Rules "Players Push For Pure Five-Man Bench" (The Age)

[WaynesWorld19]

Players push for pure five-man bench; Roos sound out Geelong footy boss for CEO job

AFL players are pushing for a pure five-man interchange, rather than returning to the green vest of yesteryear, if there is change to the medical substitute ruling.

www.theage.com.au

Of course they did, look at the three options they were presented with.

And why stop at 5 ??

Lets make it 10 or 15.

There was nothing wrong with a "concussion" sub .....easy, black & White !

Then the AFL Coach's got involved again and introduced "grey" ...by making it an injury substitution ....and of course as is the Coach's will, able to be manipulated

All we do is go back to setups that have already failed ......is it really that hard ????

 

[WaynesWorld19]

I don't care what it is as long as the concept of a 'sub' disappears forever.

We had guys 'debut' without getting on the ground.
Shaun Burgoyne celebrated his 400th game in his 398th.
James Jordon has a premiership medal for sitting down for 4 quarters.

For nearly a 100 years, this was the case ....with 19th and 20th men in bathrobes ....I say we should support local manufacture & bring the bathrobes back !

 

[Bunk Moreland]

ROFL



2024: Why do we have only one player who can’t come on and off? This is stupid. Just make it a 5-man bench

2025: Game ending injuries are unfair. We need a sub.

 

[10571z]

I cannot fathom how they could possibly bring back the tactical sub. It was the worst possible rule ever and completely failed 1st time around.

Does no one at the AFL remember it? How could they possible bring this back

 

[FlowersByIrene]

******* bullshit. AFL does a merry-go-round with the Sub Rule and wants us to act like its some innovation and wasn't universally derided.

We had a sub-rule, it was hated and removed. Then they brought in a 'medical sub' and it was, surprise surprise abused because the AFL didn't police it properly. So their response is now to just bring back the sub-rule that everyone hated. Get ****ed.

Honestly, how can an organisation that runs such a great and successful game be SO ******* stupid and constantly make the wrong decisions for the game. It's actually laughable.

 

[10571z]

******* bullshit. AFL does a merry-go-round with the Sub Rule and wants us to act like its some innovation and wasn't universally derided.

We had a sub-rule, it was hated and removed. Then they brought in a 'medical sub' and it was, surprise surprise abused because the AFL didn't police it properly. So their response is now to just bring back the sub-rule that everyone hated. Get ****ed.

Honestly, how can an organisation that runs such a great and successful game be SO ******* stupid and constantly make the wrong decisions for the game. It's actually laughable.

I’m perplexed. It was a total fail, how they could reintroduce it is beyond me.

 

[FreddyTwoShoes]

2024: Why do we have only one player who can’t come on and off? This is stupid. Just make it a 5-man bench

2025: Game ending injuries are unfair. We need a sub.

2026: Clubs are taking advantage - make it a tactical sub instead
2027: Why do we have only one player who can't come on and off? This is stupid. Just make it a 6-man bench
2028: Game ending injuries are unfair. We need a sub
2029: Clubs are taking advantage - make it a tactical sub instead
2030: Why do we have only one player who can't come on and off? This is stupid. Just make it a 7-man bench
2031: Game ending injuries are unfair. We need a sub

 

[TennisPlayerAndy]

The people that run this game are brain dead.

There is no other conclusion.

4 on the bench. 60 interchanges per team.

 

[Xtreme]

Players push for pure five-man bench; Roos sound out Geelong footy boss for CEO job

AFL players are pushing for a pure five-man interchange, rather than returning to the green vest of yesteryear, if there is change to the medical substitute ruling.

www.theage.com.au

Of course they did, look at the three options they were presented with.

And why stop at 5 ??

Lets make it 10 or 15.

May as well make it 36, a backup for the starting 18.

The people that run this game are brain dead.

There is no other conclusion.

4 on the bench. 60 interchanges per team.

Make it 48, maximum 12 per quarter. Survival of the fittest!!

 

[The 747]

10 on the bench and three subs!

 

[kreuze_missile]

Current "medical sub" was a joke. Needed to go. But i'm not sure this is the answer.

I thought the AFL was using interchange caps to open the game up and create more scoring. Putting more fit players in the rotation will only make things worse.

