Limit the Number of Interchange Rotations

[Adelaide Hawk]

Why don't we just scrap the cap entirely. Bloody hell I don't see why the AFL has to change the rules all the time.

Because when they do change the rules, they make such a pig's breakfast out of it that they are forced to introduce even newer rules to offset the damage ... but all it does is create more problems .... so more changes are needed. They've been screwing the game up for years, it's their one and only talent.

 

[Allikat]

No no no.

The game now is such a high running high fitness game that it'd just run players into the ground. It has nothing to do with the interchange cap and everything to do with expectations of players, rules of the game, and just how the game's developed.

GWS had only 67 interchanges on the weekend, but their players weren't running any less because of it. Instead they were just running themselves ragged & cramping up all over the field.

I say get rid of the cap all together, leave the sub & the bench as is. Stop putting in rules for the sake of new rules.

 

[Unique Name]

There's a good chance there were threads like this before and it's been brought up many times but the more I think about it, the more it makes sense to limit the number of interchanges. And I mean limit the number to as low as 10 per quarter. I think this will solve many problems we have in the modern game. I'm not sure why the AFL isn't taking this proposal more seriously because if I was running the AFL, this would be one of the first rule changes I'd implement.

Pros:
- It will slow the game down (less injuries)
- It will open up the game (more goals, less congestion)
- No need for a sub. Just have 5-6 players on the bench.
- Encourages teams to play positional footy again.
- Even contest even after injuries to one team
- Less Runners on the ground

Cons:
I can't think of any

F Off with your bloody rule changes. Leave the game alone FFS.

 

[Looney]

F Off with your bloody rule changes. Leave the game alone FFS.

The changes in the rules allowed your mob into the competition. So don't be too critical

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

When players go off for a rest, it's for a proper rest ie a whole quarter.

When players kick a goal, they go back to their position, ideally to kick another one.

When a player is a bit tired, rotate forward pocket into the midfield, and the midfield into the forward pocket.

Many things irritate me about today's game, but the daddy of them all is rotating a player who has just kicked a goal. It makes absolutely no sense of all, but I'm convinced coaches do these things to try and make the game appear far more complicated than it really is.

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

Like sending out knuckle men or sending concussed players back out on the field?

no, like not having a cap on interchanges...

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

Many things irritate me about today's game, but the daddy of them all is rotating a player who has just kicked a goal. It makes absolutely no sense of all, but I'm convinced coaches do these things to try and make the game appear far more complicated than it really is.

the goal is incidental. it's the prolonged stoppage that makes the rotations. and it's not always the player that scores. granted it is quite often because it takes a certain amount of exertion and energy to score a goal..

 

[dumb]

i don't understand how the leap is made from a players fatigue level > # of players around the ball. this seems like something that gets rattled off but i don't see the connection. some of it has to do with how far the ball has moved since the last ball up or throw in.
and supposing there is - it's likely to be at the end when 'the game has opened up' anyway. players being told to follow the ball will tire out eventually anyway and open the game up, ergo there is no need to lower the rotation cap. or maybe we get the players to run a marathon before the game starts?

tiring out the players more and more would lower the skill, surely? there's always unintended consequences. you can't continually tire the players out more and more with rules and expect a free flowing game either.

 

[Whats a Battle]

tiring out the players more and more would lower the skill, surely?

Exactly. And to think that some people bang on and on about how the talent pool is too shallow.

 

[L_W_P]

They should make it 12 players on the field and 10 on the interchange with unlimited rotations IMO.

The quality of the game would increase dramatically, and there'd be no fatigue.

I wouldn't go that far but a 16/6 split with no subs would be perfect imo.

 

[yakka man]

Dweerrwayne says there will be no sub next year. Interchanges capped at 80.

 

[Furn2]

The idea isnt to tire the players out more, its to make the rolling maul 18 man press tactics less effective and therefore the game will evolve into more positional based play. It will tire players out intiially until tactics change but thats not the idea.

If a 400m runner is put in an 800m race does he just run the first 400 as usual then fall on his face at the 450m mark through exhaustion ? No he just runs slower, at the end of the race hes going to be exhausted regardless of the distance.

Its the same idea, if players cant rest then they cant get to every contest or if they do they will be too tired to be effective. So a coach decides to rotate a player in the goal square to rest, then maybe 2 players in the f50 and so on.

Its not just going to be exhausted zombies stumbling around if you reduce innterchange.

 

[afl genius]

Reckon the ideal number is around 80, 120 still seems like alot. 20 a quarter still means you can give all your midfielders a rest, whilst possibly getting back the outline of player positions which is an area the game has gone away from.

 

[SJ]

never like the idea of restricting what coaches can and can't do.

Like having 18 players on the field at a time?

Like playing the game over four quarters?

 

[SJ]

No no no.

The game now is such a high running high fitness game that it'd just run players into the ground. It has nothing to do with the interchange cap and everything to do with expectations of players, rules of the game, and just how the game's developed.

GWS had only 67 interchanges on the weekend, but their players weren't running any less because of it. Instead they were just running themselves ragged & cramping up all over the field.

I say get rid of the cap all together, leave the sub & the bench as is. Stop putting in rules for the sake of new rules.

This isn't a new rule, this is a small step back to an old rule.

 

[Freo2012]

Lets "slow" the game down - make players more tired. It will lessen injuries if players are more fatigued.

What a stupid comment - fatigue is general and specific, players recover with a short breather. Scientific studies have proven that fatigue results in greater injuries overall. You are never going to have all the players on the field having the same level of fatigue, what you will end up with is a greater range of fatigued players, some very, others very little. Thus you get a greater imbalance and with some players at greater fatigue levels there is greater likelihood of more dangerous injury.

