I've always thought you should have a back a halfback come hooker and 2 forwards on the bench to cover injuries and for tactical reasons.
We played 3 forwards and a hooker on Sunday, I think we could have done with Owen.
Every team seems to have two specialist hookers in the starting 17 so the option seems to be do we go with 3 forward on the bench or 2.
I suppose it makes things interesting Tactically but do people think we should consider having more subs like wendyball?

2 big forwards, a utility forward/back and a ball handler is the best options to have

Don't think we need more subs. If we did, I think it would only work like Union where you can only bring on a sub once throughout the game.

The reality is that forwards generally do most of the work (tackling, laying platform and taking the ball in) and so that's why bench is generally forwards.

Wingers only ever see ball when running it back on first tackle or when it's spread wide in an attacking position. They therefore conserve more energy and make less tackles.

2 props, back-rower/loose and hooker is always best solution.

or 2 props, back-rower and half-back.

Barrie Mac came up with this idea last season. Every team warms up with 18 players, if during a game a team loses a player through foul play (Dicko last Sunday) then the 18th man should be able to replace that player in the 17.

I think its a great suggestion that the RFL should seriously consider.

That's is a not bad idea that.

I think its a real good idea. I do think you could leave yourself open to underhanded tactics (Harlequins blood gate) but it definately deserves investigation.

yeah straight away I thought of the "bloodgate" incident with Harlequins.

Someone woud find a way to feign injury and get a fresh pair of legs on.

Then you've got the interpretation of it - players get injured without foul play and this puts you t and even greater disadvantage.

The idea in itself ids great but the intricacies would highlight flaws

Its a shame that the first thing we think of when someone makes a suggestion like this is how teams will try and abuse it. I think its worth consideration.