That’s the question many are asking after a long-distance, 2-point shot was unveiled during the weekend’s charity match between the Origin Diamonds and the Suncorp Super Netball All-Stars at Qudos Bank Arena.
An entertaining money-earner for bushfire affected communities, the Suncorp Super Shot could be scored from the edge of the circle during the final five minutes of each quarter and saw players give up a spot at the post to be in a position to do their bit for the cause. It was a win, win.
But could the concept play a role in driving the world’s best club Netball competition, Suncorp Super Netball, to even greater heights? Paddy Regester and Renae Smyth debate.
Is it time to add the 2-point shot to Suncorp Super Netball?
RS: They say change is as good as a holiday, but there’s nothing like coming home to your own bed. And we don’t want to be pulling at the thread and unravelling the fabric of the sport has kept us warm for almost 100 years. For something that ain’t broke and doesn’t really need fixing – we sure do like to meddle.
PR: I have to admit, I was very sceptical of the two-point shot coming into the Bushfire Relief Match on Sunday. But there was just something about the way it felt in-stadium that made it feel like it’s inclusion in Super Netball was inevitable. It sounds corny but you could literally feel the crowd hold its collective breath when a shooter loaded one up from the two-point zone. The drama was undeniable, and more drama in sport is always a good thing. I don’t feel like it would have as big an affect on the game as some might think. The risk/reward factor would get worked out pretty quick and the two-point shot would be reserved for those amazing game-on-the-line moments.
How would it even work in Suncorp Super Netball? A five-minute period like the Bushfire Relief Match? Or would it run throughout the entire game?
RS: Let’s be real. Different scoring zones aren’t exactly new territory. Fans can get their extra-point fix at the Fast5 World Series where two and three points wreak havoc on my classic sporting outlook.
PR: The million-dollar question. I just don’t think we could go down the five-minute period route. It just wades into fad territory, with every player turning and shooting from distance at every opportunity. It would have to run throughout the entire match, which I think would see it become more of a tactical thing.
Will it expose the “Under the post” shooters of the game?
RS: Expose yes, it could also see them not really needed at all. The nimble GA’s of the game typically have the knack in lining up for those long bombs so will there be a need for the staunch stature of a GS if we’ll be after those 2-point shots?
A diverse set of skills across the court is what’s really important. There will be times when we need flair, but most of the time we’ll be looking for the reliable option. This is what makes our game as exciting as it is, seeing different athletes with varying skill sets expose match up options and exploit the weakness of the opposition. We may in fact risk stagnating the excitement of the game by having a match focused on 2-point shots and teams made up of the same prototype player.
PR: Not at all! I think the threat of the two-point shot will free up even more room for the under-the-post style shooter, which may be the biggest problem of all! We already see one of the most effective ways of scoring in world netball is one shooter faking a long shot and passing off to her teammate under the post. Imagine how many opportunities the shooting circle will have to pull that play off when both defenders think the shooter is lining up the hoop from two-point range!
Will it be more exciting or is it just going to confuse things?
RS: I’m going to let the stats do the talking here. Thinking of the bushfire match, there were 45 attempts at the 2-point shot, with only 20 actually landing. That’s the disappointment of a missed goal more than half of the time.
I would much rather see the extra play to get the ball to the post and reward the team’s effort in getting it to the circle. It’s all about eliminating risk and hitting the opposition where it really hurts – on the scoreboard. One point is better than no point. Speaking of one point, I’m just going to add that teams on Sunday were able to convert attempts at a 1-point shot 73% of the time. Let’s focus on our strengths.
PR: A wise netball fan once told me that where the most exciting part of sports like football, cricket, basketball, rugby and baseball is the moment where a player achieves the main objective of the sport (kicking a goal, getting a wicket, dunking, hitting a home run, and so on), scoring a goal in netball is often the least exciting part of the game.
A huge interception by the goal keeper which starts a beautiful string of passes and decisive movements from one end of the court to the other to find the goal shooter all alone under the post, who routinely pops the ball in the net.
It’s not a bad thing at all, we still have spectacular things happening all over the court but, save for a Gretel Tippett layup or Shimona Nelson long-ranged buzzer beater, the majority of the goals scored feel a little anti-climactic. What I saw and felt on Sunday had exciting pieces of play, for both teams, in all three thirds of the court.
The Verdict:
RS: Absolutely not. Netball has a story steeped in history and tradition. It’s a timeless classic that's better left untouched.
PR: A week ago, I would have said no way! But after Sunday’s Bushfire Relief Match… I think I’m in! Not just for the excitement I think it will add, but for the extra layer of tactics it offers.
Join the conversation on Facebook.
