One substitute & 3 interchange in for 2011

[tiga]

I can just see an AFL official stopping an injured player and making him put his red vest on before going to the rooms or hospital.   
But who wears it when he is gone?? The mascot??

[Tiger Tragic]

I can just see an AFL official stopping an injured player and making him put his red vest on before going to the rooms or hospital.   
But who wears it when he is gone?? The mascot??

The player will need to wear it all the way into the operating theatre and an AFL official must be on hand at all surgeries to ensure that the red vest is not removed.  A failure to keep the vest on during surgery will result in a free kick in opposition's forward 50m.

[one-eyed]

The player who will be the substitute is to be named 90 minutes prior to the start of a match and he must wear a green vest whenever he goes onto the arena from the time that 90 minute threshold starts even if he's still wearing a suit and tie or tracksuit.

The player who is substituted off during a match must put on a red vest.



http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/green-light-for-subs-on-bench/story-e6frf9jf-1226014396119
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/nice-look-on-a-suit-for-subs/story-e6frf9jf-1226014397755

[torch]

what an absolute crock of poo this is! i feel sorry for the substitute player! extend the bench by one! have five players on the bench!

[mightytiges]

If we had 5 interchange players on the bench rotations would probably reach 200 a game  . The only issues with the sub is working out what type of player is best suited for that role (ruck, KPP or midfielder) to maximise the benefit to the whole team and that you would need to rotate the sub every few weeks so that player doesn't lose fitness being stuck on the bench for what could be most of a game each week.

[Smokey]

what an absolute crock of poo this is! i feel sorry for the substitute player! extend the bench by one! have five players on the bench!

   Didn't play footy back in the 70's did you Torch.   

It was a double-edged sword.  Dragged and that was it for the day but on a cold winters afternoon with the rain almost turning to snow, being first into the showers that only stayed hot for 5 minutes was a blessing.

[mightytiges]

what an absolute crock of poo this is! i feel sorry for the substitute player! extend the bench by one! have five players on the bench!

   Didn't play footy back in the 70's did you Torch.   

It was a double-edged sword.  Dragged and that was it for the day but on a cold winters afternoon with the rain almost turning to snow, being first into the showers that only stayed hot for 5 minutes was a blessing.

Yep our last premiership captain was a substitute on GF day and Royce Hart was a sub in the 1973 PF and turned around a 6 goal half-time deficit on our way to the flag. 

[Penelope]

Pretty sure the they were interchanges on the bench not substitutes in 1980. I think the change happened late 70's

I read somewhere not that long ago that Monteath went into the game injured and spent a long time on the interchange bench, so that could be why you have the impression he was a substitute MT?

[one-eyed]

One sub hasn't even tested in a real game yet and Adrian Anderson is already looking at two subs  ???

----------------------------------------------------------------

AFL to consider two subs
Michael Gleeson
March 19, 2011


THE AFL is looking at an even more radical overhaul of the interchange next year, including cutting the bench to just two players with two substitutes, in the event that the new rules introduced this year fail.

Football operations manager Adrian Anderson surprised and dismayed the AFL captains on Thursday when he told them that if the rule changes introduced this year - under which the bench is reduced to three players with one more substitute for a player who cannot return to the ground - did not have the effect they wanted, they would look at the more dramatic "two and two" rule.

The captains laughed at the suggestion, having expected that if this year's rule - which they oppose - proved a failure then previous bench arrangement of four players with unlimited interchanges would be reintroduced.

In a combative meeting, the captains challenged the new rule and, in particular, the way it had been introduced without trial.

Essendon captain Jobe Watson queried Anderson about not doing appropriate due diligence before making the change. When Anderson protested that the use through the NAB Cup of a bench of six players including two substitutes was a suitable trial, Watson interjected that that was "bulls--t". Watson, Chris Judd, Nick Riewoldt, Nick Maxwell, Cameron Ling, Matthew Pavlich, and Adam Goodes were the most vocal in condemning the new rule and raised the idea that far from preventing injuries, the change was likely to lead to more fatigue injuries.

The captains met league football bosses on Thursday ahead of the official AFL launch. AFL coaches also met the AFL, but the issue of the reduced interchange bench was not raised by the league, which updated the coaches on other football matters.

Not all coaches are opposed to the rule change and some have spoken out in favour of the move, though the opponents have been more strident. North Melbourne coach Brad Scott last weekend called the new rule a "disaster".

"I'm staggered that we spend our time in the coach's box now managing and mitigating fatigue and injury," Scott said after last weekend's practice game, in which he was forced to leave sore players on the ground.

"This rule was supposed to be introduced under the guise of player health and safety. Well, we're going to see injured players having to stay out on the ground, otherwise you'll be playing with 17 men."

The captains' criticism of the AFL on the rule change was unconnected to the ongoing collective bargaining agreement negotiations but was nonetheless a measure of the level of angst among players over the way they feel they have been disregarded by the AFL in recent years.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-to-consider-two-subs-20110318-1c0n7.html

[Stripes]

How many times have we heard a rule was going to be determental to the game with coaches, players and media alike bagging a rule before anyone has even had an opportunity to get used to it.  ::)I remember all the song and dance people went through with the whole rushed behind rules, center circle rule for the ruck, etc etc. I heard there was strong opposition when the kicking out of bounds rule was first introduced too!

I'm not saying this will be remembered as a positive rule but if it reduces the way teams zone now and allows more freedom and flow of ball. I would be wrapped. I notice it is predominately the captains from the clubs who have been very successful abusing the interchange to date who are most vocal in their disapproval. Newman has remained quite to date....what that means, well lets hope the rule change assists our log kicking game plan 

Stripes

[1965]

I'm all for having four subs.

That would put a stop to all this rotation nonsense.

 

[torch]

what an absolute crock of poo this is! i feel sorry for the substitute player! extend the bench by one! have five players on the bench!

   Didn't play footy back in the 70's did you Torch.   

It was a double-edged sword.  Dragged and that was it for the day but on a cold winters afternoon with the rain almost turning to snow, being first into the showers that only stayed hot for 5 minutes was a blessing.

nope, wasn't born!

[Smokey]

I'm all for having four subs.

That would put a stop to all this rotation nonsense.

 

Yep.

[Penelope]

not sure if i like the idea of four subs....but it would probably lengthen the careers of players.

Perhaps 4 subs per quarter?

[the claw]

all we need now is for the afl to get some real balls take it back to 2 interchange and 2 subs and say hello to contested footy again.