Substitution Bench - Thoughts
-
@mariner4life said in Rugby World Cup news:
@chimoaus said in Rugby World Cup news:
I see a few people are wondering if WR should implement rules on subs
as far as i can see, the only people calling for that are that whiny bitch Matt Williams
A move to limit the number of subs i can throw my weight behind, but telling a team under the current structure who they have on the bench is ridiculous. Carry 8 forwards if you want. run that risk.
Why do they currently need 8 subs do you think? I agree that each team should be able to choose the subs they want.
I'm just thinking other codes, how many subs do they have usually? AFL who have 18 players and 4 interchange. I realise its not as contact heavy but they get plenty of injuries also.
-
@mariner4life ^^^^this
8 on the bench and 4-5 changes, coach will actually have to make calls on changes to make depending on how the game is going rather than largely all pre determined
-
@mariner4life Only downside to this is the players who are not used, I remember I got selected for a rep side when I was 13, I was so stoked to be picked. We played 4 games, family came, very proud moment etc. I ended up being one of the 4 reserves when reserves only came on for injury. I played a total of maybe 20 minutes, the other 300 minutes was standing in the cold with all the gear on waiting for an injury.
-
@chimoaus that cant be something we seriously take into consideration, if anything it might make us actually start some of these guys more, if we've had to run a prop for 80 mins because we've had injuries elsewhere that used our subs...then he gets a week off and the next guy gets a start
-
sucks to be you. happened to me as well at rep level. If we are avoiding changes to stop hurt feelings then we aren't really governing.
It happens to elite soccer players all the time.
And this rule doesn't have to apply to all levels. Shit some grades have rolling subs. But at the elite level it can be implemented.
-
@mariner4life said in Substitution Bench - Thoughts:
Yes mods, i know this is not the thread, feel free to move.
Ask and ye shall receive. Good thread idea, regardless.
-
I'm way harsher. I think subs bench are for injuries only, with only one from the front row being allowed to be replaced. If you then get an injury in the front row, then if the first injury replacement is cleared (blood / head etc) they can come back, or you go down a man.
At the end of the match if the official deem the team to be gaming the rules, then all of them are suspended.
I fucking hate the bomb squad, hate it. It elevates rugby's main problem (size) to the next level.
Don't have a problem with the Saffa's for it, they are playing within the rules. But I hate it. It's pretty much so why I'm happy MR jnr doesn't like playing rugby.
-
@MajorRage said in Substitution Bench - Thoughts:
I'm way harsher. I think subs bench are for injuries only, with only one from the front row being allowed to be replaced. If you then get an injury in the front row, then if the first injury replacement is cleared (blood / head etc) they can come back, or you go down a man.
At the end of the match if the official deem the team to be gaming the rules, then all of them are suspended.
I fucking hate the bomb squad, hate it. It elevates rugby's main problem (size) to the next level.
Don't have a problem with the Saffa's for it, they are playing within the rules. But I hate it. It's pretty much so why I'm happy MR jnr doesn't like playing rugby.
I think it should be encouraged. De Allende will try a scissors move with Am and they’ll collide and smash their kneecaps in…..
The Boks, having selected an unprecedented eight man bench of forwards, will have to put on a midfield of Bongi Mbonambi and Ox Nche.
David Havilii will run in a second half hat trick and the ABs will win comfortably.
-
@mariner4life said in Substitution Bench - Thoughts:
Every code i follow has actively worked to reduce the impact of the interchange. AFL has imposed limits. The NRL decreased the number of changes.
I totally get the 8 on the bench in rugby though. Scrums need to be a part of the game, and you can't lose them due to injury. THe problem is they added a substitution for the front row, and made the overall problem worse (look, i know, a surprise that a rugby change had a huge negative impact elsewhere).
I still think you should have 8 on the bench, but you should only be able to use say 5 of them. And if you make 5 changes and then lose a front rower then you play short. Being able to sub, even on a normal 5-3 split, 80% of your biggest players, and one of your loose forwards, and more than half of your team, is absolutely ridiculous.
Yes mods, i know this is not the thread, feel free to move.
I have to say, that I agree with almost every word of this post Mariner. I so would love to see us go back to where aerobic fitness and skill are more important than anerobic fitness and size are the judgement of players abilities! It's supposed to be a game ofr all shapes and sizes.
