Replying To Kurt_Angle: "I wouldn't change anything that limits playing time for individuals. These rules filter down to underage where I'd be greatly in favour of allowing the maximum amount of subs for participation purposes. It also facilitates the managers in rotating players to help keep everyone involved and will aid player retention.
In relation to the physical aspect, allowing changes helps keep players fresh and healthier. Research has shown that injuries occur more commonly in the second half of games (link, link) so allowing managers to change more players can help reduce risk here. Don't we ultimately want to see players kept fit for inclusiveness at club level and the fans want to see the best players playing at inter county level?"
A sure in that case let there be 15 subs. And we all know which team that will suit. But sure if it means everyone is fit for their club why not."
Yet another advantage of course. We know, we know. There are only 15 players in the Meath panel, no subs. Us Dubs have more advantages than a tennis player winning a 36-34 tie breaker.
Replying To Whammo86: "I honestly don't think this levels the playing field.
Ok so take Dublin they've got a class bench most of which would be starting for every other team in the country.
I can understand why it looks like limiting subs of a team that can bring on Dean Rock is a good idea.
Truth is that Dublin are just class all through the first 15.
I don't think it's going to make any difference really at all.
Dublin's starting 15 is so fit they'd just run teams into the ground and kill them anyway just as they're already doing."
I don't know. Dublins subs are as practically as strong as the first 15. Players tire during matches and performance levels drop. Dublin being able to match fresh top quality players being brought on against tiring players seems to be a lethal combination.