List Mgmt. Welcome to Geelong, Ollie Henry

Remove this Banner Ad

It's crazy the amount of people who're still pissed off about Ollie being traded to Geelong.

I never thought it was a crime to change employers or opt to do what's best for yourself etc.

He honoured his contract, So I don't see why it's such a big issue amongst so many op supporters.
 
It's crazy the amount of people who're still pissed off about Ollie being traded to Geelong.

I never thought it was a crime to change employers or opt to do what's best for yourself etc.

He honoured his contract, So I don't see why it's such a big issue amongst so many op supporters.


Jealousy.
Let it be.
Amen
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Id have the 3 that are already at the game as emg ... capable of being activated...and then at 3/4 time. they can all be part of the game...


They have to be aware the that concussion thing is coming big time... soon it might be two weeks after a concussion
Why so many subs? It goes against the idea that when players get tired, the game opens up.
 
Id have the 3 that are already at the game as emg ... capable of being activated...and then at 3/4 time. they can all be part of the game...


They have to be aware the that concussion thing is coming big time... soon it might be two weeks after a concussion
6 on the bench, plus a concussion sub. Our game is ruthless. NFL people still can't believe we play unpadded.
18 on , 6 on the bench is so fair.
 
Id have the 3 that are already at the game as emg ... capable of being activated...and then at 3/4 time. they can all be part of the game...


They have to be aware the that concussion thing is coming big time... soon it might be two weeks after a concussion

I'd go with bit of a tweak on the 3 subs idea - I wouldn't be opposed to all 4 emergencies being available as subs, but teams can only activate one of them and once one is bought into the game, the other 3 can head to the showers

That does allow teams a level of flexibility with the sub, whether for tactical or medical reasons - especially if required for medical reasons early in the match
 
I'd go with bit of a tweak on the 3 subs idea - I wouldn't be opposed to all 4 emergencies being available as subs, but teams can only activate one of them and once one is bought into the game, the other 3 can head to the showers

That does allow teams a level of flexibility with the sub, whether for tactical or medical reasons - especially if required for medical reasons early in the match

My thinking is we have to move with the times.. What was will not be what is in the next 10 20 years. When I see soccer team not allowing players to head the ball the day before and the day after ...then concussion will continue to shape us

Im becomeing less fussed about the numbers on the bench ... on more focused on rotations
 
Only a small thing, but love seeing this.

The boys who've come back have mentioned repeatedly what a tight knit group the younger boys are, and you can see it here. We've got something really unique now, where a lot of our youngsters really did grow up and play together properly, they know eachothers strengths and weaknesses.

Could all mean nothing at the end of the day, but it does look like something special.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

It is not a pure medical sub anymore as that was being abused. It still allows a club to take a concussed or injured player off without losing a player, but there is no pressure on the medical staff to have to decide whether the player is unfit for the following game.
It also means that a team that uses its sub under this season's rules doesn't get the advantage of a fresh player, as now the opposition can use the fifth player as a sub at anytime.
It also means that the fifth player will likely get game time in the fourth quarter or earlier, instead of wasting the day as an unused sub on the bench.
We will start to see genuine designated subs now. What they look like I’m not sure but you’d think they would be a high impact type of player.
 
Only a small thing, but love seeing this.

The boys who've come back have mentioned repeatedly what a tight knit group the younger boys are, and you can see it here. We've got something really unique now, where a lot of our youngsters really did grow up and play together properly, they know eachothers strengths and weaknesses.

Could all mean nothing at the end of the day, but it does look like something special.
It's kind of the cohesion wet dream, a strong, talented core of players coming through at the same time, similar ages. Could get awesome if it can come close to its potential. :thumbsu:
 
6 on the bench, plus a concussion sub. Our game is ruthless. NFL people still can't believe we play unpadded.
18 on , 6 on the bench is so fair.
We'd get a huge advantage with our list going much deeper than other teams. Like our 3rd sub would be bloody Sam menegola whereas lower teams would have to bring out some stage league scrubs.
 
6 on the bench, plus a concussion sub. Our game is ruthless. NFL people still can't believe we play unpadded.
18 on , 6 on the bench is so fair.

My preference would be to have a bench of 9 with unlimited subs. Make tactical changes on a whim, carry a centre bounce specialist. Rotate in extra talls and smalls on a whim. Develop burst players who aren't fit enough to play more than half a game.
 
My preference would be to have a bench of 9 with unlimited subs. Make tactical changes on a whim, carry a centre bounce specialist. Rotate in extra talls and smalls on a whim. Develop burst players who aren't fit enough to play more than half a game.
Problem here is I'm serious, you're taking the p---
Player longevity and injury prevention- we could use more bench easily.
 
I guess you're just jealous of my genius
you didn't let me finish...
there are 5 subs in EPL and A-League, works well, and they have 11 on pitch, surely 6 in AFL is workable.
 
Getting well away from Ollie Henry.. resonable discussion but not here

Will clean up soon.

Go Catters
 
It's crazy the amount of people who're still pissed off about Ollie being traded to Geelong.

I never thought it was a crime to change employers or opt to do what's best for yourself etc.

He honoured his contract, So I don't see why it's such a big issue amongst so many op supporters.
It's not so much Ollie, it's where he was traded to and the perception of fairness and equalisation
 
I can already hear the Tuggers squealing

Steve Hocking, fresh from travelling back in time to assassinate rivals to his own rising powerbase, instituted this rule change expressly to f*ck with Richmond head-space. Again.

I know where Steve Hocking lives. And he's living there rent-free:thumbsu:
 
My preference would be to have a bench of 9 with unlimited subs. Make tactical changes on a whim, carry a centre bounce specialist. Rotate in extra talls and smalls on a whim. Develop burst players who aren't fit enough to play more than half a game.

Problem here is I'm serious, you're taking the p---
Player longevity and injury prevention- we could use more bench easily.

I coached Year 12's a few years ago - we were allowed 18 on the field plus 7 interchange.
We utilised it to have 2 forwards, 2 backs , 2 mids plus a ruck on the bench with unlimited interchange - but all players had to play a minimum of 50% game time.
Would love to see the team composition and strategies Scott would adopt with that line up :think:
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top