News 18th man??

[Basil Brush]

After the games this weekend, I am thinking we need an 18th man as a sub.

However, whoever the 18th man replaces can not play the next week.

All thoughts welcome.

 

[MilkShark]

HIA due to foul play means the person who gives the penalty, also stays off the field

 

[This Year?]

I'm with it. Faster game, more time in play = more injuries.

Against the 18th man not playing next week but.

 

[Bazal]

Yes to 18th man

No to missing the next week.

 

[lockyno1]

Would be abused like nothing before. Unless it’s an independent medical officer signing off on the replacement that could work

 

[Basil Brush]

Yes to 18th man

No to missing the next week.

The player subbed out needs a medical exception to play next week?

 

[Basil Brush]

Would be abused like nothing before. Unless it’s an independent medical officer signing off on the replacement that could work

See my reply below your post.

 

[Bazal]

The player subbed out needs a medical exception to play next week?

I don't think they should be barred from playing at all if they pass the protocols, for eg.

I think the sub should be triggered by numbers of fit players available. IE if there's one player down, tough luck, that's the NRL. But maybe if you lose two you can trigger the sub. Especially in the case of two HIAs for a freak accident, like we saw with the Raiders today.

Plenty of teams win games with three fit benchies. What I think we want to avoid is situations like today where the Raiders had one, or the Sharks had none.

 

[Sphagnum]

Just an extra bloke for Craig bellamy’s men to try and maim

 

[Basil Brush]

I don't think they should be barred from playing at all if they pass the protocols, for eg.

I think the sub should be triggered by numbers of fit players available. IE if there's one player down, tough luck, that's the NRL. But maybe if you lose two you can trigger the sub. Especially in the case of two HIAs for a freak accident, like we saw with the Raiders today.

Plenty of teams win games with three fit benchies. What I think we want to avoid is situations like today where the Raiders had one, or the Sharks had none.

Yes today was a great example.

Raiders and sharks.

We need to get serious regarding concussion.

 

[AJB1102]

HIA used to be a piss-take to skirt interchange restrictions with majority of HIA'd players returning. Now it seems rare to come back on after HIA so yeah, lose 2 to HIA (any other injury is tough luck) to unlock an 18th man.

 

[bileduct]

How would this work though? How many dudes do you need to lose before you unlock the 18th dude? Does it only apply to dudes who suffer HIAs or all game ending injuries?

Maybe just increase the interchange bench to 5 or 6 players that can all be used at any time but still keep the number of interchanges the same, or even reduce to 6.

You can't both speed up the game and be strict about head knocks without addressing the considerable disadvantage teams end up in when players who don't pass HIAs can't return to the field. It completely f**ked over two teams on the same day.

 

[Hello, I'm The Doctor]

I reckon they should permanently expand the bench to 6...

the 4 man bench was only established because of the unlimited interchanges. Now we are down to 8 changes per game, a bigger bench is not an advantage.

But it will stop teams from losing their whole bench to injury.

 

[Eelementary]

I think we should explore having a 19th man; that way, you can cover for a loss in the backs, and the forwards.

It would suck if you had a situation like Cronulla's from last night, and you needed to replace two backs, and two forwards, and only had a prop as your 18th man.

The NRL should allow a team to delve into their extended named squad under such scenarios.

 

[Bring back John Fifita]

I’ve been calling for a 6 man bench, same number of interchanges. For cases like the sharks / raiders etc.

I’m more convinced it’s needed this season with new rules, faster game etc.

We’ll see more trouncings later in matches like yesterday unless there’s more men on the bench.

 

[Pete Cash]

In our game Kris passed his initial HIA but the doctor was unsure about it after a second thought

The result of this was Scott had to play 70 minutes with a broken rib. This is probably not great for player welfare

Why not extend the bench to 6 but keep the amount of subs the same ?

 

[parrawentyfan]

Was just about to post the same thing! 6 man bench instead of 4. A couple of extra players without the hassle of managing the medical rules.

 

[franklin2323]

Would be abused like nothing before. Unless it’s an independent medical officer signing off on the replacement that could work

You would just do something like after 2 failed HIA's. one is ok to cover 2 makes the game as good as over

 

[soc123_au]

I like the idea of the 18th & 19th man. I would make them someone that had played reserve grade in the previous game. The logistics of that would be a problem the way things are now though.

 

[franklin2323]

How would this work though? How many dudes do you need to lose before you unlock the 18th dude? Does it only apply to dudes who suffer HIAs or all game ending injuries?

Maybe just increase the interchange bench to 5 or 6 players that can all be used at any time but still keep the number of interchanges the same, or even reduce to 6.

You can't both speed up the game and be strict about head knocks without addressing the considerable disadvantage teams end up in when players who don't pass HIAs can't return to the field. It completely f**ked over two teams on the same day.

In NSW Cup. The 18th man is ready to go but only goes onto the bench once someone is out due to HIA