Substitution rules (was Re: Is a joint game feasible?)

Substitution rules (was Re: Is a joint game feasible?)

Post by Dr J.S. Marsla » Wed, 15 Nov 1995 04:00:00


[snip]

: Teams can dress 17 players for a game, of whom 13 are on the field at one
: time (6 forwards and 7 backs).  Each team can make up to six
: substitutions.
[snip]

Is that a local rule?  

In the UK for Stones Bitter matches only 4 substitutions are allowed from
17 players and in the Regal Trophy 4 substitutions are allowed from 15
players.  In addition ***-bin substitutions are allowed if a player is
bleeding who must return in 10 minutes.  The international rule is 4
substitutions from 17 players with unlimited time allowed for the
***-bin - or at least it was in the World Cup.  I remember when I was
playing (pre-1978) we could have 2 substitutions from 15 players.

A case for standardisation perhaps.

All the best
--
John
The Yorkshire motto updated:  Hear all, see all, say nowt;
Eat all, sup all, pay nowt; Read all, lurk all, post nowt;
And if tha'ever do's owt for nowt allus do it for thi'sen.

 
 
 

Substitution rules (was Re: Is a joint game feasible?)

Post by Peter Davie » Thu, 23 Nov 1995 04:00:00


Quote:

>[snip]

>: Teams can dress 17 players for a game, of whom 13 are on the field at one
>: time (6 forwards and 7 backs).  Each team can make up to six
>: substitutions.
>[snip]

>Is that a local rule?  

>In the UK for Stones Bitter matches only 4 substitutions are allowed > ...
>A case for standardisation perhaps.

>All the best
>--
>John

I think this has been the rule in the Winfield Cup for a few years now.
There is talk of changing this to unlimited substitution but then there
is a lot of talk down here in Oz at the moment. A few clubs have been
caught out over this one. Since *** bin substitutions don't count it
can be hard to track. Auckland lost 2 competition points this year for
making too many subs which is a severe punishment IMO. It cost them a
place in the finals but the finals were a joke thanks to the ARL Vs SL
war. Gold Coast lost 2 points a few years back but all that did was steal
the Wooden spoon from Parramatta.

Another case for standardisation and rationalisation.

--
===================
Peter Davies
I Pity Inanimate Objects

 
 
 

Substitution rules (was Re: Is a joint game feasible?)

Post by Dr J.S. Marsla » Fri, 24 Nov 1995 04:00:00

[snip]
: There is talk of changing this to unlimited substitution but then there
: is a lot of talk down here in Oz at the moment.

I don't like that idea at all - it would lead to specialist kickers only
running on for kicks or specialist drop/field goal kickers running on for
the last ten minutes.

: A few clubs have been
: caught out over this one. Since *** bin substitutions don't count it
: can be hard to track. Auckland lost 2 competition points this year for
: making too many subs which is a severe punishment IMO. It cost them a
: place in the finals but the finals were a joke thanks to the ARL Vs SL
: war. Gold Coast lost 2 points a few years back but all that did was steal
: the Wooden spoon from Parramatta.

And Wales were let off during the World Cup for the same mistake.  But it
seems to me that the problem of tracking ***-bin substitutions is best
solved by treating ***bins in exactly the same way as tactical
substitutions i.e. allow each team x substitutions in total where x is
somewhat greater than the 2/4/6 presently allowed.  Then the only
distinction between tactical substitution and ***bins will be that
the ref decides on one and the coach decides on the other.

All the best
John