News 18th man??

[nick87]

18th man is just how long is a piece of string rule. Once teams start exploiting it there will be talk of a 19th man.

but what is the exploitation we are fearing?
Bringing in a fresh player who isn’t good enough to be in the top 17?
I mean you can’t be suggesting coaches would purposely not play one of their best players on the off chance they can bring him on with a HIA?

Honestly, in real terms, what are they actually going do to exploit this or anything that isn’t already being done right now?

 

[typicalfan]

but what is the exploitation we are fearing?
Bringing in a fresh player who isn’t good enough to be in the top 17?
I mean you can’t be suggesting coaches would purposely not play one of their best players on the off chance they can bring him on with a HIA?

Honestly, in real terms, what are they actually going do to exploit this or anything that isn’t already being done right now?

I guess some teams 18th man will be better than others, I am just saying we could get to the point where using the 18th man becomes common and then suddenly the 18th man gets concussed or fouled and then the answer to that would be a 19th man using the same logic as having 18. As you say, maybe increasing the size of the bench to 6 would avoid this altogether.

 

[Danish]

but what is the exploitation we are fearing?
Bringing in a fresh player who isn’t good enough to be in the top 17?
I mean you can’t be suggesting coaches would purposely not play one of their best players on the off chance they can bring him on with a HIA?

Honestly, in real terms, what are they actually going do to exploit this or anything that isn’t already being done right now?

coaches at present have to choose whether or not to carry 3 forwards + utility on the bench, or 4 forwards. 4 forwards would be preferable to a lot of teams but for having to protect against an injury to the backline. Players 17-19 in most squads are pretty well matched in terms of ability, it’s more the coaches game plan that governs who gets that last spot.

So coaches would exploit the 18th man to be their backline utility since they’d only be using him to protect against injury anyway, and then feel confident they can have an extra middle forward in their rotation.

this assumes that the coach exploiting the rule will have their medical staff rule out any injured player as an HIA regardless of head knock in order to activate the 18th man.

 

[MugaB]

but what is the exploitation we are fearing?
Bringing in a fresh player who isn’t good enough to be in the top 17?
I mean you can’t be suggesting coaches would purposely not play one of their best players on the off chance they can bring him on with a HIA?

Honestly, in real terms, what are they actually going do to exploit this or anything that isn’t already being done right now?

Not sure if an 18th man is really nessesary, seriously if you cannot compete with 17, whats 18 gonna do?
Coaches are dumb if they aren't carrying a reserve that can atleast cover a back, and most reserve 2nd rowers can slot into centres, and push wingers around

 

[AnonymousLurker]

Not sure if an 18th man is really nessesary, seriously if you cannot compete with 17, whats 18 gonna do?
Coaches are dumb if they aren't carrying a reserve that can atleast cover a back, and most reserve 2nd rowers can slot into centres, and push wingers around

Like sticky ?

 

[Bazal]

Not sure if an 18th man is really nessesary, seriously if you cannot compete with 17, whats 18 gonna do?
Coaches are dumb if they aren't carrying a reserve that can atleast cover a back, and most reserve 2nd rowers can slot into centres, and push wingers around

But the argument isn't about not being able to compete with 17?

It's about not being able to compete with 13 against 17 cos you lose three or four to injury...

 

[MugaB]

But the argument isn't about not being able to compete with 17?

It's about not being able to compete with 13 against 17 cos you lose three or four to injury...

But thats what reserves are for, not to give the 20min stint Props a break, every player should be an 80min player, the way the games going, its going to be a lot harder to carry 4 forwards, not if they cant do at least 40mins work off the bench... thats how it should be

 

[Bazal]

But thats what reserves are for, not to give the 20min stint Props a break, every player should be an 80min player, the way the games going, its going to be a lot harder to carry 4 forwards, not if they cant do at least 40mins work off the bench... thats how it should be

But the point of an 18th man is either that all the reserves are injured and cannot play, or that you have cover (within the existing interchange count and therefore taking up interchanges) for other positions.

I genuinely don't see the issue.