Quote ="FearTheVee"Although I agree with the points you are making, how many other NRL coaches regularly name sides with no intention of playing all 17 unless a player gets injured?
If they don't do it, and they have "NRL attention to detail", why don't they do it?'"
The NRL is a completely different competition. It's played faster. The defensive intensity is higher. The talent level is greater. The tactics are unique. The fixture structuring (and thus the workload placed upon teams) is different. Each side can draw upon two reserve grade teams - a good proportion of whose players are NRL ready from the first game. The relationship with the fans is different. They have access to cutting edge data analysis on every facet of individual and team behaviour etc. etc.
I don't think it makes any sense judging Royce by what goes on over there.
Quote I know it is all supposition without the data, but wouldn't you agree that it seems reasonable to assume that spelling an extra forward is more likely to result in a fresher pack than not spelling an extra forward? The cumulative effects of doing this every week must make a difference too, given how much all coaches talk about fatigue at the back end of a season?'"
Let's say for a moment you are right - the pack is fresher. This begs the question - HOW MUCH fresher? If the answer is - not enough to make any significant difference then, by your rationale, we must [igain[/i towards the end of the season (in comparison to every other side) because we're achieving a similar level of effectiveness without having to call upon the services of a 17th player. If we completely rest a player in 20-25 games per season we're that much fitter come the business end.