18th man from this Thursday in the NRL

[Southerner]

I’m an advocate:

• The 18th man will finally fix the injustice of an offending player continuing in the game whilst the injured player of the opposing team is unable to return.

• A team will no longer be disadvantaged by losing a player to injury due to foul play.

• It will help improve player welfare as players have to cope with the extra workload of losing a player.  

• It’ll help keep the team (with the injured player) stay competitive as they don’t lose a player and therefore should reduce risk of a blowout scoreline. 

• Works as an added deterrent for players to foul as it reduces the benefit of injuring an opposing player. 
 

Discuss.

[Sports Prophet]

As this now includes players out of the game for foul play, I anticipate we will now see referees required to show a bit more guts in using the sin bin or sending players off for fouls play, where otherwise would take the easy option and simply put the player on report
 

I like the rule but it is open to coaches and players to take advantage of it. 

[langpark]

NRL is getting out of control with these constant rule changes. They will need to put the brakes on very soon, they are too reactionary, we seem to be getting a rule.chamge every week now. 

I also read this morning, because there have been some "not so close" scorelines (but hardly blowouts) two weeks in a row now, the NRL is considering taking action. The solution suggested was to bring back the NRL U20 league. If someone can work out the logic here, I'sld be grateful if you could explain it to me. 

[Farmduck]

I read that the average margin in Round 4 was the biggest in 25 years (or something) but we had 4 games where a top 4 serious contender played a probable bottom 4 team.

Souths, Storm, Penrith and Fish racked up big scores against Manly, Dogs, Horsies and Cows. I wasn't surprised.

[Lowdesert]

23 hours ago, Southerner said:

I’m an advocate:

• The 18th man will finally fix the injustice of an offending player continuing in the game whilst the injured player of the opposing team is unable to return.

• A team will no longer be disadvantaged by losing a player to injury due to foul play.

• It will help improve player welfare as players have to cope with the extra workload of losing a player.  

• It’ll help keep the team (with the injured player) stay competitive as they don’t lose a player and therefore should reduce risk of a blowout scoreline. 

• Works as an added deterrent for players to foul as it reduces the benefit of injuring an opposing player. 
 

Discuss.

I’m for and against this.  Personally I think it’s papering over other deficiencies though. 

Illegal play in the NRL needs to be punished more than just  ‘on report’.  Refs are bottling it.

Clubs who have been on the end of blowouts have weak squads due to various shortfalls - poor spending, poor recruitment from grassroots, not growing their own players etc etc.  The loss of one player just cannot be wholly responsible for a blowout.

[Harry Stottle]

It used to be said that when a team got a man sent of early and are reduced to 12 for the rest of the game that the extra effort displayed by those 12 more than made up for the missing 1.

Now we have it that if a player gets injured and still replaced by an interchange that is not sufficient in this day when all 4 interchanges are capable player's not just make-up substitutes.

 

[kiwis 13 6]

From what ive read the way the NRL are introducing this 18th player is a bit weird. Apparently the 18th player cant be the 18th man who already travels with the squad in case of last minute injuries but must be a youth player who hasn't played a game that week. How about just make rule something simple like when 3 players are severely injured and wont be involved in the game anymore that day the 18th man who already is a part of squad is able to enter the game as the 18th player.

[nkpom]

Quote

I also read this morning, because there have been some "not so close" scorelines (but hardly blowouts) two weeks in a row now, the NRL is considering taking action. The solution suggested was to bring back the NRL U20 league. If someone can work out the logic here, I'sld be grateful if you could explain it to me. 

The issue with the National Under 20s has raged since the decision to scrap them in 2017. He is marmite I know but last week's "Six Tackles with Gus" Podcast had quite a bit on this very subject. The argument is the scrapping of the National Under 20s was a short sighted financial one, and to maintain and indeed improve player standards the NRL should be developing young players and not leaving it to the Queensland and NSW State competitions. This will be become even more of an issue when the new Brisbane team comes in shortly, followed inevitably by an 18th team shortly after.

[langpark]

I never liked the U20s and as an avid follower of Qld Cup, I prefer seeing the best young players going into strengthening the state leagues.

Regarding 18th man. People forget, last season, we saw the 6-again rule brought in and now we have had the removal of scrums. These two change have meant the game literally never stops now, unless points are scores.

Instead of just reversing their decision on the scrum rule, we now have the 18th man as the genius solution.

[Lowdesert]

17 hours ago, kiwis 13 6 said:

From what ive read the way the NRL are introducing this 18th player is a bit weird. Apparently the 18th player cant be the 18th man who already travels with the squad in case of last minute injuries but must be a youth player who hasn't played a game that week. How about just make rule something simple like when 3 players are severely injured and wont be involved in the game anymore that day the 18th man who already is a part of squad is able to enter the game as the 18th player.

