I'm happy for a bit more attrition and the benefits that could come from that, we are somewhat on the same page.
I just don't like it by reducing interchange as I like teams to have the option to run big guys and I think 6 changes could lead to a lot of games being ruined by injury.
Fifita would be the number 1 prop coming through the lower grades due to his ability to play large minutes.
I still think that if you make it harder for props to come through (ie expected to debut being able to put out 40 minutes +) then there is more chance they will change sports. Even with Fifita it's likely he may have had to wait a little longer to debut. With 8 interchanges it is much easier to introduce your newer players in small stints. This even extends to being able to give a smaller quicker guy a chance late in a game.
Only the absolute best halves make it through. You might say ''well thats good, we only want the best halves''. Not so, the best halves we have are pretty poor players when you think about what a 7 used to be.
If the absolute best are pretty poor then bringing more of them in won't help! With a shift towards ball playing fullbacks that is also an option for a dynamic quick 'half' that isn't up for 80 minutes on the front line. If you're too small for even that then you just are too small. If you're good enough your big enough.
They used to present opportunities, have pace, have a step, have skill. Nowadays they are purely game managers, their job is to direct traffic and try to put a good kick in on the last. How often do you see a chip behind tired forwards now? Once a year?
I hope SJ will have pace step and have skill! The decrease in the need for the halves to be the X factor, I think, is due to the general increase of athleticism... there is now more chance your second rower or centre will be a game breaker as they are bigger, faster and stronger... and the more of a danger they are this then opens up opportunities for the halves.
The game right now is 90% big guys.
Most of these guys aren't that "big" it's not like everyone is 120kg and 6 foot 5, the main size difference from the past is better sports science, training and nutrition - due to these factors across the board players will be 'bigger' on average but the vast majority of them are playing big minutes.
I'm unsure why you think we eliminate the value of the big guys, it's quite the opposite really. Big guys will be running over the top of the small skilled guys we bring back, but when they get tired the small skilled guys will run around the big tired guys. It goes both ways. Hence why league used to be a game of shapes and sizes. The big guys still have a spot in the game, in the forward pack. But out wide and in the halves we want speed and skill, we do not want 100kg wingers and centres. Of course there will be some that have speed, size and skill but they are very few and far between.
You don't think if they spent half the game blowing some teams will drop them and bring in someone more mediocre players with a bit more ticker to counteract this? They now have a player they wouldn't have previously have got as much games playing because he doesn't have the clear weakness of spending half his time on the field exhausted.
If your teams biggest weakness is getting shredded late by small guys because your props are too tired you get props that are 5-10kg lighter that can do their required time without getting tired. Now small quick guys aren't as effective against you so other teams play less of them. Because there are less of them you can play more bigger guys and the circle of life goes on
An extreme example but basically what I'm saying is the game would react to the change in a way that would mean there is unlikely to be a dramatic change towards a very open free flowing event
People like Renouf, O'davis, blake and mat rogers would have no place in the current game. And if they did make it, they would have very little to no impact on it. They would get destroyed due to their lack of size.
No they wouldn't, they'd all be bigger/stronger too because in today's game they'd have also had 10+ years of better elite training, sports science and nutrition too. Google says rat was 6ft and 87kg. These days he'd maybe be 6ft and 94kg and still kill it.
Curious, what are we protecting players from? I'm going to assume injury. It is a well talked about issue in the game, so many injuries. It's because players are all so big now, they spend so much time in the gym to get size. Everyone is so big and running full speed all the time and causing injury upon themselves and other players.
Protecting the teams/games. With six interchanges any injury has a much greater impact on your team. So easy to pick up an injury or two in any given game and that can already have a big impact on that teams ability to compete and then that just escalates with six interchanges. I think it could lead to more lower quality games as a result, and potentially more injury as players are less able to get off if they are hurt. Conversely I think less slow play the balls, less time wasting can increase speed (and attrition) without doing this. By increasing attrition in this way and rewarding legs tackles I think that can bring more smaller players in potentially while still giving teams the option of using the big dudes.
You can argue all sorts of things can lead to increased/decreases injury. Maybe more attrition means more sloppy tackling so you get less pure impact injuries and more concussion/injury from tired tacklers. I don't think any of us have enough info to truly be able to say what can and can't cause more injury.
