Isn't the role of the 18th man a perfect opportunity to do this.

...because, as others have pointed out, they could sample matchday by being the 18th man.

Using a valuable bench spot for someone who isn't trusted to actually take part in the game strikes me as eminently unsensible frankly. All it does it load more work onto the 16 other players. Superleague is too competitive these days to play 16 against 17....

Indeed.

If you are only going to give a youngster 4 minutes you might as well have him as 18th man, going through all the warm-ups and team talks with the team and sitting on the bench during the game, and naming a sub who you actually have the faith in to use.

The 4 minute system we seem to have developed places an extra burden on the team in my opinion, and can't exactly inspire confidence in the spare wheel named.

Were they really subs, I just though he sent them on to warm down...

McNamara's interchange policy has never made any sense and has been pivotal in introducing uncertainty, confusion and in some circumstances collapse. Did anyone press him on this at the forum?

I agree in part that if someone is on the bench then they should be used.

However, look at Elliot Whitehead prior to his injury, his game time and progression increased pretty satisfactorily I'd say!?

For those going on about the interchange policy and youngsters - I seem to recall a previous coach bringing debutant Rob Parker on in the 78th minute at home against Stains when we were hanging on to a very narrow lead?

That was different, presumably?

It wasn't for me if your named on the bench you have to be able to do at least half an hour in the game.

Quote ="redeverready"Isn't the role of the 18th man a perfect opportunity to do this.'" www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... _awesome_/ He seems to disagree

Quote ="redeverready"Isn't the role of the 18th man a perfect opportunity to do this.'" www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/s ... _awesome_/ He seems to disagree

What do you expect him to say.