I could be wrong mate but I can’t see it being just a youth player.   I agree in that the 18th man should be used only after the others have been utilised at least once.

im sure the NRL will employ someone to monitor thus full time anyway

 

[Wire quin]

Do they not need to look at the bigger picture which is the number of head injuries? I watched a game a couple of weeks ago and there was 3 HIA failures in one team (I think thats happened in 2 games this season). Given the focus in sport globally on head injuries, dementia claims etc would they not be better of sorting contact with the head out?

Union (I know we don't like it!) have really clamped down on head contact.

[Sports Prophet]

21 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

It used to be said that when a team got a man sent of early and are reduced to 12 for the rest of the game that the extra effort displayed by those 12 more than made up for the missing 1.

Now we have it that if a player gets injured and still replaced by an interchange that is not sufficient in this day when all 4 interchanges are capable player's not just make-up substitutes.

 

I fear you’re missing the point of why this is happening

[Davo5]

2 hours ago, Wire quin said:

Do they not need to look at the bigger picture which is the number of head injuries? I watched a game a couple of weeks ago and there was 3 HIA failures in one team (I think thats happened in 2 games this season). Given the focus in sport globally on head injuries, dementia claims etc would they not be better of sorting contact with the head out?

Union (I know we don't like it!) have really clamped down on head contact.

The Union tackling laws are now an absolute joke,no thanks.

[Harry Stottle]

21 minutes ago, Sports Prophet said:

I fear you’re missing the point of why this is happening

Please enlighten me SP.

[Dunbar]

So, the NRL and Super League now have a different scoring system (2 point drop goal in the NRL) and is now played by a different number of players.

How is this good for our game. 

[Sir Kevin Sinfield]

On 06/04/2021 at 14:24, Southerner said:

I’m an advocate:

• The 18th man will finally fix the injustice of an offending player continuing in the game whilst the injured player of the opposing team is unable to return.

• A team will no longer be disadvantaged by losing a player to injury due to foul play.

• It will help improve player welfare as players have to cope with the extra workload of losing a player.  

• It’ll help keep the team (with the injured player) stay competitive as they don’t lose a player and therefore should reduce risk of a blowout scoreline. 

• Works as an added deterrent for players to foul as it reduces the benefit of injuring an opposing player. 
 

Discuss.

Fully agree with this. A player ruled out by a HIA should also be replaced with the 18th man IMO.

[Dunbar]

22 minutes ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Fully agree with this. A player ruled out by a HIA should also be replaced with Theo 18th man IMO.

Bit restrictive if each team has to find a player named Theo to name as the 18th man!

[Sir Kevin Sinfield]

44 minutes ago, Sir Kevin Sinfield said:

Fully agree with this. A player ruled out by a HIA should also be replaced with the 18th man IMO.

 

[Sports Prophet]

3 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

Please enlighten me SP.

what happens when the team has no players left on the bench due to foul play or concussions?

[Jao 711]

Is there to be a distinction between the 18th man and the other 4subs or is he, as I am sure we all suspect ,just another sub which is what they wanted in the first place and what will happen shortly.If it is obviously foul play the referee already bas the solution so why do we need an 18th man?

[Harry Stottle]

15 hours ago, Sports Prophet said:

what happens when the team has no players left on the bench due to foul play or concussions?

Yes I can see your concern SP? 

May I just say it didn't happen very often when we only had two subs, I can never recall it happening since we have had 4 subs, call me cynical but I can see this being misused and exploited in ways to get fresh men onto the field, I have to be convinced that every HIA is genuine, how easy is it for the trainer to deliver a message to a player he is treating. 

As for foul play, yes it still goes on but in miniscule proportions to how the game was played and even so player's were not leaving the field in droves, as Jao 711 above says the referee has an alternative why do we need an 18th man?

[Sports Prophet]

31 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Yes I can see your concern SP? 

May I just say it didn't happen very often when we only had two subs, I can never recall it happening since we have had 4 subs, call me cynical but I can see this being misused and exploited in ways to get fresh men onto the field, I have to be convinced that every HIA is genuine, how easy is it for the trainer to deliver a message to a player he is treating. 

As for foul play, yes it still goes on but in miniscule proportions to how the game was played and even so player's were not leaving the field in droves, as Jao 711 above says the referee has an alternative why do we need an 18th man?

Yeah that’s it mate. This is very open to abuse. Sharks two rounds ago lost three players to HIA and another to a knee injury all before half time. Two earlier games of the same round saw Raiders lose three players to HIA by 60th minute. In both games, those teams just ran out of legs in the last 10 to stay in the contest.