Goal Kicker : Sun Jan 20, 2019 7:00 pm  

I know its only friendlies but Shaw missed a fair few the last couple of weeks and could prove costly over the season.
Do we put Hall or Drinkwater in there or stick with Shaw?

Re: Goal Kicker : Sun Jan 20, 2019 7:39 pm  

Shaw Hall Drinkwater Mcguire Dagger Crooks Atkin Addy. All would do a job. I'd go for Hall initially. Held his nerve away at Leeds and a few long range ones have influenced results since his return. Nice problem to have for Sheens.

Re: Goal Kicker : Sun Jan 20, 2019 8:19 pm  

Everyone is welcome to disagree but I think the 35 second shot clock is a major factor here.

Hull FC's Sneyd admits he took over twice as long as is now allowed. It's got to make a difference to the routine.

Shaw was 100% Rovers best kicker in 2018 now he has to rush his routine and hasn't got it right yet.

Re: Goal Kicker : Sun Jan 20, 2019 9:48 pm  

His Bobness wrote:

Everyone is welcome to disagree but I think the 35 second shot clock is a major factor here.

Hull FC's Sneyd admits he took over twice as long as is now allowed. It's got to make a difference to the routine.

Shaw was 100% Rovers best kicker in 2018 now he has to rush his routine and hasn't got it right yet.

Good point regards the shot clock, and as you said Sneyd admitted taking 30 seconds extra per kick.
Will be interesting to see how quick kickers adapt.
Hall to me though seems more relaxed wide out but time will tell I suppose.

[Mild Rover]

Re: Goal Kicker : Sun Jan 20, 2019 11:35 pm  

His Bobness wrote:

Everyone is welcome to disagree but I think the 35 second shot clock is a major factor here.

Hull FC's Sneyd admits he took over twice as long as is now allowed. It's got to make a difference to the routine.

Shaw was 100% Rovers best kicker in 2018 now he has to rush his routine and hasn't got it right yet.

It’s a good point.

Re: Goal Kicker : Mon Jan 21, 2019 1:09 pm  

Mild Rover wrote:

It’s a good point.

I understand the reasoning behind the shot clock, and am in favour of it, BUT, if if is to the detrement of goal kickers, than i think maybe another 20 seconds needs adding, i was a fairly good goal kicker at a very good level in Union and League, and when you have a routine, it is VERY hard to change. I was fairly quick and didnt have any daft run ups etc.

Players like Sneyd are going to suffer, and so will F.C if Sneyd cannot change his routine.

Im not singling F.C and Sneyd out, its just his timing to take a kick is alarmingly long (30 seconds extra is hell of a lot of time).

I think if we see the goal kicking averages fall dramatically as a result of the shot clock, it should be scrapped or altered to suit.

Re: Goal Kicker : Mon Jan 21, 2019 2:39 pm  

robinrovers10 wrote: I understand the reasoning behind the shot clock, and am in favour of it, BUT, if if is to the detrement of goal kickers, than i think maybe another 20 seconds needs adding, i was a fairly good goal kicker at a very good level in Union and League, and when you have a routine, it is VERY hard to change. I was fairly quick and didnt have any daft run ups etc. Players like Sneyd are going to suffer, and so will F.C if Sneyd cannot change his routine. Im not singling F.C and Sneyd out, its just his timing to take a kick is alarmingly long (30 seconds extra is hell of a lot of time). I think if we see the goal kicking averages fall dramatically as a result of the shot clock, it should be scrapped or altered to suit. Wasn't aware there was a 'shot clock' for goal kicks any more than what was already in place. This is taken from sky website... "Teams will be penalised if they fail to beat the shot clock for scrums (35 seconds) or drop-outs (30 seconds) - while sanctions will also be introduced to ensure that no more than 80 seconds of match time is used up by each kick at goal." https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.skyspo ... s-for-2019 I think previously refs stopped the clock after 80 seconds (could be wrong) when conversions were being taken. Doesn't look that much different, but I may have missed something more recently?

robinrovers10 wrote: I understand the reasoning behind the shot clock, and am in favour of it, BUT, if if is to the detrement of goal kickers, than i think maybe another 20 seconds needs adding, i was a fairly good goal kicker at a very good level in Union and League, and when you have a routine, it is VERY hard to change. I was fairly quick and didnt have any daft run ups etc. Players like Sneyd are going to suffer, and so will F.C if Sneyd cannot change his routine. Im not singling F.C and Sneyd out, its just his timing to take a kick is alarmingly long (30 seconds extra is hell of a lot of time). I think if we see the goal kicking averages fall dramatically as a result of the shot clock, it should be scrapped or altered to suit. Wasn't aware there was a 'shot clock' for goal kicks any more than what was already in place. This is taken from sky website... "Teams will be penalised if they fail to beat the shot clock for scrums (35 seconds) or drop-outs (30 seconds) - while sanctions will also be introduced to ensure that no more than 80 seconds of match time is used up by each kick at goal." https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.skyspo ... s-for-2019 I think previously refs stopped the clock after 80 seconds (could be wrong) when conversions were being taken. Doesn't look that much different, but I may have missed something more recently?

Re: Goal Kicker : Mon Jan 21, 2019 2:48 pm  

Faithful One wrote: Wasn't aware there was a 'shot clock' for goal kicks any more than what was already in place. This is taken from sky website... "Teams will be penalised if they fail to beat the shot clock for scrums (35 seconds) or drop-outs (30 seconds) - while sanctions will also be introduced to ensure that no more than 80 seconds of match time is used up by each kick at goal." https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.skyspo ... s-for-2019 I think previously refs stopped the clock after 80 seconds (could be wrong) when conversions were being taken. Doesn't look that much different, but I may have missed something more recently? To be honest, I'm in favor of the stop clock on scrums and drop outs but think goal kicking should be exempt as all kickers have different styles from years of practice.

Faithful One wrote: Wasn't aware there was a 'shot clock' for goal kicks any more than what was already in place. This is taken from sky website... "Teams will be penalised if they fail to beat the shot clock for scrums (35 seconds) or drop-outs (30 seconds) - while sanctions will also be introduced to ensure that no more than 80 seconds of match time is used up by each kick at goal." https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.skyspo ... s-for-2019 I think previously refs stopped the clock after 80 seconds (could be wrong) when conversions were being taken. Doesn't look that much different, but I may have missed something more recently? To be honest, I'm in favor of the stop clock on scrums and drop outs but think goal kicking should be exempt as all kickers have different styles from years of practice.

Re: Goal Kicker : Tue Jan 22, 2019 12:43 pm  

Rubyred1 wrote:

To be honest, I'm in favor of the stop clock on scrums and drop outs but think goal kicking should be exempt as all kickers have different styles from years of practice.

I'm not, some kickers take an age, Tickle used to wind me up with the amount of time he used to take over a reasonably simple kick.

Re: Goal Kicker : Wed Jan 23, 2019 4:13 pm  

Though not really bothered about the clock. Am I the only one who can’t understand why everyone seems to be getting obsessed with speeding up the game? Is it that big a problem? I watched Rovers against Saints 1992 or 3 on that well known video sight, an entertaining game with lots of action. They had just started to clamp down on laying on & head high tackles the game flowed well & the only difference from today was the game was not stopped for injuries and video ref as much as it is today. Union & NFL don’t seem to worry about nothing happening for long periods of the game yet they get good support & TV coverage. The only thing I have really noticed is our players now being full time are fitter & stronger so the skill full small players never get much chance to run at tired forwards, so the reduction in subs will help that & maybe even go down to six changes if we find eight to much? What’s any one else think?