As the NRL confirm they are reducing the number of interchanges to 8 for next season, also stating they are to monitor the effect and not ruling out reducing it further in the future will we follow suit?

As we seem to adopt most of what the NRL do I can't see us not in this case. I would also like to see us increasing the number of substitutes from 4 to five. This would reduce the impact of a player being ruled out of the game from injury and hopefully give an opportunity to a youngster to fill a bench spot.

Already said on BBC Sport SL are looking into doing the same.

Not for me thanks.

You're just going end up with template forwards all built like second rowers who can do as close to 80 minutes as possible. It's promoting athleticism over skill IMO.

The stated aim of this is to reduce the impact of impact substitutions by making players play more minutes. I am all for that as it could reverse the trend for bigger and more musclebound props.
I would go further and have fewer interchanges alongside permanent/injury substitutions. I am aware that for the good of the players and match in progress we do not want to see injured players staying on to make up numbers.

Isn't that what we already have? A constant stream of fresh legged behemoths does not promote skill development.

I've said for a while we should go to five subs if we're reducing interchanges. Would give more players game time and improve development.

I wonder if the Dragons knew about this before they signed Mose Mosoe?

Fine by me, Leeds have been running with 3 subs for years anyway.

'cause rotating 20 stone mammoths every 20 minutes is high level skill?

If it means more "smaller" props like Grant Millington, it means there's going to be a lot more skill on display.

I'd love to know which universe you're living in where sides are rotating 20 stone mammoths every 20 minutes.

There should still be a place in the game for players like Masoe, Kylie Leuluai etc who provide big impact over a short period of time. Tired defences don't encourage skill, they just make it easier for mediocre players to look good.

I'd rather have the seven-tackle set!

No chance of that since Thierry Alibert moved on

It's bad for player welfare. Those proposing the rule changes are idiots. The idea is to stop big players having an impact on the game by making everyone tired. It isn't going to reduce the collisions and their severity, instead you will see fatigued players going through the same impacts more often. You will likely see more injuries as players make poor choices and their technique deteriorates.

I though the idea (or one of them) was to reduce the gang-tackling with 3 and 4 defenders (due to them saving energy) and thus help have a better/cleaner ruck and PTB......which is a good thing as the wrestling and spoiling tactics/slowing down the PTB has become the biggest problem with the on field product. Too much seemingly relies on that one area of a match,

How will it stop that? If anything the wrestling and spoiling will INCREASE as players are fatigued. They will lie on for longer and mess about more.