New Substitute Rule

[Saintersss]

Will the team change its structure with the new rules of 3 interchange and 1 substitute.

How will we setup? Will we still go with 2 pure ruckman and 2 tall forwards? Or we continue with our setup from the Grand Final?

Is Gardiner staying on for 1 more year? because this could really be the death of him as he is unable to ruck more than 60% gametime.

[3rd generation saint]

I think this rule will as popular with the coaches as a bad injury to a star player.
Personally I think it is a BS rule made by players who have had their day but just can't stop interferring with a game that has passed them by.
Just wish those morons would just leave the friggin game alone and let it evolve naturally.

[Eastern]

I think Gardi staying on for 1 more year. The substitute rule is made for guys who can play in positions other than ruck. We have Kosi, Benny Mac and Rhys Stanley who can all play Ruck/Forward or Forward/Ruck as well as Blakey who is a backman who can "Pinch-Hit" in the ruck.

Having said that, I believe the days of having 2 specialist ruckmen in the side are finished. The way of the future appears to be 1 x Specialist Ruckman and 1 or 2 x Adequate ruckman who can also play in other positions (normally as the 3rd forward) !!

[SaintPav]

New rule is about helping level the playing field for GC and GWS. The other crap you hear about it helping to avoid high collision injuries etc is friggin baloney.

[plugger66]

New rule is about helping level the playing field for GC and GWS. The other crap you hear about it helping to avoid high collision injuries etc is friggin baloney.

Cannot see how it helps those teams at all.

[SaintPav]

New rule is about helping level the playing field for GC and GWS. The other crap you hear about it helping to avoid high collision injuries etc is friggin baloney.

Cannot see how it helps those teams at all.

It will reduce the capacity of rotations by at least 1/4 so in my opinion, it will limit somewhat the better teams output like the Collingwoods of this world. Apart from the AFL giving giving the newbies a head start in goals, what other rules coud they possibly tinker with to try and level the playing field?

I of course could be wrong and it's just an opinion but I'm happy to put it out there.

[Quixote]

How does it work?

Can a SUB replace another player at any time - or does the replaced player have to be injured? And if the latter, there's surely a whole lot of grey area there.

If the SUB can replace a player at anytime during the game (midway through the 3rd springs to mind), it's going to make for some interesting tactics.

Run a midfielder ragged then bring on another? Same with the ruck, then go mobile?

I actually don't mind the rule, ATM - but will reserve judgement until I've seen what happens and, for now, re-iterate - STOP f****** AROUND WITH THE GAME, Ok? I mean really - what has Adrian Anderson ever actually known about FOOTBALL?

[Eastern]

I think the easiest way to describe it is to look at the guy who is "Substituted Off". He cannot go back on once sub'd but the "sub" who replaces him is permitted to be part of the normal rotations from the time he is sub'd on !!

[SaintPav]

How does it work?

Can a SUB replace another player at any time - or does the replaced player have to be injured? And if the latter, there's surely a whole lot of grey area there.

If the SUB can replace a player at anytime during the game (midway through the 3rd springs to mind), it's going to make for some interesting tactics.

Run a midfielder ragged then bring on another? Same with the ruck, then go mobile?

I actually don't mind the rule, ATM - but will reserve judgement until I've seen what happens and, for now, re-iterate - STOP f****** AROUND WITH THE GAME, Ok? I mean really - what has Adrian Anderson ever actually known about FOOTBALL?

Once the sub come on, the player who is replaced cannot come back on for the rest of the game. It reduces the bench to three interchange.

[noob]

If Gardiner plays another year i would imagine he would be the subbed off player.

[Stillwaiting]

Can someone please clarfy for me, is this a new rule for the regular season, and what is the rule exactly

[barks4eva]

I think this rule will as popular with the coaches as a bad injury to a star player.
Personally I think it is a BS rule made by players who have had their day but just can't stop interferring with a game that has passed them by.
Just wish those morons would just leave the friggin game alone and let it evolve naturally.

Agree!

The new rule is sheer stupidity!

How easy is it if they're concerned about the number of interchanges?

Just fricken cap them!

Same should be done to Demetriou and Anderson!

Absolute assclowns!

[Quixote]

Thanks for the heads up guys.

Not sure about this rule.

Does it actually favour anyone - and what is it in place to prevent??

If anything, and I'd say only marginally, the new rule favours teams with old players in key positions.

MG *cough* Baker Lenny *cough* MG.

[kosifantutti23]

I think this rule will as popular with the coaches as a bad injury to a star player.
Personally I think it is a BS rule made by players who have had their day but just can't stop interferring with a game that has passed them by.
Just wish those morons would just leave the friggin game alone and let it evolve naturally.

Who gives a stuff what the coaches think? The game belongs to the fans. The coaches have their own agendas.

Do you think the game "evolved naturally" to give us four interchange players or were there rule changes that did it?

I would have preferred an interchange cap, like four per quarter, but it will be interesting to see what impact the sub has on the game.

[Enrico_Misso]

If they seriously want to slow the game down
- go back to 20 men
ie two on the bench and make them both subs and put an end to this interchange madness.

The best part of that is we would be back to one on ones.
Players would have the same opponent for the whole game.
Whereas at the moment a midfielder might have up to 6 different opponents during a game.

[saintspremiers]

The problem with the sub is that if you wait too long to sub off a player, you'll tire out the other 21 that are rotating with only 3 on the bench.

Also, if a player gets a injury early, it may be tempting to sub him off.

IF the player somehow unexpectedly recovers to full strength a quarter later, you've blown it and he can't come back on.

So it's gambling/punting during the game.

Bloody tough gig with only 3 on the bench - so if it's a top player injured, the coaches may think we'll try with 2 on the bench if the top player is likely to be back within, say 20 minutes, but much more than that you are almost forced into a sub to keep up your 3 rotations.

Basically, the rule is farked.

Why can't they have 4 interchanges and a sub instead?

That would be sensible.......

[vacuous space]

I don't think it will affect the game that much. It's most likely going to kill off the second ruckman, which was a bit of an endangered species to start with. Teams will look at it as three midfield rotations and will rotate a Kosi/Hawkins type through the ruck. I think it highly unlikely that teams carry a tall on the bench for 50% of the game now.

Rotations will drop, thanks to a person not being on the bench, and the AFL will claim victory. They'll probably pull out an equally dubious stat about a decrease in injuries next year. I'd really like to see this data linking injuries to rotations. From what Eade and others have been saying, it sounds like they've been searching for numbers to suit what they wanted to do anyway.

I'm not sure where the AFLPA is on this one either. Surely pulling a player out of the lineup isn't going to be a good thing for them. It will be interesting to see how regularly the sub is used. If it's infrequent then it could really impact careers. I think the talls are already feeling the heat. Guys like McEvoy, who lack mobility, have got to be wondering if the AFL is out to get them.

[#1GILL]

I don't think it will affect the game that much. It's most likely going to kill off the second ruckman, which was a bit of an endangered species to start with. Teams will look at it as three midfield rotations and will rotate a Kosi/Hawkins type through the ruck. I think it highly unlikely that teams carry a tall on the bench for 50% of the game now.

Rotations will drop, thanks to a person not being on the bench, and the AFL will claim victory. They'll probably pull out an equally dubious stat about a decrease in injuries next year. I'd really like to see this data linking injuries to rotations. From what Eade and others have been saying, it sounds like they've been searching for numbers to suit what they wanted to do anyway.

I'm not sure where the AFLPA is on this one either. Surely pulling a player out of the lineup isn't going to be a good thing for them. It will be interesting to see how regularly the sub is used. If it's infrequent then it could really impact careers. I think the talls are already feeling the heat. Guys like McEvoy, who lack mobility, have got to be wondering if the AFL is out to get them.

I think it being used infrequently is out of the question. Teams will use the advantage of fresh legs every time surely?

[vacuous space]

I think it being used infrequently is out of the question. Teams will use the advantage of fresh legs every time surely?

I'm not sure it's an advantage to get a lesser player on the field, fresh or not. Ideally, you're going to be taking your best 21 into the game. Fresh legs may be an advantage in a tough game late, but unless you're trowing the guy into the middle, I'm not sure how much impact fresh legs will have. Surely you're not going to be throwing a lesser player into an important spot in the dying stages of a critical game.

IMO the tactical advantages will be limited and the sub will be nothing more than a novelty. My guess is it will seldom be used for it's intended purpose and it will have minimal impact on the most important part of the rotations.

[mad saint guy]

Stupid, crappy pointless rule that has been brought in for the sake of change. It just means developing/backup ruckmen will have a much harder time getting a game, older players will probably expire sooner if they can't rotate as often and kids breaking into the side (as a sub) might only get 25-30 minutes of TOG instead of 40-50.

I can see Geary, Armo and Clarke being our regular sub contenders for a good part of the year. Likely to come on with 10 mins to go in the third quarter. This rule is bad news for Ben McEvoy; he's not strong or experienced enough to be the number one ruckman and he's not mobile enough to play enough as a forward to justify his selection at the expense of another runner. I can see Kosi being our regular backup ruck with Gilbert/Goddard swinging forward to cover for him.

[repta]

slow the game dow n....hahahaha ... increase rotations yes. The teams will use it as a weapon. really how often do players get so hurt they cant go back on?
Send a player out to run flat chat for a half. Never stop running. Then replace them in the 3rd quarter. Slow the game down I think not.