How will we use the new substitute rule

[Andy_Mac]

Interested to here the thoughts of others on what will be the most effective way to use the new substitute rule.

Do you use the substitute as another midfielder to throw into the mix as required or would you be better of using it on a Ruckman. I guess ideally it would be another running player, but given our situation I think we might have to look at it differently.

For mine we use the 3 normal bench spots for mids with PJ as the Sub. We pick up an extra runner on the ground being the small forward (say Tapscott or Jetta), that would other wise be the back up ruckman that can apply extra forward pressure.

We then run Jamar one out in the ruck for 2.5 quarters (Dunn can be used as a last resort for 2-3 mins if required), then Sub PJ in during the third moving Jamar forward for use as our get out option in the last quarter and a bit when the team is on tied legs.

Ultimately given Fitz’s flexibility, by years end I can see him in the side playing that forward come ruckman role. This would allow us to use the sub as a genuine swing man, maybe like a Morton.

 

[StingaArmstrong]

Interesting tactics there.

The rule is there to replace someone that's injured, so having a player that can play multiple roles would be ideal. But at this stage of our development we're better keeping our younger players settled into their positions. Hence at times during the year i can see Bruce or Green being used as the sub as they are more than adept at playing in all parts of the ground and are getting on a bit. The rest for a couple of games would do them good.

 

[LITTLE STINGA]

Interested to here the thoughts of others on what will be the most effective way to use the new substitute rule.

Do you use the substitute as another midfielder to throw into the mix as required or would you be better of using it on a Ruckman. I guess ideally it would be another running player, but given our situation I think we might have to look at it differently.

For mine we use the 3 normal bench spots for mids with PJ as the Sub. We pick up an extra runner on the ground being the small forward (say Tapscott or Jetta), that would other wise be the back up ruckman that can apply extra forward pressure.

We then run Jamar one out in the ruck for 2.5 quarters (Dunn can be used as a last resort for 2-3 mins if required), then Sub PJ in during the third moving Jamar forward for use as our get out option in the last quarter and a bit when the team is on tied legs.

Ultimately given Fitz’s flexibility, by years end I can see him in the side playing that forward come ruckman role. This would allow us to use the sub as a genuine swing man, maybe like a Morton.

Personally I think we shouldn't use our second ruckman as a sub. If teams are more fatigued due to the new rule I would want someone with pace that could expose the oppositions tired legs like Bennell.

 

[Bartram_Class]

2 ruckman in the 21 for mine.

Utility as the sub, a Morton would be ideal.

 

[The Dr]

Agree that Cale could be an ideal sub as he can play forward, back and middle, but hopefully he really steps up next year and becomes an indespensible part of our best 21.

I reckon the forgotten man, Steph Martin could be excellent as a sub. Can play KPD, ruck, and also KPF (less effectively).

One thing though, DB's desire for players to remain flexible (ie - Dunn playing mid/forward, Green mid/forward, Bennell back/mid/forward etc) could prove rather fruitful in this era. I reckon flexibility will become even more important.

 

[d33my]

the term 'best 21' is ungainly. But i'm sure they said that about 'Best 22' back in the day

 

[Demon Dynasty]

Bruce should be our fulltime sub... can play everywhere more than well enough but wont hurt not having him in our best 21.

Morton would be good in that he can play in most positions, but when at his best he must be in our first 21

 

[Demon 16]

Tough call but given their are so many runners in todays game, I dont think a fresh midfielder is going to come on at 3 quarter time and set the game alight such as can happen in soccer.

I think I would pick our best 21 each week, then try to have a versatile player for the sub position.

The idea of having a ruckman who can play forward is that we wouldnt need to rest a ruckman on the bench, hence tiring our midfielders at a faster rate.

 

[deeman12]

Play Stef Martin as a floating backman and back up ruck. Sub him off for a fresh midfielder in the last quarter and have the Russian do all the rucking in the last.

We've put too much time into him to let him languish in the reserves.

 

[Crusty Demon]

I think you have to have 3 midfielders on the bench and have a utility type as your sub. The 3 midfielders on the bench means you can keep your rotations humming along. The utility gives the coach options if need be to plug a hole or replace an injured player.

I'm not 100% sure we can afford to do this though, at least early in the season, as we need someone in our starting 21 who can backup Jamar. Spencer or PJ will be battling for this spot, but the sooner Fitz comes along the better as he will play ultimatley as a forward who can take over ruck duties for 5-10mins a quarter.

We don't need David Hale at our club as he is a spud, but i see why the club was chasing him. But Fitz will hopefully play this role for us sooner rather than later hopefully, meaning we can play 3 midfielders on the bench with a utility type as our sub. Until Fitz comes along though, we will have to play 2 midfielders and a ruck on the bench...

 

[Dez!]

I have no doubts whatsoever that we will use this substitute rule poorly.

 

[The Dr]

I have no doubts whatsoever that we will use this substitute rule poorly.

