interchange rules need interchanging

[Raidersrawesome]

i might sound like Gould here but here it goes. we need to modify the rules instead of the current 4 replacements for 12 changes , it just takes a bit out of the game IMO. I suggest we still have 4 replacements but 2 of them are permanent , once on they stay on for that player , cant be changed again , the other 2 can be interchanged for a set amount of times , say 8 times. thoughts?

 

[broncos_are_the_best]

great idea

 

[Coaster]

I think it is a must, the game is so sanitised atm we are killing it.

We need nutrition to once again be a deciding factor to players and teams.

These guys are super fit, and some are only playing in 10 minute spurts, there is no good reason for that.

 

[phonetic]

Since when has everyone decided we need to tinker with the interchange rules? Since Mat Johns decided so? Geezus.

 

[Mr Saab]

Leave it as it is.
12-4 is fine.

 

[Papa_smurf]

nah swap 'em 'round. 12 interchange players with 4 changes allowed 2 b made.


ffs if matt johns told u 2 run a ship on2 the beach at newcastle would u?

 

[Chachi]

I think it is a must, the game is so sanitised atm we are killing it.

We need nutrition to once again be a deciding factor to players and teams.

These guys are super fit, and some are only playing in 10 minute spurts, there is no good reason for that.

I'm thinking you mean attrition - and if so, I agree.

 

[Mr Saab]

We need nutrition to once again be a deciding factor to players and teams.

Yeah i agree. Keep Riddell, Hannant and Weyman away from McDonalds

 

[nadera78]

It's funny seeing you guys talking about this, as it was you Aussies that forced the game to move to 12 changes from 4 players. If you remember everyone else was still using a limited number of subs when you guys swicthed to unlimited changes, which allowed monsters to roam around the field for 5 minutes killing the little halves, and then have a breather for 15 minutes. You even made GB play an international series with unlimited subs when we had never used that system before.

With everyone else wanting a return to limits the compromise was 12 changes from 4 players.

For what it's worth, I'd adjust it to 8 changes from 4 players. Keep it nice and simple, and therefore easier to manage.