Drop goal points value

would it not be more fair if a drop goal should be worth 2 points. would it not be more fair to align the points to a conversion ????

It would - I'm all for kicks counting less. Rugby is a team game, kicking for goal is not

 valid point, although South Africa have traditionally been the best exponents of the drop ball game at international level, and this would negate one of our strenghts. Stranky sealed the 95 World Cup with a drop goal, Jannie Debeer kicked England out of the 99 world cup with 4 drops in the semi, Frans Steyn got 2 drops at the end of a game in the trinations to beat an Australian team that we were going to lose on the day to, along with other instances where we have won that I do not recall. Most of the records from drop goals are held by South Africa. Perhaps it shoud just be worth 2 in the curry cup

Sharkbok

They have already changed the kick point system in the Varsity Cup series and it works like a dream.   I am all for it - all kicks at goal should count not more than 2 points maximum.

A bit of ancient rugby history.   In the early years of rugby a try counted 1 point - that was a hangover from soccer.    All kicks counted 3 points.   That system changed slowly and eventually by the 1930's tries counted 3 points and try conversions were reduced in value to 2 points.   Hence the name try for that component of the game.

It was only lately that the value of tries was increased to 4 points and ultimately 5 points.   Took nearly a century to get to that point.   I would hope that it does not take another century to reduce the point value of all kicks at goal to two points.

SA would gain massively by that - we would have to start playing 15 man rugby and not the donkey kicking game preferred by our present coaches.   So don't hold your breath on that one - our rugby administrtion would oppose such a move with all their strength.   The Varisty Cup  is one thing - any other series is a completely different kettle of fish.   

 Mike, one one the reasons that a penalty is not reduced to 2 points is because the likes of Mccaw would be even worse. If penalties became 2 points it would make more sense to kill the best attacking movements and make more obstructions. It has been talked about making the conversion worth 3 points which could be a better option than reducing the penalty to 2. In South Africa as was noted in the Curry Cup final, we have less professional cheats. The "fetcher" role number 6, does not exist that much in South Africa as a result. If the penalty became 2 points, we could see many more of these players come about. Perhaps it would be better to penalize repeat offenders with more time of the field instead of points, this is another topic altogether. With the video ref taking more of an active role, repeat offenders who kill the ball can be penalized, teams fined etc- in this way the penalty could be reduced to 2 points. 

i would maybe keep the penality at 3 points due to the fact that we dont really want more infringements as that will cause play to be more stop and startish but making a drop goal lesser to 2 points might hell encourage more attacking play.

@mike on your remarks of how the points structure came about over the years is spot on as always