Intrigued by Barrett's choice to go for the posts with 6 to play and down by 4, think many NZ sides would of fancied the lineout there, but hindsight 20/20 etc.
Another great game, probably not a classic even with the 1 point scoreline, but as you said, definitely a thriller to the last.
Ah ****
Gotta say I don't like the idea of taking 3 when you're down by 4 with not much time on the clock.
Fair enough perhaps when there was 11 mins to go but not with 5 to go.
Just to break this down again, apologies to those who had no real interest in the game, while losing to the frogs is no fun this is no sour grapes just
mere thoughts on tactical decisions.
So I woke up with 12 mins to play and tuned in on radio. When they took the 3 points it crossed my mind if they should of or not but thought fair enough.
Then with 6 mins remaining(which means less than 5 by the time the penalty is kicked and kickoff resumed) I really cringed at the idea.
Here's what you need to win taking 3 points:
1. The penalty needs to be kicked.
2. No more points can afford to be conceded which is what happened the first time.
3. You need to go from deep in your territory and get the ball downfield quite some distance.
4. Another penalty needs to be awarded.
5. Again the penalty needs to be kicked.
Too much required with such limited time remaining.
Of course hindsight is a wonderful thing and there is no answer as to what is right or wrong, and looking at it later is always easy I suppose.
But the more you think about it, kicking to the corner and scoring a try seems so much simpler than requiring a handful of results to go your way
in such a short space of time.