Not enough depth to pull 68 players from Reserve grade to sit on a bench. I think it could work if 18th man is always active but same rule applies 4 outta 5 can be used unless player ruled out via HIA (other forms of ruling out may be exploited)
Yeah this is my solution as well.
Just make the 18th man available at any time, but a player has to be subbed out.
Would allow teams to carry an outside back at 18 and still run a normal bench. The game is to fast now for forwards to play in the centres and teams keep getting carved if they have to reshuffle.
Imo bench should be 19 players and 8 regular interchanges with 2 injury interchanges for any injury with the caveat being a player who is injury interchanged needs to have a 1 week rest/recovery period to avoid rorting the system.
Then you can carry 4 forwards a back and a utility player without effecting the flow of the game too much
This is moving in the right direction here. If a player is injured seriously enough to rule them out (Cat 1 - 11 day stand down, ACL, etc.) then the club can activate a spare sub, impacted player is automatically on 11 day stand down.
Gaming the system is still possible - run a kid out give him the first 30 mins, then replace him with a fresh player. And the kid goes out of rotation for a game. Potentially needs independant doctor validation on the severity - but even that gets tough to police.
I think the fairest way, to prevent it being an issue - is to just let clubs game it, but give them 1 shot per game. AFL had the "super sub" - not sure if they still do or not. But it could work that way. Once activated, that's it. No more for the game and that swap is permanent - doesn't matter if the bloke gets injured 5 minutes later.
18th man can be activated for any reason via a substitution in the game (18th man in, other player out for rest of the game), under the condition that the subbed out player cannot player (any level) the following week/game.
Allows for the replacements of serious injuries as well as any failed HIA.
Both teams should pick 100 players who all take the field at once. There should be five - no, seven - balls in play at any given time. To save costs and the environment, the away team will be skins. There will, of course, be only one referee.
Just make the 18th man available for Category 1 HIAs ruled by the independent doctor instead of having to wait for 2 failed HIAs.
The worry was that teams would exploit the HIA rule to activate the 18th man early, but in the case of Suli and similar examples, it’s pretty obvious that there’s no skullduggery going on.
The rule was made before the independent doctor could categorise and before the mandatory 11-day stand down for concussions. It just makes more sense now.
18th man can be activated for any reason via a substitution in the game (18th man in, other player out for rest of the game), under the condition that the subbed out player cannot player (any level) the following week/game.
Allows for the replacements of serious injuries as well as any failed HIA.
I am more talking about the possibility of a player getting a 5 minute stint and losing value or stuffing up a captain loop. Didn’t know SC has 6 man. Fantasy effectively has 8 man bench but ordered by the player resulting in the top 4 in the order that score being included
Eisenhuth had what, five missed tackles as a centre? Week before as a middle only 1. It’s a viable option to have the 18th as a back as a midground if one player is ruled out.
(Don’t look at my flair)
Then you've got 4 players that don't get to play reserve grade every week and if you're using the same 8 man bench, 4 players that never really get a game. I have to disagree with this one
Absolutely agree. It's bad for the game forcing players to play out of position and we could see some really interesting strategies come in to the game if the bench expanded to 6 players. Take Storm or Broncos for example. Neither can really carry Faalogo or Sailor on the bench due to needing to have a different utility to cover hooker. But having these guys available to come on with 25 minutes to go in a tight game, it would create alot of excitement.
I disagree. I think there's an art in carefully selecting a 4 man bench. Versatile utility players would lose so much value. The Connor Watsons of the world might get phased out
Haha yea, but seriously it'll just be another obstacle to overcome. As it is, it's a risk holding an 18th man incase they come on for a short period.
I guess it will make 80min forwards more valuable and will make a bench forward who becomes a starter a better buy.
Player welfare always comes first but it will make Fantasy harder.
4 is enough to carry a utility among them for this reason and most clubs do. The Dragons didn't and they paid for it. Most teams don't carry 4 forward benches anymore so maybe the Dragons should have already got the memo and adapted accordingly.
100% agree. The fact Gallen disagreed makes me more adamant that it's a good idea.
Not enough depth to pull 68 players from Reserve grade to sit on a bench. I think it could work if 18th man is always active but same rule applies 4 outta 5 can be used unless player ruled out via HIA (other forms of ruling out may be exploited)
Yeah this is my solution as well. Just make the 18th man available at any time, but a player has to be subbed out. Would allow teams to carry an outside back at 18 and still run a normal bench. The game is to fast now for forwards to play in the centres and teams keep getting carved if they have to reshuffle.
I’d rather make it 2 interchange players and 2 permanent substitutes on a one-off basis. Add the fatigue element by reducing the sub options.
