The Sub Rule

[RobsJourney]

Hey fellas, venting a bit here. Have been really sitting back and thinking about the state of the game, the over umpiring, our best 22, everything basically. And one thing that keeps nagging and coming back is the sub rule. I bloody hate it.
I don't know if the AFL has any hard evidence to show that it has fixed anything they hoped to fix, but, imagine being the sub most weeks, like Ellis so far this year. You get no game time and thus bugger all match fitness, and often you end up back in the 2's just for more game time. Imagine being that bloke, knowing you are seen as 22nd best from the start, and then get dropped.
Then what about the bloke who gets subbed off.. it's a kick in the guts and you also miss out on the chance to possibly do something redeeming in the last quarter or so. And where does that leave your state of mind? It might make them train harder, play better next week. It might eat away until you find yourself traded or delisted.

I do see the benefit in that if you have an injury then you still have 3 rotatable players like your opponent. But, I'm just not happy with the system, and I'd love to find a way to petition against it.

Anywayyyy, if it's worth the discussion, thoughts?



Also...I never liked the idea of a rotations cap, it seems out of place in the sport and would become something that needs to be policed during the game. But I'd probably have it with 4 interchange players, in place of the current system.

 

[tunksy]

still think it sucks. still dont like that a cap is coming too. bugger all we can do unfortunately.

 

[mcuzzy]

if an interchange cap comes in then they're going to have to reduce the amount of games per season

there are enough cramps and injuries as it is, the players will barely get a chance to recover

the afl have sped up the pace of the game with quicker ball ups, less tolerance and calling play on much quicker, the playesr don't have much time for a breather unless they're on the bench or actively resting in hte forward line like cotchin does.

i believe the players need to have more of a say in what happens, because it's quite clear andy d and his crew have no idea what it takes to be an elite athlete at this level anymore

 

[Rodney Dangerfield]

I'm all for a 17 game season anyway.
This bloody playing a handful of sides twice is ridiculous.

 

[NUFC Tiger]

Hey fellas, venting a bit here. Have been really sitting back and thinking about the state of the game, the over umpiring, our best 22, everything basically. And one thing that keeps nagging and coming back is the sub rule. I bloody hate it.
I don't know if the AFL has any hard evidence to show that it has fixed anything they hoped to fix, but, imagine being the sub most weeks, like Ellis so far this year. You get no game time and thus bugger all match fitness, and often you end up back in the 2's just for more game time. Imagine being that bloke, knowing you are seen as 22nd best from the start, and then get dropped.
Then what about the bloke who gets subbed off.. it's a kick in the guts and you also miss out on the chance to possibly do something redeeming in the last quarter or so. And where does that leave your state of mind? It might make them train harder, play better next week. It might eat away until you find yourself traded or delisted.

I do see the benefit in that if you have an injury then you still have 3 rotatable players like your opponent. But, I'm just not happy with the system, and I'd love to find a way to petition against it.

Anywayyyy, if it's worth the discussion, thoughts?



Also...I never liked the idea of a rotations cap, it seems out of place in the sport and would become something that needs to be policed during the game. But I'd probably have it with 4 interchange players, in place of the current system.

Pretty much agree RobsJourney - not a fan of the sub rule myself. Means one player has to warm the bench while another then basically gets told his services for the rest of the game aren't required.

I get how it's to help reduce the disadvantage of having an injured played early in the match but for instance in the collingwood game, we subbed off Tuck for Ellis and then Chaplin got concussed and King got a corky/possible hamstring injury so we effectively played a bit of the third and the entire last quarter with only 1 fit guy on the bench.

Cool avatar by the way

 

[johnno77]

I like the sub rule. Would be tough to be the sub but surely it makes a bloke like Ellis work harder at training. His time will come.

The over-umpiring so far this year is another story altogether. Perhaps they should put a cap on whistle blows?

 

[RobsJourney]

if an interchange cap comes in then they're going to have to reduce the amount of games per season

there are enough cramps and injuries as it is, the players will barely get a chance to recover

the afl have sped up the pace of the game with quicker ball ups, less tolerance and calling play on much quicker, the playesr don't have much time for a breather unless they're on the bench or actively resting in hte forward line like cotchin does.

i believe the players need to have more of a say in what happens, because it's quite clear andy d and his crew have no idea what it takes to be an elite athlete at this level anymore

Good post, andy d and co. seem to have no idea at all.

I couldn't agree more, the afl has sped up the game heaps with the fast kick-ins and quick ball ups, quick play ons, a player even brushes a blade of grass just off his mark and he is called to play on. It's bloody ridiculous. Anyway guess I just wanted to vent a bit but it'd be great if the fans could have a genuine say, and moreso the players.

 

[Damo80]

This seems to be the result of the AFL powers to be wanting to specifically mold the game for a specific outcome - that being, to make the game more open, free flowing, and therefore a more "attractive" spectacle. There is also a valid argument around the pure fact that there is a rules committee who are out of a job if they're not concocting rule changes year after year... for them, it becomes about self preservation (holding onto their plumb role at the AFL), rather than "what's in the best interests of the game", which is concerning.

In my opinion, if the AFL want to make the game more open and free flowing, then the simple answer is to have less players on the field. 16 a side etc, whether that be with more interchange players, doesn't really matter. They just seem to taking a very indirect route if this is ultimately their goal driving rule changes such as reducing the interchange to 3, and then capped rotations from next season.