Goal kickingthis season

[King Salvo]

I think you’re missing the point being made. No one is saying sides don’t lose games because they miss goals, I think everyone on here would accept that as a reasonable statement. Happens all the time, even to the best goal kickers in the comp think Jarod Croker the poor bastard.

The argument is; what is the value proposition of a specialist goal kicker vs picking the best player in that position and going with an inferior goal kicker. Not whether sides lose games because goals are missed.

If we use 2016 as the example as you raised we had Jackson Hastings who kicked at 84%, one of the best percentages in the competition and in line with what James Maloney was kicking at during the previous 3 seasons. Now you can’t say we lost those games because we went into it without a recognised goal kicker, you could argue we lost those games because of goal kicking but not because we didn’t have a recognised goal kicker.

Look at 2018/19 - Trent Robinson had to make a really hard call. Does he stick with Michael Gordon who was a good solid performer for us in 2017 and a recognised goal kicker with a 81% career goal kicking record or does he go with Blake Ferguson who had struggled at centre but clearly had the higher ceiling in terms of talent. Then back himself to find someone like a Brett Morris in 2019. Hard decision because his two back up kickers were a prop who plays 50mins and a centre who is erratic by nature.

He chose the latter and in my opinion he 100% made the right call, we don’t win 2018 without the season Blake Ferguson had. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again the best season I’ve ever seen from a winger in RW&B. I also think a lesser winger in the 2019 grand final may have affected the outcome of that game, Brett Morris was my man of the match his defensive work on Jack Wighton’s kicking game was immense.

The argument this year is we could have kept Kyle Flanagan or promoted/bought a specialist goal kicker but at what cost, would it mean a downgrade on the player currently occupying that position. Again I think in this instance the ceiling of a Keary/Lam or Keary/Walker combination is far higher than another season of Keary/Flanagan. So then what’s the trade off?

Kyle Flanagan kicked at 80.5% last year, going off last year we scored 102 tries from 22 games. So of those 102 tries assuming he didn’t get injured he would’ve kicked 164points. Hypothetically if we downgraded to a 75% kicker which is what Latrell Mitchell was kicking at assuming again he missed no games he would’ve kicked 154 points. The difference over the course of a season is 10 points, so the Question has to be, is it worth having a specialist goal kicker in the squad if it is a downgrade on the player already occupying that position.

That is the point being made, not whether or not sides lose games because of a missed goal. Happens all the time, like in your 2016 example when we had one of the better goal kickers in the game.

Would you keep Michael Gordon and dump Blake Ferguson in 2018 to have a specialist goal kicker in your starting 17... I think that’s the easiest way to put it.

I thought Gordon wanted to go back to the North Coast though so why he asked for and was granted a release as otherwise he would have stayed at the Chooks.

His request for a release would also coincide with the Chooks signing of Tedesco.

If he stayed and no Tedesco - it would have been 1- Gordon 2- Toops - 3 Mitchell - 4 Manu 5- Ferguson though - there was no keep Gordon or Ferguson decision that needed to be made though?.

https://www.roosters.com.au/news/201...diate-release/

If you don't have a reliable kicker it will cost you games for sure and certain.

What happens though if the Chooks only score 80 tries this year and a lot more of the games are closer with a few points in them - those games could be won or lost as a result of who has the better goal kicker(s)

Many would say there were better wingers than El-Masri even at the Dogs but his goal kicking was second to none and won a stack of games for them because of it (regularly turning 4's into 6' etc) so he was picked week in week out.- 81.97% Goal Kicking average

It's a bit like the argument in cricket with wicket keepers- do you pick the best wicket keeper or pick a not as good wicket keeper who is a better batter- dropped catches/missed stumping's etc can lose you games and on the flip side wicket keeper/batters who can score big runs can win you matches.

If say Ian Healy and Adam Gilchrist were the same age and playing at the same time who would they pick - a Top notch gloveman in Healy who can score some runs or a not as good gloveman in Gilchrist who can score a lot of runs.

Healy's test average was 27 and Gilchrist 48 (was over 50 for most of his career until the end when his batting faltered )

It boils down to what team will give you the best chance of winning and i am sure goal kicking would come into the equation of coaches - if your guaranteed to score more tries than your opponent so goal kicking doesn't matter then having a goal kicker wont matter but of course that wont be the case in most games.

[Mickie Lane]

man , id hate to debate anything with you. great post.

Exactly. He knows his stuff, I think.

[Johnny73]

For all those saying that goal kicking trumps positional talent, I direct them to Keith Barnes. Hell of a toe poker but not the world's greatest defensive fullback.

[Headless Chook]

For all those saying that goal kicking trumps positional talent, I direct them to Keith Barnes. Hell of a toe poker but not the world's greatest defensive fullback.

