Project Restart - Hoping for 8th June

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?


Lunny/Berge, Jags, McG/Bill, Moose/McBurnie, L Freeman, Retsos, Verrips/Moore, Osborn, Zivko I reckon.

Don't think the 5 sub rule will benefit us to be honest. Was hoping that would get vetoed.

I would have marginally preferred not to have it, but I don't think it'll make much difference when it all shakes out.

If a team has game changers on the bench, they'll change the game whether it's 3 or 5, like when we played Man U. I'm choosing to look at the positive in that we've got a few decent players on the bench ourselves that don't get many minutes, so we'll get to see them in action.
 
Don't think the 5 sub rule will benefit us to be honest. Was hoping that would get vetoed.
On the other hand, it will allow us to play our high energy pressing game with players knowing that if they start to run out of steam on 70 minutes they can be replaced. That could be important in our first couple of games when we’re still not quite match fit, particularly for the fullbacks, who must cover a lot of ground every game.
 
Lunny/Berge, Jags, McG/Bill, Moose/McBurnie, L Freeman, Retsos, Verrips/Moore, Osborn, Zivko I reckon.



I would have marginally preferred not to have it, but I don't think it'll make much difference when it all shakes out.

If a team has game changers on the bench, they'll change the game whether it's 3 or 5, like when we played Man U. I'm choosing to look at the positive in that we've got a few decent players on the bench ourselves that don't get many minutes, so we'll get to see them in action.

I'm not worried about our options. But I do think our squad is exceptionally fit and we lose that edge allowing our squads to compensate for it with the extra subs.
 
I can perhaps be convinced of the need to expand it to 5 subs allowed to guard against injuries. Fine. That’s not what I’d have liked, but so be it. But why on Earth are clubs now able to name a bench of 9? That’s got nothing to do with just guarding against injuries – it takes one rule change benefiting the stronger/deeper squads and widens it further. Totally unnecessary.
 
I can perhaps be convinced of the need to expand it to 5 subs allowed to guard against injuries. Fine. That’s not what I’d have liked, but so be it. But why on Earth are clubs now able to name a bench of 9? That’s got nothing to do with just guarding against injuries – it takes one rule change benefiting the stronger/deeper squads and widens it further. Totally unnecessary.

"There will be limits on when substitutions can be made during games so it cannot be abused for timewasting. Teams will be restricted to three during games, plus another opportunity at half-time, meaning they will have to make at least one double substitution to use their full compliment."

Even more bizarre it appears two would have to be made at half time so how is that guarding against injuries? surely its later in the game when the restrictions should apply.
 
"There will be limits on when substitutions can be made during games so it cannot be abused for timewasting. Teams will be restricted to three during games, plus another opportunity at half-time, meaning they will have to make at least one double substitution to use their full compliment."

Even more bizarre it appears two would have to be made at half time so how is that guarding against injuries? surely its later in the game when the restrictions should apply.

On reflection I may have misread Yorkshire Posts quote. You could do your substitutions during the game without using half time but to get your full complement two would have to be double substitutions during the game.
 

Looks like Wilder didnt want it either.
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20200605_001232_uk.co.telegraph.android.jpg
    Screenshot_20200605_001232_uk.co.telegraph.android.jpg
    730.4 KB · Views: 72
Looks like Wilder didnt want it either.

Yep, we opposed the move to allow 5 subs, and the move to extend the bench to 9 players. Because we realise the former is somewhat unnecessary and likely to benefit the stronger squads, and the latter completely unnecessary and designed to benefit the stronger squads.
 
As an aside..... The Rugby League in Australia has started behind closed doors with appropriate protocols & tests for players. About 90 minutes before the Cowboys v Sharks game this morning, six Sharks players failed their first temperature check. The protocol apparently gives them two more goes each......
 
As an aside..... The Rugby League in Australia has started behind closed doors with appropriate protocols & tests for players. About 90 minutes before the Cowboys v Sharks game this morning, six Sharks players failed their first temperature check. The protocol apparently gives them two more goes each......


At least we still have the Parramatta eels v manly-warringah sea eagles
 
Was only half watching but I am sure I heard Charlie Nicholas on Sky Sports saying he thinks we will be the team most likely to be affected by the lock down, kind of predictable really.

It is funny though as from what I am hearing we seem to be the team most ready to get back into it
 
I wonder what the TV viewing figures will be for our first game. As the curtain raiser, and will people still stuck at home in the UK and across the world, it could be a record audience.
 
Bit of an aside this. Watched a bit of the Polish restarted season and this is a terrific shirt. Would like us in this, quite simple, nowt fancy.

MKS CRACOVIA KRAKÓW
1591541637850.png 1591541669669.png
 

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom