V’landys changing the debut age is bad for so very many reasons, and they include (but are not limited to):

1. The rule was introduced to assist in player welfare management, and reduce the probability careers (or worse) would be ended prematurely by debuting too young;

2. As recently as 2015, the game was considering elevating the debut age restriction to 19, given what we’ve learned about player welfare. This is especially so considering what we’ve come to learn about the long lasting impacts of repeated concussions: https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.dailytelegraph.com.au/sport/nrl/teams/brad-fittler-backs-new-nrl-age-restrictions/news-story/536dd7710f0ec7f91c50d0f2292f5e78

3. If the rule was introduced to preserve player welfare, and we’re bending the rules on this occasion because “it’s of benefit to the game” (presumably to ensure he doesn’t go to union), are we not able to conclude something about what is and is not a priority here?

4. Bending the rules to allow Suaalii to debut early presupposes that the risk of him sustaining serious injuries, aggravated due to debuting prior to turning eighteen is, in all the circumstances, apparently worth taking to ensure he remains in the NRL system.

5. It also sets a dangerous precedent: You can’t debut prior to eighteen, unless you’re a freak talent and are refusing to leave the code. There are ALWAYS guys like Suaalii, Ponga, and D Fifita, but setting doing this just gives them leverage over clubs and the code itself.

6. Like the 6 again rule, like the one ref change, this appears to be something that is being considered with little-to-no consultative process. It’s just the powers that be firing from the hip, hoping they don’t miss, and asking any/all relevant questions later.

7. The boomer voices in the game (you know the ones) will come out in support of it and continue to worship at the altar of V’landys; but don’t be fooled. This is some weird cowboy, above-the-law type decision making, and sooner or later, it’ll come back to bite the game on arse.