I keep reading people saying how the new interchange laws will make a player like Junior less valuable but I don't think that's going to be the case at all.
To my mind, the changes have the biggest impact on your edge second rowers. Edge second-rowers that can play eighty minutes are going to be immensely valuable. With Manu, Scott and Edwards we have players who I reckon will be able to play eighty-minutes and I think that's where all the impact in your rotation is going to be.
I can't see prop rotations changing at all. The default prop rotation will still be four props rotating on 20 and 60 minute marks. No matter what you do with your props your still going to want to have them playing two stints and they're simply isn't a more efficient way of doing it unless you can get a prop through an entire half of football and that's basically unheard of.
I've been mucking around with rotations, and the interesting thing for us will be how if we go two hookers and how we use then. Arthur has previously shown a liking for finishing a game with both Peats and De Gois and I think the reduced interchange makes that an even better model because you want as much energy as possible at the end of the match.
I'm really looking forward to the trials to see how teams respond to the interchange changes.
Replies
Except IDG is not as zippy as he used to be - for taking advantage of a tired opposition
"The default prop rotation will still be four props rotating on 20 and 60 minute marks."
That hasn't been the default rotation for about ten years now. Since the line between props and locks became well and truly blurred, you often see a vast difference between the minutes played by the various middle forwards - whether they are considered 'props' or 'locks' by the fans and commentators.
I agree with Phil, the props rotation will not change. The lock and back rowers will be the ones playing more minutes.
I am looking forward to half a dozen interchanges only and about time.
Foran et al will thrive on it.
With two halves whose strengths are their running games, I think we will see a lot of points scored at the end of halves.
Mate of course everyone will be playing the same amount of minutes - there are still 13 x 80 = 1040 player minutes to be spread amongst 17 players. That means every player will still get an average of about 61 minutes each. Considering 1-7 will all probably still play 80 minutes, that means the six starting forwards plus the four on the bench will share 6 x 80 = 480 minutes, that means those ten guys will play an average of 48 minutes each.
The point is that no team uses 4 x 40 minute props any more, nor is there any clear distinction between the prop rotation and any rotation of the players considered to be locks - every team starts with three middle forwards, with another two to four on the bench. The number of minutes they play has little to do with the number on their back (e.g. Tolman, Graham and Klemmer all play longer minutes than Eastwood and Kasiano at the Bulldogs, and Martin Taupau plays less minutes than some of the 'props' in the 17) and at most stages of the game the three forwards in the middle with the hooker could be any mix of 'props' or locks.
Pou, that's an even bigger generalisation than I've made. I would still absolutely argue that the most common rotation is like-for-like swap of the front four. There are still traditional locks littered throughout the competition. Hinchcliffe. Watmough, Taumalolo, Graham, Houston, Mannering, etc. None of these guys are hit up the middle types and you still want two big bodies taking those middle hit-ups. What's changed in recent years are your best props have gotten fitter and they're playing a lot more minutes that the bench props. If you can get a thirty and 25 minute stint from your best prop who might be 50 per cent more effective than your bench props, then its stupid to give as many minutes to a lesser prop.
In fact, I'd argue that the move to prop-like locks has been shifting back again in recent years and with the interchange reduction that will be even more so the case.
I'm not saying there's no more traditional locks (though I call Taumalolo as much a prop as a lock) but rather that a lot of them are wearing jersey 8 or 10 these days.
As I see it what separates a genuine prop from the other middle forwards (or 'locks') is how often he carries the ball. Due to their size, front rowers are generally liabilities in defence. They are in the team because they are the best at carrying the ball into a set defensive line, and every team needs someone to charge into the defence when there has been no quick play-the-ball setting them up.
So while a smaller 'lock' is generally a better defender (due to better endurance, mobility and one-on-one tackling), you need a genuine big man on the field for your attack. Therefore the props, being there to carry the ball, will be the ones running it most frequently while they are on the field. The locks are there for defence and whatever other attacking roles they might play (decoy runs, playmaking, etc).
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next