General Bombers Talk Non-Essendon Thread X

Status
Not open for further replies.

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Charliebrow 16

Premiership Player
Joined
Oct 3, 2006
Posts
3,644
Likes
2,479
Location
Tasmania
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Celtics, Federer, Birmingham FC
Anyone have any strong views or feeling about the substitute rule? Does it still have a place in the game? If not, should it be abolished immediately or at the end of the season? If it goes, do we need more interchange rotations or keep them capped at 120?
 

quotemokc

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jul 19, 2008
Posts
11,986
Likes
13,063
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Atlanta Falcons/Winnipeg Jets
Anyone have any strong views or feeling about the substitute rule? Does it still have a place in the game? If not, should it be abolished immediately or at the end of the season? If it goes, do we need more interchange rotations or keep them capped at 120?
It never had a place
 

BrunoV

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 5, 2009
Posts
14,884
Likes
18,235
AFL Club
Essendon
I've just read that Lucas didn't come close to the great CHFs of his time, yet Modra being compared to Ablett Snr goes through to the keeper?

Ok then.

165 games for 588 goals for an average of 3.6 goals a game.

Look at his record between 93 and 97 following which he had some injury problems and his career petered out. He was twice All-Australian and once a Coleman Medalist.

He kept the company of the era's other great full forwards.

I'm not saying he's as good, but he wasn't that far behind and he has the numbers to back it up (as opposed to being a flash in the pan). Check out some of his highlights on youtube. He was a freakshow.
 

Halftimehero

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Jun 26, 2012
Posts
9,602
Likes
7,956
Location
Front and Square
AFL Club
Essendon
I would have thought murphy yes, Gibbs no. But if caro has written an article saying they are up for sale then there is 0 chance either will be traded
There big problem is they need to trade out some quality to get early draft picks in, apart from Gibbs, Murphy, Jamison and Henderson they really dont have any other players with currency, Kreuzer maybe if he got himself right.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Mercurial89

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Apr 20, 2011
Posts
9,936
Likes
12,257
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Anyone have any strong views or feeling about the substitute rule? Does it still have a place in the game? If not, should it be abolished immediately or at the end of the season? If it goes, do we need more interchange rotations or keep them capped at 120?
4 on the bench. Slowly bring down the cap over a few years to 80. Have a sub for concussions and injuries only. 20min concussion test stays and the sub can be used. If the team gets an injury they can be subbed off but that player is unable to play the following week.

The sub as an injury management tool is ok. I think the above arrangement takes into account the medical side of things, the coaches views on rotations, protects against being a man down in rotations.
 

Yoda_

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 6, 2007
Posts
24,667
Likes
11,310
Location
South East Suburbs
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Tottenham Hotspurs, Melbourne Vixen
Murphy is the one clubs would target - Lot more hurt factor to his game.
Gibbs has more hurt factor than Murphy IMHO. Kicks goals, I50's, R50's, possessions getter, meters gained etc. all factors Gibbs overshadows Murphy in.
 

BrunoV

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 5, 2009
Posts
14,884
Likes
18,235
AFL Club
Essendon
Anyone have any strong views or feeling about the substitute rule? Does it still have a place in the game? If not, should it be abolished immediately or at the end of the season? If it goes, do we need more interchange rotations or keep them capped at 120?

It's close to the most idiotic bit of reasoning that can be credited to the AFL which is saying something.

It was brought in to reduce interchange numbers and lessen the impact on an injury despite the data pretty clearly showing that rotations were at their highest when a team was down to 3 on the bench.

If you want to limit the impact of an injury to one team and want to limit rotations to tire the players, which mind you, is almost certainly going to involve more injuries, I would have thought limiting the number of rotations available to a team to a meaningful amount (as opposed to the average) would be the way to go.

Not to mention that 8/10 times its a waste of game time.

The quicker we are rid of the stupid ******* rule, the better.
 

BrunoV

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
May 5, 2009
Posts
14,884
Likes
18,235
AFL Club
Essendon
So Gibbs and Murphy are up for trade according to Caro's article.


Do not see the point in Carlton gutting its playing list. Would that not just be the more of the same from them? Violent, knee jerk that still dances around the problem. It's not like these players will land them multiple first round picks each (like Judd essentially did for WCE).

We were at the same point 5 or so years ago with not much of value on the list, struggling to attract anyone to the club and seemingly unable to buy our way into the first round of the draft. I like to think that the decision was made to build the list from the ground up which meant spending the time identifying talent and then investing in the development of the players recruited.

It doesn't have to take 5 years either. There will be plenty of good kids AFL wide, in particular at GWS, which SOS will be all over, who will be looking for an opportunity. Our VFL side on the weekend was stacked with AFL quality between the ages of 19 and 22. Fremantle seems to have an abundance of mid sized running machines as does Sydney.

I appreciate the irony of suggesting that they start an era of list building by poaching players from other AFL clubs but I see it as the same thing as taking Hibberd, Crameri, Baguley, Jenkins (who secured us some draft value and has ended up quite the player), Ambrose and Howlett as mature aged recruits.

The models based on teams full of first round picks still fall well short of being proven. The starting point has to always be building a good team for the long term first (I think we did that and it's been frustrating that we didn't get a few finals wins because of the supplements related bullshit between 2012 and 2014). There is plenty to suggest that the premierships all come from the good, consistent teams which ultimately put themselves in positions to attract the additional talent which takes them from being good to great.

There is probably one exception to the rule as the bastards are quite luck in one respect. There are rumblings that both Sheil and Treloar are on the way back to Melbourne and you'd think that SOS being at Carlton gives them a tremendous advantage. You would have to re-assess trading a Gibbs or Murphy for one of those players.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom