Pav as Super Sub

[Arcassius]

.... in 2013

One more year pinch hitting, one year up forward - then impact substitute for the last 2 years

 

[ballanFYNE]

Nah, just play him for the four, then keep signing for a year (if he wants) as a sub.

 

[docker_champ29]

Could be a decent idea if he still has his athletisicm. I always thought that we would put a midfielder as our sub for some extra legs.

 

[Arcassius]

Just thought that the mechanism would work well in prolonging his career, as well as allow some flexibility in grooming his replacement(s)

 

[electricfeel]

The day Pav retires will be the saddest day of my life. I refuse to think about Pav as a super sub towards the end of his career

 

[E Shed]

I've been watching some of the games from earlier in the year. He was absolutely brilliant. Must have been injured late.

 

[dominguez]

I know a lot of people weren't happy with the rule change but it will be interesting to see how clubs use it. Will it be seen as an insult if a team is up by 10 goals early in the 3rd term and sub off their marquee player?

Looking forward to the fixtures too, they're usually out not long after trade week so we should get our schedule this week.

 

[se17enteen]

 

[Arcassius]

I know a lot of people weren't happy with the rule change but it will be interesting to see how clubs use it. Will it be seen as an insult if a team is up by 10 goals early in the 3rd term and sub off their marquee player?

It will be interesting to see how it evolves - could be used for managing the return of previously injured players to give them some game time, impact subs, injured players - I still like the idea of pav coming on to a massive roar then demolishing the opposition

Looking forward to the fixtures too, they're usually out not long after trade week so we should get our schedule this week.

Reckon we'll get 3 or so fixtures at the MCG with one against collingwood?

 

[Nickos66]

Haha, gem of a pic there.

Nah, i'd say keep him on the field.

 

[Dr Pepper]

The day Pav retires will be the saddest day of my life. I refuse to think about Pav as a super sub towards the end of his career

here here... i dont even want to think about that.

 

[bfff]

If two players get injured after the sub has been used is the player that has been subbed out then allowed to return to the field?

 

[im_a_lazy_sod]

That's why it should be 4 on the bench + 2 subs to minimise that

What happens if you end up with 3 players going down injured?

Under the current system you'd be f**ked under the subs system you'd be slightly better off but still could be f**ked

All depends on who gets injured - if anyone

PS Funnies pic of Pav I've seen in a while - also if you can get your hands on one of his under17 pics he was pretty chubby

 

[Scatter]

If two players get injured after the sub has been used is the player that has been subbed out then allowed to return to the field?

Don't think so - once you are subbed off you're gone. You are not going to sub someone off unless injured until 3rd quarter anyway just in case.

Like the call of Pav as super sub in a few years time. At some point his output has to diminish, and less gametime will improve longevity and he may be better as an impact player anyway.

Does anyone else think that most times when you are down a player or two through injury during a game, the team tends to dig in and win anyway? I'd like to see the stats on this.

 

[Nickos66]

The whole sub concept to me just plain sucks. Say for instance You're a sub that comes on only for the 4th qtr - seems pretty dumb to put that against your career tally of AFL games, being a spectator for 3 quarters..

 

[dominguez]

If two players get injured after the sub has been used is the player that has been subbed out then allowed to return to the field?

No bfff.

 

[dominguez]

The whole sub concept to me just plain sucks. Say for instance You're a sub that comes on only for the 4th qtr - seems pretty dumb to put that against your career tally of AFL games, being a spectator for 3 quarters..

I think that will be rare but there have been plenty of players injured in the first quarter and play no further part and that game has always counted towards their tally.

 

[bfff]

No bfff.

So all it takes is three injuries and you could be left with no interchange. Great system

 

[Scatter]

So all it takes is three injuries and you could be left with no interchange. Great system

Only if you sub someone off early when there are no injuries at that stage, then get three injuries after that - how often do you reckon that will happen?

 

[bfff]

What if someone gets injured early and you use your sub? Two more injuries and you are screwed. Not that unlikely given the nature of the game.

 

[Scatter]

What if someone gets injured early and you use your sub? Two more injuries and you are screwed. Not that unlikely given the nature of the game.

How is that different to now?
You'd have one left on the bench to use either way.

 

[bfff]

No you'd be left with none to use because the sub can't come back on.

 

[dont bowl there]

No you'd be left with none to use because the sub can't come back on.

Huh? The sub is replacing an injured player in your example. So if another two injuries happen there is one fit bloke on the bench. If that happened in 2010 there would be one fit player left as well.

 

[bfff]

Huh? The sub is replacing an injured player in your example. So if another two injuries happen there is one fit bloke on the bench. If that happened in 2010 there would be one fit player left as well.

I stand corrected

 

[Scatter]

I just don't think any team will sub in the first, and only late in the second maybe, if there are no injuries. Most will occur at 1/2 time or during the 3rd quarter.