The sub rule was much maligned through out the season from all corners. However, I would have to say it was one of the keys to our premiership success.
In what other year could a team handle losing a player not in one final, but in ALL THREE finals, and due to the sub rule, still be on a level playing field? Add to that the round one win, which started it all, and we all owe thanks to the sub rule.
Some might say that the opposition was able to have a fresher player later in the game, but compare that to them having 22 fresher players (due to more rotations) and you see how the cats benefited.
I know some coaches (Malthouse) said it was actually a hinderance if you had 2 players go down, but the answer to that is not to can the sub rule: its to simply allow clubs to name two, or even three subs.
So my toast is to the sub rule - very successful IMO!
In what other year could a team handle losing a player not in one final, but in ALL THREE finals, and due to the sub rule, still be on a level playing field? Add to that the round one win, which started it all, and we all owe thanks to the sub rule.
Some might say that the opposition was able to have a fresher player later in the game, but compare that to them having 22 fresher players (due to more rotations) and you see how the cats benefited.
I know some coaches (Malthouse) said it was actually a hinderance if you had 2 players go down, but the answer to that is not to can the sub rule: its to simply allow clubs to name two, or even three subs.
So my toast is to the sub rule - very successful IMO!







