the best one by far. Enough said.
Steve Renouf (Maroons legend)
I'm a fan of the golden point win. The excitement around the draw and then the golden point is good for the game
Jamie Soward (Former Blues five-eighth)
Golden point. If you have never kicked a field goal in golden point then you'll never understand.
Margie McDonald (NRL.com senior reporter)
Call me old-fashioned but a draw is absolutely fine with me. After 80 minutes of running against a brick wall, I think of the poor old forwards having to play extra-time and watch the halves try and pot a field goal. If it's 18-18 at full-time, leave it be... Give the sides one competition point each. I know finals/GF need a result – so in those cases you can have golden point, because replays just don't work (ask Cronulla in 1978).
Brett Keeble (NRL.com reporter)
Under current golden-point rules, most teams set up for field goals and referees are under perceived pressure to not blow penalties. Field goals or penalty goals should not end the game, but a “golden” try should. If scores are still tied after two five-minute halves, then call it a draw.
Tony Webeck (NRL.com reporter)
I might be a dinosaur but I'd love to revert to simply awarding each team a point if scores are tied at the end of 80 minutes. I'm not sure that the way golden point games are decided are always fair and individual competition points reintroduce some chaos to the Telstra Premiership ladder. It's simple, and effective.
Brad Walter (NRL.com senior reporter)
Golden point. If it ain't broken, don't fix it. Golden point was introduced in the NRL in 2003 and even Wayne Bennett seems to have accepted it. Golden point games are thrilling to watch and winning in extra time has become an art form, with the good teams knowing how to set up for a field goal.
Chris Kennedy (NRL.com reporter)
While I'm confident extra time isn't going anywhere and I realise it can be tense and exciting, I prefer the old draw in regular round games and saving extra time for finals. The field-goal shootouts can get very scrappy and influenced by luck and taking home one point each is often a fair result. Plus it helps split up the ladder at the end of the season when things are getting log-jammed.
Maria Tsialis (Big League editor)
I would love to see extra time played fully (a total of 10 minutes) and whoever is in front at the end of that wins the game. It takes away the onus on field goals being kicked to win - which often leads to bad football - and also gives an opposing team time to put in that last-ditch effort if they find themselves behind early on. If they're still deadlocked, call it even.
Zac Bailey (NRL.com reporter)
Golden point. I like things the way they are. Golden point matches has fans of both teams on the edge of their seats waiting to see what happens. The most deserving team doesn't always win and fans of the losing team generally leave devastated (think Panthers v Wests Tigers earlier this year) – but that can be the case after matches decided in 80 minutes, whether it be a draw or loss.
Lone Scout (NRL Fantasy expert)
Field goals are a valid way to decide a contest, but tries are better. So I'd prefer a combination of 10 minutes of extra time and golden try - whoever's in front after 90 minutes wins, but if either team scores a try during extra time it's game over.
Corey Rosser (NRL.com reporter)
Extra time followed by a draw would be a fair way of deciding the game, while still keeping things exciting. It would prevent a field-goal shootout and create difficult decisions for teams, which I think would only enhance the product for fans.
Alicia Newton (NRL.com reporter)
Golden point has gone a bit stale for me and after 15 years the rule is due for a change. Let players take their field goals in regular time then have to settle it with golden try past the 80th minute. Penalty goals shouldn't win you the game in extra time either.
Mary Konstantopoulos (Ladies Who League)
Whilst it may be extremely stressful when it is your team that features, golden point is still my favourite way to decide a drawn match. The NRL is in the business of entertainment and for me, golden point adds that essential drama that all footy fans love.
Tanisha Stanton (NRL.com reporter)
There is nothing wrong with the system that is in place now. There have been a number of games go into golden point already this season and they've so exciting to watch. It's also a great test to see which teams and players can step up in those crucial moments.
Kenny Scott (NRL.com podcaster)
Ask a fan of a team that loses in golden point, they'll tell you that a draw is good enough. Ask a fan of a team that wins in golden point and they'll tell you the system is fine as it is. People go on and on about the idea of the golden try, but in reality there are too many variables to make it work. What if a team kicks three penalty goals in extra time but then loses because the other team scored a 'golden try'? Golden point has been around for about 15 years and is now an accepted part of the game. Not only that, but In terms of excitement and curiosity and simplicity, golden point wins hand down.