News Coaches' concussion worry sparks push for 23rd player

[Atomboy]

fu** Gridiron.
We do not want anymore on bench than we already have. Rather have as many players as possible not in senior team getting a proper full game in the reserves.

I dunno man, could be a way to get some of those dole bludgers into gainful employment.

If they don’t want to move to rural Australia to pick fruit for $2 an hour they could be made to play a half of footy for the Crows or the Bombers.

Kick be just the kick up the @ss they need.

 

[telsor]

What happens if 3 players get injured???
We do not want a game where a team is playing with only 17 on field against another team of 18.
Two interchanges may work 90% of time but in this day and age of tight OHS it not going to happen.
Much better off just dealing with 4 on interchange and bring the interchange system back to what it was designed to be.
An interchange bench to cover for injuries and minimal tactical things like changing ruck around etc.
If a player is only allowed to come off once during a game for tactical change and anything but a concussion or serious injury is only other reason then four is plenty to cover for the times concussion take a player or two out of the match for rest of the game.

What happens if 5 get injured currently?
Should we have 18 on the bench? Or 36? What if there are 37 injuries!

The game managed for a long time with with 2 emergencies.

 

[AnEmptyChair]

Ah yep, seems you're correct

Concussion substitutions: What you need to know

Learn how teams can replace players who have possible concussion under a trial with IFAB from MW23

www.premierleague.com

.

Seems incredibly unprofessional changing rules mid season to me.

This part is interesting:

"Won’t the team using APCSs and also three normal substitutions have a possible advantage by having more fresh players on the field than their opponents?
No, because once an APCS takes place, the opposing team are given the right to make an additional “normal” substitution at a time of their choosing."

So if we're following the EPL then once a team uses their concussion sub, the opposition should be allowed to use theirs whenever they choose too.

Seems like opening an unnecessary can of worms to me

I don't disagree with either of your assessments there, mate. I was just pointing out that this kind of rule change isn't unprecedented and isn't as indicative of the AFL being a poorly run organisation as some people would like to believe.

 

[footyfan1978]

What happens if 5 get injured currently?
Should we have 18 on the bench?

That is the thing. We got to use commence sense and balance. We know the basic odds of how likely there is to be a couple of injuries. In theory there is no limit but in reality we know 4 on bench is enough.
3 is probably enough in 95% of times but 4 seems common sense balance of covering for what it likely to be needed and not overdo it.

 

[Tackle Bag]

4 replacement players on the bench plenty. That’s what they are for

 

[little hawk gmf]

Teams that play fri night regularly have a huge advantage. If the sub doesnt get on get plays VFL.

Sunday guy doesn't get on he misses week. Team penalised with player basically missing both games and losing touch.

 

[Pusswah]

Much rather see games occasionally be impacted by a team being a man down, rather than every ****ing game or two having some sort of thing happen where it seems like it's being gamed by the coaches.
You know it'll happen.

 

[Lip Gallagher]

Absolutely absurd idea to introduce a 23rd player. We don't have a 23rd player for knee, hamstring, calf, shoulder, ankle, rib injuries; nor should we for concussion.

Ding ding ding ding, grand jackpot won, verifing win, please call attendant.

Chief said their was a malfuntion, sorry you get nothing

 

[Dangerousfield]

Be nice to know which coaches were pushing for this as it seems not all were. Manipulation loophole for sure.

The substitute rule of a few years back was much hated by everyone, let's leave it in the past.

 

[RUNVS]

I have no problem with the general idea but I think the sub should be forced to be tired too, so there is an exercise bike somewhere and every quarter the sub must ride 4km or something like that, so if he comes on at 3 quarter time he isn't fresh.

 

[Sttew]

Players are still allowed back on after any of those injuries if the coach allows them to. Players are not allowed to return from concussion under these rules. That's the difference

But what if a player is ruled out of the game early on with a knee or hamstring?

 

[theyellowsash]

We had an injury sub before because coaches complained that it was unfair.

We then saw the coaches abuse it and bring players on as a tactic. I even recall seeing one player subbed in for tactics and then the team immediately suffered an injury they could then no longer change.