Also.. inevitible that JB/BT start referring to players as "super subs".. i've got my eye roll on standby

 

[Strahany]

Why not just make the three emergencies available for an injury sub at any time? Protect integrity by enforcing a minimum 1 week unavailability for selection for any player subbed off unless the club can sufficiently justify their decision (to sub said player) to an independent medical examiner/panel appointed by the AFL. If successful, the player is made available for the next game.

 

[carlton_99]

Why not just make the three emergencies available for an injury sub at any time? Protect integrity by enforcing a minimum 1 week unavailability for selection for any player subbed off unless the club can sufficiently justify their decision (to sub said player) to an independent medical examiner/panel appointed by the AFL. If successful, the player is made available for the next game.

They really should have just done this for the 2022 season. If they come off they are not allowed to play the following week. So simple and would have stopped teams manipulating the medical sub rule.

 

[Schauermann]

5 is better then 4 and a sub.

 

[Section 5]

Typical of the AFL to drop this on draft night, and only give us a portion of what this new proposal is going to entail
We know they are calling it a "tactical sub" and it is in addition to the present 4 on the bench

I am at the stage where i don't really care how many are on the bench with one proviso
They at least keep the interchanges at the present number, but i would prefer for this to be reduced to 60
The magic number for interchange probably lies at when players are not taken off after a goal

Maybe the AFL wanted to call it an injury sub but that comes with interpretations.
So settled on tactical sub. That way it basically can be used anytime

Now it is back to the AFL to give us all the details.
Then it will be interesting how the coaches choose players to fill that role
One thing the AFL may include is the tactical sub can't be a debut player

 

[Walshawk]

Can already hear the talk in 2024 that the players hate the sub, it is a farce and that a five man bench will be introduced for 2025.

 

[kickazz]

The people that run this game are brain dead.

There is no other conclusion.

4 on the bench. 60 interchanges per team.

I was one of the few it seems that liked the sub rule, but I think this suggestion makes sense. Maybe even 5 bench but reduced rotations.

Fewer rotations mitigates the disadvantages of being one down. I think it makes for better proper footy too. This isn't ice hockey we are playing here

 

[nickrebellious]

2026: Clubs are taking advantage - make it a tactical sub instead
2027: Why do we have only one player who can't come on and off? This is stupid. Just make it a 6-man bench
2028: Game ending injuries are unfair. We need a sub
2029: Clubs are taking advantage - make it a tactical sub instead
2030: Why do we have only one player who can't come on and off? This is stupid. Just make it a 7-man bench
2031: Game ending injuries are unfair. We need a sub

2050: AFL is renamed NFL and has offensive and defensive teams that rotate each possession. A speciality team comes on for set shots.

 

[flyinghi64]

The people that run this game are brain dead.

There is no other conclusion.

4 on the bench. 60 interchanges per team.

With a max of 20 changes in any one quarter.
If there is an injury late in a quarter and you have used the 20 then stiff. That will make clubs think when they get to 17/18 rotations.

 

[BIRDBRAIN]

What other dumb new rules are we getting? Can't be just subs.

 

[RedBloodBlackSwan]

For nearly a 100 years, this was the case ....with 19th and 20th men in bathrobes ....I say we should support local manufacture & bring the bathrobes back !

Dane Rampe agrees with this

 

[footyfan1978]

I was one of the few it seems that liked the sub rule, but I think this suggestion makes sense. Maybe even 5 bench but reduced rotations.

Fewer rotations mitigates the disadvantages of being one down. I think it makes for better proper footy too. This isn't ice hockey we are playing here

36 maximum would have it around about what it was in early 2000's before mass rotation abuse became a thing.
Or two maximum times to bench for any player in a match during match progress. Quarter, Half time and Three Quarter time changes not counted. I could live with it.

 

[RUNVS]

15 players on the field and 8 on the bench.

 

[Freomaniac]

May as well make it 36, a backup for the starting 18.



Make it 48, maximum 12 per quarter. Survival of the fittest!!

Now if Vince Russo was the AFL CEO....

It would be an AFL footy on a pole match lol

 

[Freomaniac]

The people that run this game are brain dead.

There is no other conclusion.

4 on the bench. 60 interchanges per team.

60 interchanges per team is a solid round number.

if the AFL brings in 5 or even 6 players on the bench, why need an injury sub?

Makes even top 8 sides a better chance to rotate 1 or even 2 kids off the bench