5 man interchange

It looks like the NRL is considering allowing teams 5 players on the interchange bench but they would only be allowed to use 4 in the game. This will allow for early injuries during games.

I think it's a good idea as teams often get caught out with an early injury - what do you think?

You need to be a member of 1Eyed Eel to add comments!

Join 1Eyed Eel

Votes: 0
Email me when people reply –

Replies

  • I like it personally id like to revisit what they did on 2000 when the season started earlier because of the Olympics.
    But modify it
    3 interchange players 6 interchanges
    2 allocated reserves who ever they replace is off for good the reserve can become a real tactical ploy
  • Could mean a player not getting game time for a few weeks. Will be hard to juggle as if have back on bench and don't require him for 3 weeks where does he get his game time. Will rules allow for player to back up and play ISP and NRL same week?
  • I’ve called for this for a number of years. Having the extra man will allow teams to carry a specialist playmaker on the bench, without having to use them.

    Common sense idea

  • I believe its a good idea but it's flirting with danger because it's difficult to police. How do we really know someone is injured, they would need approval from the teams head doctor.
    • Doesn’t matter, because they’ll only be able to use 4 players off the bench.

      • Won't that disadvantage one side, if you have to use your backup playmaker and the opposition doesn't then they have 4 fresh forwards to your 3. I also think a coach may elect to carry a 5th forward then abuse the HIA, I'd like to see a reduction in interchanges first.

        • This reply was deleted.
          • Most clubs carry a utility player anyway, do we end up with a 6th man in case we get injuries to 2 playmakers? Bad luck is bad luck, I'd like to think at the end of a game, season or career the good and bad calls even themselves out. Adding more fresh players into the fray is not the answer IMHO.

  • I think they only have 3 fresh players on the bench and have 2 players who play in the lower grade on the bench

  • Back in the days of real footy teams had 2 reserves.

    Reserves only came on when injury forced a player from the field for the remainder of the match.

    SO - to address the game time scenario, back in the day reserves could play in another team if not used.

    Sometimes we even played in two teams over a weekend. Ie. was used from the reserves and played in another team.

    If we go back to having a designated reserve, coaches would have to consider a utility player imo.

    At what stage does the reserve come on. Is he there to replace injured player regardless of when (during the game) a player gets carted off?

    I can see a certain amount of merit in the idea if developed and used properly.

    I can also see a player having a bad day getting injured and being replaced by a better(?) player.

    The old Ice pack on the nose would do it.

    OH look - miraculous recovery and can play next week.

    • It's the same system that soccer uses. In the EPL teams can name 7 reserves but can only use 3 of them, the manager makes those decisions for injuries and tactically based on how the game is going.

      Under this system a coach has greater flexibility in the bench players he picks, but more importantly he can select a specialist back up playmaker without having to necessarily use him. If you've got a young half you want to get some minutes into, this is a great way to do that without the risk of playing a young guy for the whole game.

This reply was deleted.

More stuff to read

Slugg replied to Poppa's discussion Players and Values and Judgements to make
"I think the club  is doing the right thing not paying 600 k to  800k for a good first grade player that can boost our chances of winning comp when they can sign 3 or 4 players for the same money that may boost our chances of winning a reserve grade…"
1 minute ago
Coryn Hughes replied to Cʜɪᴇғ -'s discussion Big News On Lomax
"Parra just need to stick to there process and add when we need to.
Lomax has all the potential which to this time is unrealised and that's before talking about money.
Blaize Sanders Penisini AMS you really want to see if these guys are something and…"
7 minutes ago
Graham polkinghorne replied to Cʜɪᴇғ -'s discussion Big News On Lomax
" We needed lomax before Talagi came on the scene. If a crystal ball would show us Blaize turns out to be an excellent centre, we would not be chasing Lomax.
Would Blaize hang around for 2 seasons to cement a FG spot?
Lomax would be worth every penny…"
18 minutes ago
Seth hardy replied to Avon Barksdale's discussion NRL admits bunker got it wrong on roosters obstruction call
"I said in a previous post that common sense has gone out the window with refereeing  today. There  all basically clones to a system. In other words they are as dumb as dog shit. "
22 minutes ago
More…