-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
expanded bench
- Thread starter TasSaint
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Won't more fresh players make the game even faster?
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
That's a gay idea.
Nope.
More fresh legs = more sprinting down to the backline to flood.
Should go back the other way if anything, IMO.
More fresh legs = more sprinting down to the backline to flood.
Should go back the other way if anything, IMO.
Adding more players to the bench will just speed up the game further.
Agree totally with this. Limiting the number of interchanges made would be one way of doing this.
Don't we want to see a fast game of footy? I don't think we need more players on the bench, but I don't think limiting the number of interchanges is required either.
Go back to two or three on the bench, plus if a doctor deems a player injured, then another is allowed to take his place in the 22 or whatever it is reduced to.
The only condition is that if that happens, then that player must have a week off the following week to stop fake injuries.
That is the only way there will never be a team with only 15 or 16 fit players on the field without the game becoming like Grid Iron.
There's not many games that are ruined by flooding these days. When there is flooding, it's usually caused by the attacking side chipping it around and not going long to the forwards.
Leave the bench at 4, don't limit the number of interchanges. I think it's spot on at the moment.
Leave the bench at 4, don't limit the number of interchanges. I think it's spot on at the moment.
Expanding the bench will increase speed. The interchange did it and the last expansion did it. More fresh runners = more constant speed. The main players to suffer will be the elite who spend most time on the ground. It will also favour the clubs with more money and longer lists for you equalisationalists regardless of merit devotees.
Exactly right, plus limiting the number of interchanges is a health risk to players in the short and long term.
So why does Freo, who do the most changes, have the least injuries? Without wanting to risk infuriating the woofing gods, I think we've only had one mild hammy (out for 1-2 weeks) in 2 years. Is it because we don't allow players to continue to run on tired legs?
Our only current injury is Webster who did his knee playing for East Perth last year. (Schammer might now be on the list from the bump from Lucas on his AC joint).
Of course impact injuries like this can't be helped by regular rotations (Crawford's arm etc).
I reckon 4 on the bench is about right. Limiting interchanges would just add to the rules that Freo has been the reason to change.
Prior Opportunity came in after Freo started running with the ball "Neesham's run and stun" approach.
Nominating a ruckman at the centre bounce started after Drum put both Clem Michael and Daniel Bandy in the centre at the same time (I think Collingwood and Hawks did similar around the same time, and the Dogs still do it this year with Darcy and Street, but the rule is now in so that only one can jump, even if it's a bad bounce).
I wonder what other rules we can influence... 2 goal headstart for visiting teams interstate?
Ruckmen can't be more than 210cm tall?
Forwards can be reported for over excited post goal celebrations?
I suppose we've already done our bit for alternative jumpers!
BTW Mal Brown back in the 70s (coaching Claremont) also did the first ever interchange, sending a guy back out to replace an injured guy after he'd been replaced earlier in the match. They changed the 19th/20th men rules the year later to allow interchanges.