---

I am in favour of most of the proposed changes but i can see a possible downside. Most people are voting FOR the changes to try and get more players to play, or give a greater opportunity to more fringe players to have a game, BUT at present we guarantee to give 7 different players a game, given the new rules we are only guaranteeing 5 players to get a game based on the teams managers choice over who plays. I can see the more competitive teams just fielding their best 5 players twice to try and get the best results.

This could work against what a lot of people are voting for. I am sure some teams will have more players and will try and spread the games around but i would bet that some of the teams that have been struggling for players over the past few seasons will just field the same 5.

What we are doing is saying that a team of your best 5 players is better than a team of 10 different members of your team, as there is always going to be a big difference between the best and worst players in each team.

We could end up alienating all the 6th/7th/8th/9th/10th players. We could eventually just end up with lots of teams of 5 players which would not do the venues any good either as less people equals less money for them.

I personally would still vote for the rules as a change is what the league needs but we will need to properly evalute the effect of the changes before voting them in on a perm basis.