What happens if you have too many injuries to name a full squad?

[Dry Rot]

A question that may be faced this weekend by the Saints

Injury crisis: Saints may struggle to name full squad of 26

https://www.afl.com.au/news/628354/injury-crisis-saints-may-struggle-to-name-full-squad-of-26

[Hotdog60]

Well they have enough players just not the players that they want to play.

But it is an interesting question and I suppose you play short or if the other side is nice will reduce their squad to match.
Also maybe the AFL has to get involved and if there is reduced players on the field maybe the length of the quarters could be shorten just for that game.

[bulldogtragic]

Put a baby Saints jumper on witches hats. I know that’s an upgrade on many of their players. But it seems the right thing to do.

[bulldogtragic]

Well they have enough players just not the players that they want to play.

But it is an interesting question and I suppose you play short or if the other side is nice will reduce their squad to match.
Also maybe the AFL has to get involved and if there is reduced players on the field maybe the length of the quarters could be shorten just for that game.

It’s too bad being sensible about it. Freo had 5 injuries in the end and so no one on the bench. It’s bad luck. It’s no different except Saints know about it in advance. I don’t want a precedent to change things. I wouldn’t want us to reduce our team if we were playing them. They just need to do the best with what they have.

[Hotdog60]

It’s too bad being sensible about it. Freo had 5 injuries in the end and so no one on the bench. It’s bad luck. It’s no different except Saints know about it in advance. I don’t want a precedent to change things. I wouldn’t want us to reduce our team if we were playing them. They just need to do the best with what they have.

I agree with your comments and it would be just tough luck but I did say if the other side was nice, I'd be a bastard. :)

[jeemak]

You play injured players. If it's good enough to do in a do or die final - where aside from what chest beating coaches say - players play injured, then it's good enough to do in a home and away game.

Reckon Morris plays with a broken back in round 12.......well of course, it's a bad example because the dude's a *!*!*!*!ing psycho, but you get my drift.

[Dry Rot]

Thanks for the replies.

That's what Woofers think, now what do you think the AFL would do?

[boydogs]

Thanks for the replies.

That's what Woofers think, now what do you think the AFL would do?

Reduce the interchange cap to slow the game down and reduce injuries :P

[jeemak]

No. Don't change any rules for one game or one week only.

You play injured players, field less players, or don't play a team at all and forfeit.

[jeemak]

The reason why you have to keep a straight line on the rules is pretty much the same as why teams like ours forego home ground revenue in lockdown. If stiff shit rules apply to one element of the game, then stiff shit rules should apply to other elements of the game.

We can't control St Kilda's injury management, only they can (or any other team). We know that teams field players with injuries when they think they're better off doing so, that means unfortunately you either let it slide or make a blanket rule that if a player gets a certain type of injury they're out for a mandated time and that's not acceptable.

No offence DR, but this isn't an issue, in my view.

[Topdog]

You play injured players. If it's good enough to do in a do or die final - where aside from what chest beating coaches say - players play injured, then it's good enough to do in a home and away game.

Reckon Morris plays with a broken back in round 12.......well of course, it's a bad example because the dude's a *!*!*!*!ing psycho, but you get my drift.

Spot on. Morris is a freak but for most mere mortals there will come a point where they have to understand if the are hurt or injured.
If you are hurt you play the game, if you are injured you can't.

Also 2 of Saints injuries are essentially parental leave

[GVGjr]

A question that may be faced this weekend by the Saints

Injury crisis: Saints may struggle to name full squad of 26

https://www.afl.com.au/news/628354/injury-crisis-saints-may-struggle-to-name-full-squad-of-26

We had a similar challenge under Rocket in 2006 and from memory he still wouldn't promote Tom Davidson from the rookie list.

It's a tough spot for the Saints but they'll have to struggle through it

[mjp]

It's a tough spot for the Saints but they'll have to struggle through it

The mid-season draft was last week...couldn't they have resolved the situation then?

[Happy Days]

The mid-season draft was last week...couldn't they have resolved the situation then?

Yep. They had 4 picks and only used 2.

I think I’m missing something here. They definitely have enough for a 22 and seemingly enough for 4 emergencies, just not emergencies they want to play. They also had two guys voluntarily sack playing this week, which, while not casting aspersions on their reasons for doing so, shouldn’t mean they get granted a special exemption to do something they could’ve done last week and chose not to.

[GVGjr]

The mid-season draft was last week...couldn't they have resolved the situation then?

Exactly.

[Twodogs]

They attached that crest on the front of their jumper after they finished a game V North in the 1030s short of players but still won. After they awarded themselves the crest due to their brave effort Jack Dyer famously said that if Richmond did that every time they had a gutsy win their jumpers would become too heavy to wear.


I guess the answer to your question is they would see another crest on the front of their jumper.

[jeemak]

They attached that crest on the front of their jumper after they finished a game V North in the 1030s short of players but still won. After they awarded themselves the crest due to their brave effort Jack Dyer famously said that if Richmond did that every time they had a gutsy win their jumpers would become too heavy to wear.


I guess the answer to your question is they would see another crest on the front of their jumper.


Who are you talking about?

[Axe Man]

They attached that crest on the front of their jumper after they finished a game V North in the 1030s short of players but still won. After they awarded themselves the crest due to their brave effort Jack Dyer famously said that if Richmond did that every time they had a gutsy win their jumpers would become too heavy to wear.


I guess the answer to your question is they would see another crest on the front of their jumper.

Was that when William the Conqueror was captain of the Saints?

[Twodogs]

Was that when William the Conqueror was captain of the Saints?

The bastard was born in the late 1020s he would have been too young to be captaining the Saints in the 1030s. I was thinking Cnut but he was basically a pagan and only a Christian for show so I don't reckon that the Saints would have been all that keen back then.

Edward the confessor perhaps?

[Twodogs]

Who are you talking about?

St Kilda.

[jeemak]

St Kilda.

By crest they meant emblem?

[Twodogs]

By crest they meant emblem?

Yep but they call it a crest.

https://www.saints.com.au/club/history/the-crest

[Axe Man]

The bastard was born in the late 1020s he would have been too young to be captaining the Saints in the 1030s. I was thinking Cnut but he was basically a pagan and only a Christian for show so I don't reckon that the Saints would have been all that keen back then.

Edward the confessor perhaps?

They debuted much younger in those days, their life expectancy was much shorter so couldn’t afford to wait. ;)