Let's be honest the interchange cap is all about trying to make the game more "entertainment value" better, not to reduce injuries - it will mean more injuries. Cannot compare to decades ago when all players where semi-amateurs - training, physiology changes mean modern professional athletes in any sport are far fitter and quicker to recover, but when they "hit the wall" it is the same as the past.

Fatigue does 2 things, lessens players physical output capability at the time and also lessens their cognitive functions - expect many more serious injuries through reduced interchange caps.

The AFL love playing their puppetry "tell the public this lie" to cover up the real reason for what they want without fully thinking or researching what they want and just creating a bigger problem for themselves - pure incompetence.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

the goal is incidental. it's the prolonged stoppage that makes the rotations. and it's not always the player that scores. granted it is quite often because it takes a certain amount of exertion and energy to score a goal..

As opposed to all the other players who stood around and watched?

My SANFL team Norwood lost the 2010 GF because of idiotic rotations. Sam Rowe, now with Carlton, pulled down a big mark. went back and drilled a long goal to give Norwood a 4 goal lead with only a few minutes to go until half time. Rowe was winning the game for Norwood and I couldn't believe it when he was marched off the ground. Norwood were in full control and the opposition were walking around with their heads down.

Norwood took the ball out of centre, rushed the ball forward but there was nobody there! Two more quick rushes into the forward line, but our key forward was sitting on the bench. What for? A rest? He had all half time to rest, what in hell was he doing sitting on the pine with a couple of minutes to go? Norwood could have gone in 5 or 6 goals up and had the game almost won.

Central came back and won by 1 goal, and to this day I am totally convinced that damned stupid idea of rotating the goal kicker cost us the flag. Sorry, but I cannot believe someone who has just scored a goal has expelled any more energy in the play than the players who presented him with the opportunity to goal. I'm sure not even the coaches know why they do it, they just do it.

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

Like having 18 players on the field at a time?

Like playing the game over four quarters?

i really expect more common sense than that from a mod.

obviously i'd like coaches to be able to do anything. i'd love for ross lyon to be able to get his players to drive tanks on the field.

 

[Tas]

Good luck getting recruited if your beep is shit in a no interchange environment.

 

[didaksrightfoot]

Many things irritate me about today's game, but the daddy of them all is rotating a player who has just kicked a goal. It makes absolutely no sense of all, but I'm convinced coaches do these things to try and make the game appear far more complicated than it really is.

There is a lot of sports science that goes on behind the scenes... and Clubs would have done a lot of study into something like this, and if everyone is doing it, you would assume they pretty bloody good reasons.
(I would assume that part of it involves having players at an optimum level of adrenaline/focus... and clubs may have found that for most players, a short break after a goal might be a great way to keep them at the optimum level... but there's probably a whole heap of reasons).

For example, I remember in one test series where Dale Steyn would stand there shouting and checking his pulse before every bowl, and whoever was commentating said it was because they had found that he bowls best when in a very specific heart rate range... I reckon every single player would have a multitude of things like this that they and the club are aware of, but we would have idea about.

 

[JohnnyFontane90]

As opposed to all the other players who stood around and watched?

My SANFL team Norwood lost the 2010 GF because of idiotic rotations. Sam Rowe, now with Carlton, pulled down a big mark. went back and drilled a long goal to give Norwood a 4 goal lead with only a few minutes to go until half time. Rowe was winning the game for Norwood and I couldn't believe it when he was marched off the ground. Norwood were in full control and the opposition were walking around with their heads down.

Norwood took the ball out of centre, rushed the ball forward but there was nobody there! Two more quick rushes into the forward line, but our key forward was sitting on the bench. What for? A rest? He had all half time to rest, what in hell was he doing sitting on the pine with a couple of minutes to go? Norwood could have gone in 5 or 6 goals up and had the game almost won.

Central came back and won by 1 goal, and to this day I am totally convinced that damned stupid idea of rotating the goal kicker cost us the flag. Sorry, but I cannot believe someone who has just scored a goal has expelled any more energy in the play than the players who presented him with the opportunity to goal. I'm sure not even the coaches know why they do it, they just do it.

there's no rule that forces players to come off after they score. i certainly don't like it. you stick with the hot hand. but coaches should be able to rotate as they like.

i mean rowe's not a small man. and players in lower legues i'm gonna guess don't have the aerobic capacity of the AFL anyway. maybe he needed a rest, who knows. i really expect nathan bassett who's very highly regarded to be able to make the correct calls about when his players need rest and maintaining team structure. But if you feel that it was a bad move then fault lies with the coach, not the rule.

 

[Unique Name]

Good luck getting recruited if your beep is shit in a no interchange environment.

This.

Alethicism will be more sort after than skill. Their will always be rubbish games in a season and conversely their will always be good games. So take the good with the bad, let the game evolve naturally and stop trying to **** with it.

 

[SJ]

i really expect more common sense than that from a mod.

obviously i'd like coaches to be able to do anything. i'd love for ross lyon to be able to get his players to drive tanks on the field.

I don't understand the difference really.

It's just a step back toward a (sensible and original) rule of the game.

 

[Looney]

Many things irritate me about today's game, but the daddy of them all is rotating a player who has just kicked a goal. It makes absolutely no sense of all, but I'm convinced coaches do these things to try and make the game appear far more complicated than it really is.

Yeah, sometimes there'd be a player that happens to be lurking near the interchange gates during a stoppage and he'd be called in for a rotation for no apparent reason other than the fact that he was just near by.