Do you think it's time the AFL reconsider the 3 player + 1 sub on the bench rule?

[Lums23]

I really don't like the idea of trying to open the game up by making players tired. If anything it will increase soft tissue injuries, particularly in the sort term. These players right now are conditioned to run, but also with plenty of short breaks. When they're cooked and can't go off, they're just going to do a hamstring from overuse. And aside from that, it will run the spectacle, particularly in the short term. Every single team will have to change their game play dramatically, as well as the fact that skill level will be low as all the players will be exhausted

 

[Greendogg5]

I really don't like the idea of trying to open the game up by making players tired. If anything it will increase soft tissue injuries, particularly in the sort term. These players right now are conditioned to run, but also with plenty of short breaks. When they're cooked and can't go off, they're just going to do a hamstring from overuse. And aside from that, it will run the spectacle, particularly in the short term. Every single team will have to change their game play dramatically, as well as the fact that skill level will be low as all the players will be exhausted

of course the change would need to be made gradually over time.

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Give the clubs an option

No subs and 60 interchanges or the current scenario

One of the major reasons for the sub is to stop clubs out-rotating the other in the event of early injury

If you limit the subs - that can't be done anyway

 

[Wallaby]

I really don't like the idea of trying to open the game up by making players tired. If anything it will increase soft tissue injuries, particularly in the sort term. These players right now are conditioned to run, but also with plenty of short breaks. When they're cooked and can't go off, they're just going to do a hamstring from overuse. And aside from that, it will run the spectacle, particularly in the short term. Every single team will have to change their game play dramatically, as well as the fact that skill level will be low as all the players will be exhausted

Why would that increase the incidence of hamstring and other soft tissue injuries? Here's an article that uses the AFL injury report from 2013 as a resource.

Key paragraph:
There was a statistically-significant increase in both injury incidence and prevalence over the years 2008-2013 (“High interchange era”) compared to the years 2002-2007 (“Low interchange era”).

http://physioworks.com.au/Injuries-Conditions/Activities/afl-injuries

 

[ThirtyThr33]

I thought I saw on the news that the AFL plans on having shorter quarters so maybe it won't be necessary to reconsider the bench rule, its something like 35 minutes for the average quarter length.

How they are going to shorten the quarters I don't know. Maybe they should not stop the clock when there is a ball up. It is funny however, one time they were trying to speed the game up and now its the opposite.

 

[Damon_3388]

I've never understood why having more fatigued players (which leads to greater risk of injury and sloppier play) is considered a desirable outcome.

 

[Sportsguy]

As an industry, the AFL is searching for this utopia where we have reduced congestion to quicken up the game and create a better spectacle. All while managing to simultaneously limit injuries. Constant rule changes seem to frustrate fans, coaches and players, and I personally think the four-man bench +1 substitute works perfectly to restrict any potential imbalances injuries may cause. A seemingly notable observation from round one has been the new harsher interpretation of the holding the ball decision - rewarding the tackler and penalising incorrect disposal. Hopefully this in itself leads to greater consistency and more attractive spectacle, and in-turn forcing a reconsideration of the new current sub rule

 

[swaffi]

Nothing will happen, it will stay the same because of the AFL's propensity to be prideful.
Has anybody ever heard of the AFL coming out saying to a rule that has been in for a few years.."yes I think we've made a mistake there, let's do this or that"
They're a law unto their own, they don't listen to the people. They might hear the people but they don't really listen

 

[Pessimistic]

Other commentators paying out on KB, who cracked it and blamed coaches complaining about injuries for the sub rule

 

[Crows4Eva]

Really hoping the sub rule is ditched after this season. Seems likely as it seems like most coaches, players and fans don't like the sub. I kinda expect 4 person interchange with a rotation cap around 80-100 will be the outcome tbh

 

[Lums23]

Crazy idea that I've just thought of and haven't put a lot of thought into, but what if they had 5 or 6 on the bench and no subs. If they're limiting interchanges anyway, so it's not like it'll mean more people running on and off the bench. The players would get more of a rest, potentially meaning less soft tissue injuries as they won't be overworking themselves. Part of the reasoning behind the sub is so that a team isn't at a disadvantage if there's an early injury. With 4 on the bench it was an occasional issue, but with 5 or 6 the extra minutes to be picked up from the injured player would be more spread across the whole team

 

[Matera92]

It should be the players more than anyone pushing for it to be removed.

Playing one quarter a week then running laps...yeah that's what I signed up for...

 

[PACatter]

Yes, but I think they should consider something a bit outside the lines of what has been suggested.

I think a 2 interchange + 3 sub set-up would be beneficial both to the game and to the players.

You'd have less interchanges, due to less players to switch out. Coaches would be less likely to pull a guy off for a 2-minute rest right after they goal.

Extra subs would allow for players with corks or minor injuries to be subbed off and may allow the coach to consider the health of the players a bit more. I think everyone agrees that some of these guys that play on should be pulled for the game at times, but coaches won't because of limited subs.

 

[frotherr_]

Personally I believe it should be 4+1. Most local leagues have 4+ 1 so why shouldn't the AFL? It would reduce injuries and keep the game at a constant pace and would allow fatiguing players to recover rather than incur injury.