Interchange to stay at 8 for now

[T-Boon]

More related to the issue of momentum in a game as the article posted above talks about: how about the team that scores then has to do the kick off? Give the other mob first crack of the sav to return serve

BOOM.

 

[Captain Apollo]

Well it looks like it will be staying where it is for the foreseeable future -

https://www.nrl.com/news/2019/06/18/why-the-nrl-kept-interchange-at-eight/

 

[ram raid]

I have to disagree with Kenty on this one.

With the amount of injuries in NRL today teams could run out of players.

And as said, the HIA will become even more of a rort than it is.

 

[typicalfan]

Should be six interchange plus 2 more when the player goes off can't come back on. Can be tactical or used for injuries.

 

[Vee]

Pull the levers again. Lop another 5 seconds off each. Repeat until the time wasting stops.

 

[ram raid]

Getting rid of scrums would put some fatigue back in the game.

 

[MilkShark]

Kent on NRL 360 last night said the RLPA met with 16 of the games leading players, they were asked if they wanted it decreased to 6, the players did not want this. The reasons for it are:

1. the smaller players (halves) would feel too much pressure to perform later in the halves
2. they (smaller players, halves) like to have big players in the game still for protection
3. decreasing interchange would bring fatigue which would lead to lazy tackles resulting in injuries to the ball runners
4. the stats given in the link by the above poster

Kent then said he believes there are hidden agendas behind both the players and coaches for not wanting a decreased interchange:

Players agenda: the real reason the players don't want the interchange decreased is because they can play for many more years with 8 man interchange, extending their careers and thus earning alot more money

Coaches agenda: they don't want tired players on the field because tired players means mistakes

Now I can't stand Kent, but for years now I have been a strong believer in decreasing the interchange so I think he is spot on with his assessment here.

 

[t-ba]

Can't blame the players for wanting to prolong their careers to be fair...

 

[MilkShark]

Can't blame the players for wanting to prolong their careers to be fair...

Sure, but the only reason these guys make that kind of money is because the game is entertaining, well it used to be.

I watch one game a week now, I used to watch a few, the game is not the spectacle it once was.

 

[Diesel]

Get rid of the wrestling. They cracked down on the slowing the ruck for the first 6 rounds last year until the usual complainers moaned about the amount of penalties in each game and the powers that be, caved.
The sooner wrestling is gone, the better

 

[Western_Eel]

every one is obsessed with reducing the interchange to open the game up, why dont they just reduce the number of players to 12 on the field?

 

[M2D2]

Changing it to 6 is utter stupidity. It wont 'open games up', it will ensure blowouts.
10 was too much. 8 is the perfect amount.

 

[MilkShark]

Changing it to 6 is utter stupidity. It wont 'open games up', it will ensure blowouts.
10 was too much. 8 is the perfect amount.

Its about more than opening games up

 

[M2D2]

Its about more than opening games up

The idea that dropping the interchange to 6 will stop or lessen the wrestle is laughable, so if thats your go to.
Kent can f**k off.

 

[MilkShark]

The idea that dropping the interchange to 6 will stop or lessen the wrestle is laughable, so if thats your go to.
Kent can f**k off.

?

It's about bringing the smaller talented players back

 

[LineBall]

The idea that dropping the interchange to 6 will stop or lessen the wrestle is laughable, so if thats your go to.
Kent can f**k off.

Changing the 10 metres back to 5 metres would more likely get rid of the wrestle. Teams would have their line set quicker and have no excuse to delay the play-the-ball.

If that ever happened (and it won't), then I would seriously look at reducing the interchange further.

 

[Dragonwest]

The idea that dropping the interchange to 6 will stop or lessen the wrestle is laughable, so if thats your go to.
Kent can f**k off.

Fatigue leads to less 3rd & 4th men being able entering the tackle = less wrestling = faster play the balls = more fatigue and so on.

Only way to combat this would be train for smaller endurance athletes over power athletes. Big men with motors and hardened locks that play above their weight will become priceless like the late 80's and 90's.

Bring it back to 6. Rugby League is Organised Chaos, coaches want it as organised a possible, the fan wants the game as open and chaotic as possible.

 

[Captain Apollo]

People seem to forget about what happened during the 1994 ARL finals series, specifically the Canberra v Norths game. A combination of send offs and injuries saw Norths run out of interchanges well before fulltime when they picked up another injury. Norths tried to put on a 7th interchange, which of corse didn't happen. However it was this incident that lead to the push to increase the interchange.

 

[lockyno1]

My personal view is it should be once you are off you are off. I’d limit it to 5 interchanges notnincluding HIA assessments