-
@MajorRage said in Substitution Bench - Thoughts:
I'm way harsher. I think subs bench are for injuries only, with only one from the front row being allowed to be replaced. If you then get an injury in the front row, then if the first injury replacement is cleared (blood / head etc) they can come back, or you go down a man.
At the end of the match if the official deem the team to be gaming the rules, then all of them are suspended.
I fucking hate the bomb squad, hate it. It elevates rugby's main problem (size) to the next level.
Don't have a problem with the Saffa's for it, they are playing within the rules. But I hate it. It's pretty much so why I'm happy MR jnr doesn't like playing rugby.
So uncontested scrums?
-
This discussion keeps on coming back and coming back.
This is from 2016.
Substitutions: The Rule Change World Rugby Needs Most
Substitutions, or rather, reducing them is the rule change the rugby world needs most. World Rugby , the sport's international governing body, currently permits teams to select eight players on the substitutes' bench...
-
@MiketheSnow said in Substitution Bench - Thoughts:
@MajorRage said in Substitution Bench - Thoughts:
I'm way harsher. I think subs bench are for injuries only, with only one from the front row being allowed to be replaced. If you then get an injury in the front row, then if the first injury replacement is cleared (blood / head etc) they can come back, or you go down a man.
At the end of the match if the official deem the team to be gaming the rules, then all of them are suspended.
I fucking hate the bomb squad, hate it. It elevates rugby's main problem (size) to the next level.
Don't have a problem with the Saffa's for it, they are playing within the rules. But I hate it. It's pretty much so why I'm happy MR jnr doesn't like playing rugby.
So uncontested scrums?
No. Sizes should drop so it’s not ridiculously dangerous.
-
@MajorRage said in Substitution Bench - Thoughts:
@MiketheSnow said in Substitution Bench - Thoughts:
@MajorRage said in Substitution Bench - Thoughts:
I'm way harsher. I think subs bench are for injuries only, with only one from the front row being allowed to be replaced. If you then get an injury in the front row, then if the first injury replacement is cleared (blood / head etc) they can come back, or you go down a man.
At the end of the match if the official deem the team to be gaming the rules, then all of them are suspended.
I fucking hate the bomb squad, hate it. It elevates rugby's main problem (size) to the next level.
Don't have a problem with the Saffa's for it, they are playing within the rules. But I hate it. It's pretty much so why I'm happy MR jnr doesn't like playing rugby.
So uncontested scrums?
No. Sizes should drop so it’s not ridiculously dangerous.
In the present climate there's absolutely no way that a contestable scrum will take place without a full complement of specialised front rowers
-
Totally agree. Which I believe is a fundamental issue.
Either that or we are happy with the slow evolution to NFL.
-
I’d vote for sides having 5 replacements with their positions designated, one for each front row position and then a utility forward and a utility back.
I don’t see it happening though.
In lots of countries, Rugby’s main competitor in the entertainment market is NFL so it’s no real surprise to see the game as it chases cash becoming more and more like NFL.
-
@MajorRage said in Substitution Bench - Thoughts:
Totally agree. Which I believe is a fundamental issue.
Either that or we are happy with the slow evolution to NFL.
Pre 1942 American Football when it was double platoon with players playing both offence and defence maybe
The opportunity to speed up the game is there
World Rugby are just glacial when it comes to change
First thing they can do is employ the injury protocol in Association Football
If a player requires medical attention on the field, the game is stopped
Then once they have been attended to they have to leave the field and cannot return until the next stop of play
That's good for 5-10 mins each match for starters
-
I wonder if we will ever see genuine utility types that can play loose forward / wing for example.
Victor Vito type athletes that are trained to cover backline positions
-
@kiwiinmelb said in Substitution Bench - Thoughts:
I wonder if we will ever see genuine utility types that can play loose forward / wing for example.
Victor Vito type athletes that are trained to cover backline positions
Pierre Spies will be plotting a comeback as we speak
-
@kiwiinmelb said in Substitution Bench - Thoughts:
I wonder if we will ever see genuine utility types that can play loose forward / wing for example.
Victor Vito type athletes that are trained to cover backline positions
Ardie?
