There was a football game in 1968 between the university teams of Harvard and Yale, with the old rivals having arrived at the contest undefeated on their seasons. Harvard scored 16 points in the last minute to come back and pull off a miracle tie, which led the bright young minds at the school’s student newspaper to devise the famed headline: “Harvard Beats Yale 29-29”.

Ties inspire weird feelings. Even when the score is symmetrical, the game usually is not, something which Manly coach Geoff Toovey was quick to note in his team’s 10-10 draw against the Melbourne Storm. Toovey was incensed, feeling his team had been better. But at the same time, he expressed his opinion that a drawn game at the end of 80 minutes was preferable to duelling field-goal attempts, or players exerting themselves over the edge. “It’s a gladiatorial sport, I know, but we’ve got to look after our players,” he said.

One wonders if the Romans had to debate how to settle draws in the Colosseum (the lions, you’d think, figured that out for them). In any case, one of the reasons that fans follow their sports is that they provide a quick and clear resolution so often lacking from the rest of life. What’s interesting is how, as professional sports have become consumer-driven, the methods of breaking deadlocks create ever greater dissatisfaction. Golden points, penalty shoot-outs, no tie-break in the fifth set, extra innings, the 18-hole Monday play-off, the grand final replay – the debate around what constitutes a fair-versus-practical resolution to a tight contest inspires mixed feelings. Kind of the way you feel after a tie.