This won't work.

 

[calman]

Wish AFL would bit the bullet, appoint Gameday Doctors with no obligation to the club, only player welfare, to check for concussion
takes the decision away from players ( who never want to go off) and clubs, who will err on the side of winning

 

[STFU Donnie]

I’m all for preventing concussion and protecting players but I don’t like this because there’s no doubt some teams will manipulate this rule.

Have a non club affiliated medical officer make the call. And any player subbed off for concussion misses a mandatory two weeks. That should cut out the shenanigans.

 

[RUNVS]

Have a non club affiliated medical officer make the call. And any player subbed off for concussion misses a mandatory two weeks. That should cut out the shenanigans.

Except on Grand Final day.

 

[JT_the_Man]

It’s a massive no from me. Treat it like any other injury.

 

[falcons2]

I like it - however, I see problems that could be overcome. But I'd extend it to any major injury. No finger dislocations or corkies for example.
Players can only be subbed before halftime.
Subbed players are automatically banned from playing and contact training for 12 days and must keep a recovery log to be submitted to AFL integrity. (I know oxymoron)
If a club tries to fake it - loss of 4 points + any from that game (awarded to the opponent)(so it could be 8). Loss of score from that game. Coach, 16 day suspension from all AFL venues including training.

Clubs use travelling emergencies for Sunday games and interstate travel anyway so players have been missing games for years.

It may require a 14 day break between a prelim and GF because we don't want a player to miss a GF for a minor injury.

 

[Neale4brownlow]

AFL: Alastair Clarkson gives insight into meeting over concussion substitute introduction (nine.com.au)

Seems strange. Coaches all for it but on the condition the sub can't be over 21?

It should work ok anyway. I doubt there will be too many cases of manipulation for gain. if you have a player go off concussed then they're out for 12 days and miss 1 or 2 games.

 

[juss]

We've tried the sub before, no need to over complicate things, 4 on the bench, no subs.

Concussion, ACL, broken arm, its all the same, it will happen and it's just bad luck.

 

[juss]

Players are still allowed back on after any of those injuries if the coach allows them to. Players are not allowed to return from concussion under these rules. That's the difference

Doesnt add up.
The point of a sub is to prevent the team losing a player from being down a rotation. That impact is still felt regardless of injury.

If a player breaks a leg and can't walk, they're a man down, if in the incident another player is concussed, they get to replace them. There's no logical reason to mitigate against one disadvantage and ignore the other.

 

[Brezsa]

If it ends up only being concussed players, who is going to be the first team to have a player come off with an injury that is structural (knee, shoulder etc) that you immediately know is missing weeks & suddenly that player is also suffering from concussion.

My tip Carlton or Richmond on Thursday. Maybe they can give the doctors a stick to hit the injured player in the head.

 

[Purple Suit]

If it ends up only being concussed players, who is going to be the first team to have a player come off with an injury that is structural (knee, shoulder etc) that you immediately know is missing weeks & suddenly that player is also suffering from concussion.

My tip Carlton or Richmond on Thursday. Maybe they can give the doctors a stick to hit the injured player in the head.

Don't be silly, a doctor has an oath to protect life so they won't be hitting a player. Cleary the head coaches job.

 

[Suma Magic]

If a player does a hammy one minute after the start of the GF, would it be against the rules for a team mate to concuss him before he leaves the ground? Or for him to concuss himself?

This rule doesn’t do anything for concussion. Just reduces the times where teams are a man down.

I really hope they don’t do it. So little benefit for so much bullshit.

 

[00Stinger]

The new potential concussion rule is pretty ******* stupid

Imagine two players collide in a contest. One breaks a collarbone so his team is now a man short. The other one gets ko'ed and has concussion, so his team get to replace him

How is that fair?

Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk

Sent from my SM-G981B using Tapatalk

 

[Suma Magic]

Now it might be an injury sub. Which will definitely just become a normal sub. Which would be so much worse than a concussion sub.

really hope that this is a classic AFL deciding against a terrible idea that they have suggested play.