Game has changed a lot since then. Goal kicking was more valuable before they brought in the differentail penalty from scrums

[Maxy Walker]

I think you’re missing the point being made. No one is saying sides don’t lose games because they miss goals, I think everyone on here would accept that as a reasonable statement. Happens all the time, even to the best goal kickers in the comp think Jarod Croker the poor bastard.

The argument is; what is the value proposition of a specialist goal kicker vs picking the best player in that position and going with an inferior goal kicker. Not whether sides lose games because goals are missed.

If we use 2016 as the example as you raised we had Jackson Hastings who kicked at 84%, one of the best percentages in the competition and in line with what James Maloney was kicking at during the previous 3 seasons. Now you can’t say we lost those games because we went into it without a recognised goal kicker, you could argue we lost those games because of goal kicking but not because we didn’t have a recognised goal kicker.

Look at 2018/19 - Trent Robinson had to make a really hard call. Does he stick with Michael Gordon who was a good solid performer for us in 2017 and a recognised goal kicker with a 81% career goal kicking record or does he go with Blake Ferguson who had struggled at centre but clearly had the higher ceiling in terms of talent. Then back himself to find someone like a Brett Morris in 2019. Hard decision because his two back up kickers were a prop who plays 50mins and a centre who is erratic by nature.

He chose the latter and in my opinion he 100% made the right call, we don’t win 2018 without the season Blake Ferguson had. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again the best season I’ve ever seen from a winger in RW&B. I also think a lesser winger in the 2019 grand final may have affected the outcome of that game, Brett Morris was my man of the match his defensive work on Jack Wighton’s kicking game was immense.

The argument this year is we could have kept Kyle Flanagan or promoted/bought a specialist goal kicker but at what cost, would it mean a downgrade on the player currently occupying that position. Again I think in this instance the ceiling of a Keary/Lam or Keary/Walker combination is far higher than another season of Keary/Flanagan. So then what’s the trade off?

Kyle Flanagan kicked at 80.5% last year, going off last year we scored 102 tries from 22 games. So of those 102 tries assuming he didn’t get injured he would’ve kicked 164points. Hypothetically if we downgraded to a 75% kicker which is what Latrell Mitchell was kicking at assuming again he missed no games he would’ve kicked 154 points. The difference over the course of a season is 10 points, so the Question has to be, is it worth having a specialist goal kicker in the squad if it is a downgrade on the player already occupying that position.

That is the point being made, not whether or not sides lose games because of a missed goal. Happens all the time, like in your 2016 example when we had one of the better goal kickers in the game.

Would you keep Michael Gordon and dump Blake Ferguson in 2018 to have a specialist goal kicker in your starting 17... I think that’s the easiest way to put it.

Hastings wasn’t the main goal kicker in the early rounds of 2016 though. Latrell had a go in the first couple of games and wasn’t up to it that stage. Then SST and Hastings shared it for a couple of games before Hastings took over after about round 5.

Two of the first four games were lost where we scored as many or more tries than the opposition but missed a lot it goals. We ended losing the first 5 games and it the season was as good as over..If we’d won 2 out of the first 4 games that season may have turned out completely differently for all we know.

This season. we’re looking at the same scenario of part time kickers that we started with in 2016. Sure we have a much more experienced squad than then so not expecting another repeat of that kind of season but the lack of a recognised goal kicker still has to be a concern.

[King Salvo]

Hastings wasn’t the main goal kicker in the early rounds of 2016 though. Latrell had a go in the first couple of games and wasn’t up to it that stage. Then SST and Hastings shared it for a couple of games before Hastings took over after about round 5.

Two of the first four games were lost where we scored as many or more tries than the opposition but missed a lot it goals. We ended losing the first 5 games and it the season was as good as over..If we’d won 2 out of the first 4 games that season may have turned out completely differently for all we know.

This season. we’re looking at the same scenario of part time kickers that we started with in 2016. Sure we have a much more experienced squad than then so not expecting another repeat of that kind of season but the lack of a recognised goal kicker still has to be a concern.

Can make or break your season those results in those close games. If say a team only wins 2 of 8 they most likely wont figure the finals as that will play on the players minds in other games. Win 6 of 8 they most likely play finals as the confidence from those wins is extended to/reflected in other games.

If it was guaranteed a team would score more tries than the opposition that goal kicking won't matter then it wont - of course no guarantee that will happen so turning 4's into 6's will matter

[The Skeez]

Carr had a mini shocker (I thought) in a side that was pretty good across the board...he's relegated to No: 23 this week!

Spicy Thai chicken soup kicked a 60m dropout in the 50th min mark with ease in the North’s trial. Andrew Walker style

[Jacks Fur Coat]

Spicy Thai chicken soup kicked a 60m dropout in the 50th min mark with ease in the North’s trial. Andrew Walker style

Tom yum then?