Substitutions My Little Bugbear

I have said in the past that I can't see the point in making substitutions with only 5 or so minutes left on the clock and feel it devalues a cap, after all what impact is a player supposed to have in that timescale.

After today my bugbear is growing to the mass substitutions we see at the 55-60 minute mark that constantly upsets the rhythm of a game. I genuinely feel that if England hadn't made the raft of subs they did then they would have got the 50+points needed to at least put more pressure on Ireland and also if Wales hadn't done the same then we would have seen a bigger winning margin at Cardiff.

How about introducing a ruling that after lets say the 60 minute mark then no subs will be allowed other than for injury, then it would be a contest of fitness and stamina etc.

Everyone in the team has to do their bit to win a 6N. And that includes the coach. England and SL fell a bit short - I hope he's learnt his lesson as he was outplayed by Schmidt.

I agree its a 23 man game these days but time and time again we see these raft of changes affect the flow of the game.

[quote="bedfordwelsh"]I have said in the past that I can't see the point in making substitutions with only 5 or so minutes left on the clock and feel it devalues a cap, after all what impact is a player supposed to have in that timescale.

After today my bugbear is growing to the mass substitutions we see at the 55-60 minute mark that constantly upsets the rhythm of a game.  I genuinely feel that if England hadn't made the raft of subs they did then they would have got the 50+points needed to at least put more pressure on Ireland and also if Wales hadn't done the same then we would have seen a bigger winning margin at  Cardiff.

How about introducing a ruling that after lets say the 60 minute mark then no subs will be allowed other than for injury, then it would be a contest of fitness and stamina etc.[/quote

Agree completely - team loses cohesion and defence becomes porous.

I hate it, SCW said the same thing, I saw no reason to sub Burrell for a guy who has hardly played this season.

agree with posts on this.  subs are for a purpose.  what was the purpose today ? sh sides would have cranked it up and pushed to the limit. our players need that experience when we are ahead. and need to feel that clinical no-nonsense maintain the pressure.

everyone must be sick of me on about  biggar being better than priestland,  today he should have stayed on. liam Williams too. not so sure about mike p he was starting to get caught, wrong way when mid field screaming for the ball, couple of unnecessary box kicks.


my mate says you have to let the bench come on if theres nothing on the game and a win is secure.  I say why ? he says to give them the experience of coming on and being ready to perform and step up to speed quickly.

I would say club level maybe, international, no.

?

Of course you sub if the game is won

This is 23 man rugby, what happens if you throw an unblooded sub in after a few minutes foillowing an injury and he has no experience?

This thread is a failure to see the strategic role of substitution

All you'd get is mass subs before the 60 minute mark.

I do agree that I don't like to see all these subs, but today for Wales it did make some sense with the game won and nothing more to gain. For England, probably disruption they could have done without