To kick or not to kick: the penalty goal dilemma

On Saturday night the Sharks and Dragons opted to kick for penalty goals on several occasions. For the Sharks, their reluctance to attack ultimately cost them victory, while the Dragons decision to advance their lead two points at a time proved the difference.

So why are teams ignoring the chance to attack in try scoring positions?

So far this season, teams have opted to kick for penalty goals 30 times, a slight decrease from the same time last year. Of the teams opting for two points, the Sharks have been the most prolific with seven shots at goal.

The conservative style of play shown by Cronulla is largely to blame for their 0-4 start to the year. Their inability to capitalise on the talents of representative stars Michael Gordon, Gerard Beale, Andrew Fifita and Luke Lewis, along with the natural skill of rookies Valentine Holmes and Jack Bird have left many fans bewildered as to how the same side that pushed the Rabbitohs all the way in the Auckland Nines have displayed little, if any, attacking spark so far in 2015.

Twice this season, the Shane Flanagan coached side has gone down narrowly as a result of their reluctance to play an attacking brand of football.

In the first round against the Raiders, twice the Sharks advanced their cause by two points, only to see Canberra claim victory.

Again on Saturday night against the Gold Coast, the Sharks chose to kick for goal four times, despite achieving considerable success through Valentine Holmes, who crossed for two tries.

Their decision to kick for goal to increase the lead to 22-18 with less than ten minutes remaining was nothing short of baffling. While advocates of the style of play will claim the Sharks poor start to the season has left them reluctant to chance their arm, the form they showed in the Auckland Nines suggests they are more than capable of scoring points.

As a result, the Titans were able to come away with a win despite trailing throughout much of the game.

While the Sharks inability to attack has caught the ire of many fans, the Dragons produced the form that led them to the 2010 premiership.

Three times against Manly, the Dragons opted to replicate the attacking tendencies seen during Wayne Bennett's reign. Ultimately it proved to be a successful platform, as the Dragons were able to walk away 12-4 winners.

Where the Sharks failed on Saturday can be seen in the way they finished the match.

While the Dragons were able to grind out a win with the game on the line, the Sharks lacked the finesse of the likes of South Sydney and the Roosters to finish off the Titans.

There have been a number of similar incidences this season where teams have lost games due to conservative play.

The Raiders established an 18-0 lead in even time against the Dragons only to lose due to the decision to kick a penalty goal with 30 minutes remaining. Rather than backing their attack, the Raiders invited the Dragons back into the game.

The unlikely unbeaten Knights have shown that attacking play can result in success.

In their first three matches, the Knights have backed their ability to come up with match-winning tries against all their opponents.

The likes of Cronulla and Canberra could learn a lot from the style of play employed by Newcastle.

They currently sit top-of-the-table, have experienced their best start to a season since the days Johns and Buderus ruled the Hunter and their crowds have responded by turning up in droves.

Fans respond to attacking rugby league, merely taking a penalty goal is not in the spirit of what fans expect from their side.

While penalty goals can prove the difference in closely fought matches, as was the case with the Dragons last week, for teams willing to take chances with the ball, more often than not, they will produce the type of football that brings in crowds and victories.*