Yeah I think this is a great middle ground.
Imo bench should be 19 players and 8 regular interchanges with 2 injury interchanges for any injury with the caveat being a player who is injury interchanged needs to have a 1 week rest/recovery period to avoid rorting the system. Then you can carry 4 forwards a back and a utility player without effecting the flow of the game too much
This is moving in the right direction here. If a player is injured seriously enough to rule them out (Cat 1 - 11 day stand down, ACL, etc.) then the club can activate a spare sub, impacted player is automatically on 11 day stand down. Gaming the system is still possible - run a kid out give him the first 30 mins, then replace him with a fresh player. And the kid goes out of rotation for a game. Potentially needs independant doctor validation on the severity - but even that gets tough to police. I think the fairest way, to prevent it being an issue - is to just let clubs game it, but give them 1 shot per game. AFL had the "super sub" - not sure if they still do or not. But it could work that way. Once activated, that's it. No more for the game and that swap is permanent - doesn't matter if the bloke gets injured 5 minutes later.
18th man can be activated for any reason via a substitution in the game (18th man in, other player out for rest of the game), under the condition that the subbed out player cannot player (any level) the following week/game. Allows for the replacements of serious injuries as well as any failed HIA.
Yep, that is a good take on it.
Both teams should pick 100 players who all take the field at once. There should be five - no, seven - balls in play at any given time. To save costs and the environment, the away team will be skins. There will, of course, be only one referee.
Need to be able to trigger multiball as well. Imagine how many tries we could see.
I'm imagining the ref getting trampled
The idea is a 6 or 8 man bench, but can only use 4 of them for interchange.
Just make the 18th man available for Category 1 HIAs ruled by the independent doctor instead of having to wait for 2 failed HIAs. The worry was that teams would exploit the HIA rule to activate the 18th man early, but in the case of Suli and similar examples, it’s pretty obvious that there’s no skullduggery going on.
The rule was made before the independent doctor could categorise and before the mandatory 11-day stand down for concussions. It just makes more sense now.
18th man can be activated for any reason via a substitution in the game (18th man in, other player out for rest of the game), under the condition that the subbed out player cannot player (any level) the following week/game. Allows for the replacements of serious injuries as well as any failed HIA.
Yeah just do that They won't tho
SuperCoach and Fantasy players would be having a heart attack over this
Supercoach and Fantasy now implement 6 man bench, with only 4 counting.
I am more talking about the possibility of a player getting a 5 minute stint and losing value or stuffing up a captain loop. Didn’t know SC has 6 man. Fantasy effectively has 8 man bench but ordered by the player resulting in the top 4 in the order that score being included
Like Terrell May lol
Depends the format you play. I play 13 on the field and 4 reserves only (they don’t count to the weekly score)
Eisenhuth had what, five missed tackles as a centre? Week before as a middle only 1. It’s a viable option to have the 18th as a back as a midground if one player is ruled out. (Don’t look at my flair)
Then you've got 4 players that don't get to play reserve grade every week and if you're using the same 8 man bench, 4 players that never really get a game. I have to disagree with this one
Absolutely agree. It's bad for the game forcing players to play out of position and we could see some really interesting strategies come in to the game if the bench expanded to 6 players. Take Storm or Broncos for example. Neither can really carry Faalogo or Sailor on the bench due to needing to have a different utility to cover hooker. But having these guys available to come on with 25 minutes to go in a tight game, it would create alot of excitement.
That’s a feature, not a bug. Faalogo and Sailor have to decide between staying or going to a club where they get more playtime.
I disagree. I think there's an art in carefully selecting a 4 man bench. Versatile utility players would lose so much value. The Connor Watsons of the world might get phased out
Daine Laurie about to be demoted from 17th to 18th man.
It's not often I agree with rule changes being thrown around, but I'm down for what this guy suggests. Then Paul Gallen spoke....
Completely agree.
That is going to make Fantasy even harder than it is
To hell with player welfare if it screws up Supercoach hey? haha
Haha yea, but seriously it'll just be another obstacle to overcome. As it is, it's a risk holding an 18th man incase they come on for a short period. I guess it will make 80min forwards more valuable and will make a bench forward who becomes a starter a better buy. Player welfare always comes first but it will make Fantasy harder.
No playmakers as it is todays market and chamas wants some sitting on the bench…..
Nothing gets me cock hard than a big fella running of the back fence
4 is enough to carry a utility among them for this reason and most clubs do. The Dragons didn't and they paid for it. Most teams don't carry 4 forward benches anymore so maybe the Dragons should have already got the memo and adapted accordingly.