AFL considers changing sub rule

[teknodeejay]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/af...ubs-backing-move/story-fnbk754t-1226446535700

Was in between sites in the car and Bartlett and Denham brought it up. Based on what Bartlett said, they might well utensil this up completely. Something along the lines of if you have a potential injury, then while the injury is assessed you can bring the sub on. The sub can stay on for a max 20 minutes (or so) at which time the injured player returns or is permanently subbed out.

If that's the way they go, what a way to over complicate things.

Wouldn't it be simpler to introduce 1 sub per half? This caters for injuries and allows a substitute to potentially get more than about 30 minutes of game time.

 

[MrKK]

Massively open to abuse, just like other sports that have had injury requirements for subs - google the English rugby team who had their trainer cut a player so they could sub him off under the blood rule.

And according to Adrian Anderson the sub rule is achieving all of its objectives, so why change it.

 

[Oneiros]

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/af...ubs-backing-move/story-fnbk754t-1226446535700

Was in between sites in the car and Bartlett and Denham brought it up. Based on what Bartlett said, they might well utensil this up completely. Something along the lines of if you have a potential injury, then while the injury is assessed you can bring the sub on. The sub can stay on for a max 20 minutes (or so) at which time the injured player returns or is permanently subbed out.

If that's the way they go, what a way to over complicate things.

Wouldn't it be simpler to introduce 1 sub per half? This caters for injuries and allows a substitute to potentially get more than about 30 minutes of game time.

Or add the emergencies to the sub-bench?

 

[Geronimo#]

Bit different but....
What I'd like to see is a bit more flexibility with the sub. You have emergencies sitting there doing nothing.
Why not have them all available to sub on. So it gives you more options and keeps the opposition guessing which one will come on. Still only make one sub but have three or four to choose from. Could work with 2 subs as well.

Otherwise loose the sub all together. Go back to 4 on the bench and cap rotation to 80. Changes are fine at breaks but as soon as the quarter starts start counting to 20

 

[tzman]

If a club want to reactivate their sub due to an injury They should be able to but the injured player being subbed out is unable to play for the next 2 games. Most injuries would require 2 weeks anyway so clubs would have to think seriously before doing it

 

[Killer eagle]

Get rid of the subs and go back to four on the bench.

The sub rule hasn't fixed anything, it's just made things more complicated yet again.

Give it a few years, soon you will be able to buy the complete box set of AFL rules.

 

[Slax]

Just another case of the Rules Committee doing something they don't need to to justify their existence. They've screwed the game up enough as it is and all they want to do is make it more complicated.

Also since when does it take 20 minutes to evaluate a players injury?

 

[Tomnat Tigers]

They should just have two subs. One can be of any age and the other must be a first year player who can only be activated if their is an injury.

 

[LeverPuller]

STOP ******* WITH IT

 

[Hawkers]

No subs and two on the bench. Unlimited interchange

 

[King Elvis]

Get rid of the subs and go back to four on the bench.

The sub rule hasn't fixed anything, it's just made things more complicated yet again.

Give it a few years, soon you will be able to buy the complete box set of AFL rules.

Damn right.

The game was already opening up due to clubs new tactics.

Leave it the heck alone, at least give the stupid new system two years before making it worse!!

 

[SHAKESPEARE]

No subs, no interchange. Bartlett to hand the bibs out.