The NRL plans to introduce a watered-down 18th-man policy, allowing for an injury replacement player only when a team has lost three men to concussion.
After a weekend of heightened sensitivity around player welfare amid more than 20 injuries, the players’ union has called for a replacement player to be granted as a result of the quickened game.
However the ARL Commission only went partway to that on Tuesday, limiting its use from round five on and ensuring the reserve would only be an emerging player.
Under the rules, Cronulla would have been the only side to have had access to such a player so far this year, when they lost Wade Graham, Will Kennedy and Briton Nikora to concussion over the weekend.
The proposed rule will be discussed with clubs and the Rugby League Players Association before it is introduced, with the NRL to foot the bill of the extra player.
“All fans agree we don’t want to see a situation where a club is left with one player on the bench and this rule change will provide insurance for all clubs,” ARL Commission chairman Peter V’landys said.
“It will also only be activated in the most dire of circumstances for a club, so we don’t see it having a material impact on games every week.
“We see this as an opportunity to give an emerging player a taste of first-grade rugby league in their team’s time of need.”
The player will also have to be rotated each week, so the same youngster does not miss regular lower-grade games.
The announcement comes after significant debate over any 18th-man rule amid fears it would be exploited.
“With the speed of the game there are going to be unfortunate injuries in the game,” Parramatta prop Junior Paulo said.
“I can see ways around it and ways teams will exploit it.
“My opinion is it’s unfortunate there are injuries in our game but we play a tough sport so there are always going to be injuries.
One suggestion had been that it could only be used in instances of foul play or potentially while ruling players out of the following week.
The decision to go with three concussions to activate the replacement player at least goes part way to allaying those concerns.
It comes after the AFL introduced a similar rule for all injuries this season, which was used by almost half the teams in the opening round.
“It might be something to protect the integrity of the rule that if you do get subbed off with a concussion that you have to miss the following week,” Queensland prop Christian Welch said on Tuesday morning.
NRL boss Andrew Abdo earlier this year ruled out a mandatory period with concerns coaches or players could be deterred from declaring a concussion if it meant they would definitely miss the following match.
Paul
Roar Guru
but as the NRL has said Dexter, this is only supposed to work in an emergency, which (touch wood), should only happen rarely.
Tony
Roar Guru
It's called "lip service"
Tony
Roar Guru
100%. I'd go with a 7 man bench and use them however you like.
Simon G
Roar Rookie
Exactly, it’ll hardly ever get implemented in a game. What they should do is have 6-8 players on the bench (they can be a mixture of fresh players and players backing up from reserve grade) and you can use as many or as little of them as you please, but you’re still only allowed 8 interchanges...
Bigbill
Guest
Just keep it simple and have 18th player available in second half to sub in for any injury. Player welfare.. tick and will not have to hear all the whining when clubs use it and doctors at home on couch know better than the Doc on the sideline .
eagleJack
Roar Guru
No, don’t enjoy that at all. But you are brining up failed HIAs from foul play. They are pretty rare in the grand scheme of things. 1 failed HIA is, more often than not, just like any injury - plain bad luck. Getting a replacement for that is OTT. Coaches should be able to deal with one lost player. But 2, that’s a little tougher.
Emcie
Roar Guru
There's also been a lot of discussion against it
Edward Kelly
Roar Guru
Unbelievable cop out for the NRL on player welfare. This is more about quelling the loud chorus of old ex-players and NRL journos who want the game to be tough like it was in the good old days and to bring back fatigue as if that is some magic potion to make the game better.
Edward Kelly
Roar Guru
It is the future as the NRL gets more sensitive to the real issue of brain injury. The HIA will get harder to pass so less players get back onto the field and therefore less players on the bench.
mushi
Roar Guru
Would everyone though? It has been discussed a lot previously which implies there are people for it. That's like saying don't ban shoulder charges, everyone will blow up.
Geoff Parkes
Expert
“It might be something to protect the integrity of the rule that if you do get subbed off with a concussion that you have to miss the following week,” Queensland prop Christian Welch said on Tuesday morning. It might be something to protect the health of the player that if you do get subbed off with concussion that you have to miss the following week, Christian.....
Emcie
Roar Guru
It's almost as if the outrage all weekend was a storm in a teacup
Emcie
Roar Guru
Yeah, I'm not exactly sure what people wanted. If it was for the first HIA then everyone would be blowing up about it essentially being a free interchange player
Dexter The Hamster
Roar Rookie
I guess the issue is it only kicks in after 3 HIA's.... Which is very rare. Seems like it isn't really a welfare issue at all. Just a show.
Rellum
Roar Guru
I think we might see a remarkable uptick in 3 HIA games.
Senor Spielbergo
Guest
I’m glad they didn’t bring it in for 1 failed HIA. Why, do you enjoy watching JWH or Kaufusi use a deliberate swinging arm or elbow to the head of an opposition player and not get punished for it, while the opposition loses a player?
Adam
Roar Guru
3 of them came off from the head butt with concussion...Paulo was the replacement
farkurnell
Roar Rookie
I guess the Rules Committee must have Butted Heads together to come up with this one.
Paul
Roar Guru
I'm probably one of the few who has no issue with this rule - at least until I've seen it used. Teams already have 4 replacements, not interchanges, they can use to cover players who are injured. That teams are also allowed to use these players through an interchange process is immaterial to what this new rule is trying to do - support sides who are in dire straits as a direct result of HIA on game day.
eagleJack
Roar Guru
I’m glad they didn’t bring it in for 1 failed HIA. But 3 seems a little excessive. I’ve always felt that 2 failed HIAs, with the protocols getting tougher each year to pass, was a fair number to bring in a replacement. Pair that with just one injury and the bench is down to 1. A replacement in that case is warranted.