Hopefully the genius behind our kick-in strategy can come up with a similarly awesome plan with the sub rule

 

[goDees22]

One of the worst rule changes in history, I reckon by about round 5 the AFL will seriously consider getting rid of it, could absolutely kill big men in our game. I think that teams will just use it as an injury cover and probably make a substitution somewhere around 3 quarter time, probably try and pick one ruckman and a pinch hitter and have a sub with some pace to break it open late. Extreme stupidity even by the AFLs lofty standards

 

[d33my]

Just had a thought, getting to the end of a shift at work so feel free to shoot it down, my brain is a bit fried.
What if the AFL gave teams the option of having the sub? I.E you can either nominate on the thurs night with the team sheets whether you will be going for 22 as per usual or 21 w/ sub. Would add another tactical element to the rule, do you risk having no sub for extra rotations or do you play it safe? Would anyone ever go for 21?

Of course this would never happen, because the rule is there ostensibly to aid clubs in the case of injuries but in reality exists so the afl can taylor the game to their standards. i have a feeling no-one would ever choose the 21 if they had the option of 22.

for what its worth i hate the rule, let the game sort itself out ffs, but i guess i was just playing 'demons' advocate here. (oh lawd, it really has been a long night)

 

[Demon 16]

Just had a thought, getting to the end of a shift at work so feel free to shoot it down, my brain is a bit fried.
What if the AFL gave teams the option of having the sub? I.E you can either nominate on the thurs night with the team sheets whether you will be going for 22 as per usual or 21 w/ sub. Would add another tactical element to the rule, do you risk having no sub for extra rotations or do you play it safe? Would anyone ever go for 21?

Of course this would never happen, because the rule is there ostensibly to aid clubs in the case of injuries but in reality exists so the afl can taylor the game to their standards. i have a feeling no-one would ever choose the 21 if they had the option of 22.

for what its worth i hate the rule, let the game sort itself out ffs, but i guess i was just playing 'demons' advocate here. (oh lawd, it really has been a long night)

Interesting concept d33my but why bother with a 'sub' if you can start with him on the bench and use him whenever you want anyway?

Perhaps something like having the option of starting with 22 and no sub, or; 21 and a choice of subs. Ie/ if you go in with 21 players, you can name 3 subs and pick which one you use depending on who gets injured?

Anyway I dont like the rule, but I understand its intent. Coaches are saying that in todays game it is too much of an advantage for a team to have an extra player (if the opposition has an injury) - and in the instance where you have 2 or 3 extra injuries, you are completely stuffed.

The sub rule softens any advantage as a side is able to replace the first injury received.

Personally I would have left it alone, but I reckon we should trial less players on the ground and more on the bench - ie/ 17 or 16 on the field and 5 or 6 on the bench with limited number of interchanges. I would be interested to see the effect on play.

 

[RandB]

Play Stef Martin as a floating backman and back up ruck. Sub him off for a fresh midfielder in the last quarter and have the Russian do all the rucking in the last.

We've put too much time into him to let him languish in the reserves.

The sub rule seems to be a talking point again on the main board and has got me thinking again about our particular strategy.

Since this discussion started we have taken on Campbell as a rookie to cover the "loss" of PJ but I don't know if this will be an answer let alone what the question will be. Roos has stated that he thinks clubs will be making stuffups for a fair while until they have a grasp of how to use the rule optimally wrt their own team which i agree with. Even if Campbell is fit and Spencer is improving I am still not sure how often we will play 2 dedicated rucks although the option is at least nice to have.

In light of this I agree with the above post. Martin needs to be able to ruck to a reasonable standard regardless of our other options in Spencer and Campbell should we decide to play 1 dedicated ruck. Whether we sub him off is another question but he could be pretty important for us if he can make an impact elsewhere on the ground as well. The main question is whether he plays forward or defence when not rucking (if such a scenario eventuates that is).

I look forward to future training reports and obviously the NAB cup to see where Martin is at and if they are developing his rucking game. From what I've read so far he is fitter and stronger.

 

[deeman12]

^^ Martin showed plenty as a backman in 2008 and parts of 2009. He wasn't shocking as a forward but his kicking lets him down big time. I'd say the majority of his non-rucking should be as a backman.

 

[cannons]

Martin is a decent athlete, but a shocking footballer.

As such, he is only of use as a defender as he doesn't have to think about what he's doing, he just has to close his man down. Ask him to play in the ruck or up forward where he has to create the play himself, however, and it's bound to be a disaster.

This sub rule may revive his career to some degree, but unless he has made some serious improvements to his game since the last time I saw him, I would honestly be surprised if he made his way out of the reserves this season.

 

[Demon 16]

I think we'll end up with Jamar rucking most centre square and forward 50 contests, and either Spencer, Campbell or potentially Martin rucking for stoppages in the defensive part of the ground.

 

[RandB]

Martin is a decent athlete, but a shocking footballer.

As such, he is only of use as a defender as he doesn't have to think about what he's doing, he just has to close his man down. Ask him to play in the ruck or up forward where he has to create the play himself, however, and it's bound to be a disaster.

This sub rule may revive his career to some degree, but unless he has made some serious improvements to his game since the last time I saw him, I would honestly be surprised if he made his way out of the reserves this season.

He definitely needs to step up both in the ruck and around the ground no doubt and I agree he seems less vulnerable down back than up forward. IMO if he can improve his rucking and get a bit of mongrel he might improve around the ground as well as a result. But yeah, being serviceable in one area but not the other won't cut it now.