It was just a thought but could increasing the bench size to something like 6 players not help the development of younger players? At the moment because you only get four it has to be your strongest players on the bench, as it should be. But could making two more places available mean more younger players get the opportunity for some game time without having to hamper the teams tactics. I am not suggesting the amount of subs made in a game should be increased either.

Perhaps but it would probably mean larger squad sizes and I'm not sure clubs are all that well placed to afford bigger squads at the moment.
IMO the best way to help youth development is to increase the base of players RL picks from (ie expansion) and continue with the reduction of overseas players.

We play with 20 in the summer conference and it's associated youth leagues. It's too many. four subs feels better.

Yeah, I also like the aspect that players have to be adaptable and sometimes fill in other positions, as much as I enjoy the NFL I don't want it to go down that route with loads of subs and such specialised positions.

IMO Rugby League is a game that is played at high intensity and fatigue is a massive part of seeing who are the real quality players. Players who can keep running and tackling despite been out on the pitch for 60-70 minutes. Players who despite defending 4 sets of six on your own line can still come up with a big play to get your side out of your own half.

By increasing the subs you reduce the need for players to be able to perform at a high level whilst fatigued. I believe more subs wouldn't lead to more youth development. Sides would be more likely to have a couple of HUGE guys on the bench who can do a couple fo ten minutes stints in the hope it can tire out the opposition and wear them down. I doubt it would increase the quality of the games and would in fact decrease the excitement as fresher players tends to lead to less mistakes through fatigue whether that be dropped ball, missed tackles or giving away a needless penalty out of frustration. All these things add to our game and eventually lead to tries and sides building up pressure. Leave it as it is I say.

Agreed. Either leave it as it is or do as in the NRL and reduce the interchanges to 10.

More subs probably means more interchanges.

We are already at silly levels with the interchange situation.

For me we should go back to 4 subs and six interchanges.

I would even go down to 3 subs with 6 interchanges. But its really all down to what they decide in OZ.

I think you would be better with a gradual drop if you were going to go to 3 subs and less than 8 interchanges, my preference would be 4 subs and 8 interchanges

I think this is required.
But i would do it as follows;

Keep it as 4 subs, and have 2 reserves who could be called upon if there are injured players only.

I'd like to see it still with only 4 subs, but with maybe 10 interchanges. I think if you have more than 4 subs, it removes the tactical element of choosing your team. A coach at the moment has to choose between having four big forwards on the bench, three big forwards on the bench and a hooker, and so on. If there was 6 subs, you'd be able to cover every possibility.

I can see where you're coming from, but wouldn't this be awkward in that a coach would then be forced to decide on whether a player is good enough to be a replacement or a sub? Also, it would be open to abuse.

What about more subs but less interchanges? It's a better balance I feel.

5 subs, 10 interchanges.

But who decides if a player is injured or not? It's open to abuse like the union blood replacement rules.

Yeah, it'd be difficult to police an injured players system.

I think five subs and 12 interchanges may be a good idea, with two of these subs being 'home-grown' and under the age of 20.

The original poster was concerned more with giving youngsters a chance, I think in line with that point of view it might be better to have your normal 4 subs + 2 younger (under 19?, or under a certain number of games, perhaps?) but still keeping inside the 12 interchanges.