AFL to officially scrap sub rule and slash number of rotations in bid to reduce on-field congestion

[GVGjr]

Re: AFL to officially scrap sub rule and slash number of rotations in bid to reduce on-field congestion

Took the words out of my mouth.

You say you don't like the constant changes and yet the game was originally designed to have just a 19th and 20th man that replaced injured or out of form players once during a game. I don't see the fascination of unlimited changes, tell me why it's better for the game outside of the fact that you are sick of the changes?

[LostDoggy]

Re: AFL to officially scrap sub rule and slash number of rotations in bid to reduce on-field congestion

I want to see the best players on the ground more than having players waiting to come back on because be the ball is on the wrong side of the ground. I heard on the radio this week that a frustrated Mitch Wallis had to wait 6 minutes to get back on the ground the other week. It was 3 minutes into the quarter when he came off. He came off after just 3 minutes. We will eventually get back to playing the better footballers than the athletes.

If you want unlimited changes then the sub needs to be kept because it is a massive disadvantage to any team that cops an early injury.

Agree. Also, if players are not playing in short, sharp bursts, we will get less passages of play with everyone on the ground charging to every contest, leading to a rolling maul, stoppage after stoppage style of game (not surprised to see Paul Roos as a leading defender).

Last weeks game against NM a good example. I reckon most will remember passages from the last qtr much more than the first three. When the game becomes less about congesting your opponents space and more about winning contests and superior ball movement the game is preferable in my opinion.

[Bornadog]

Re: AFL to officially scrap sub rule and slash number of rotations in bid to reduce on-field congestion

You say you don't like the constant changes and yet the game was originally designed to have just a 19th and 20th man that replaced injured or out of form players once during a game. I don't see the fascination of unlimited changes, tell me why it's better for the game outside of the fact that you are sick of the changes?

How far back do you want to go - that was 40 plus years ago.

OK, put it another way, why is 90 the magic number?

Believe me there will be more changes to this rule in the next few years.

[GVGjr]

Re: AFL to officially scrap sub rule and slash number of rotations in bid to reduce on-field congestion

How far back do you want to go - that was 40 plus years ago.

That's really for you to answer, your position is there are too many changes to the game. Did you see the removing of the 19th and 20th man in the same manner you do on having unlimited IC changes?

OK, put it another way, why is 90 the magic number?

Believe me there will be more changes to this rule in the next few years.

So if I read this correctly you don't actually have a reason for your unlimited changes stance other than you are sick of the changes.

I'm not 100% certain 90 is the right number because it may very well be high given clubs can still make changes in between quarters etc and the actual number will be a lot higher. I am however, all for reducing the wave of players coming off the ground at the same time and I'd like to see a few more of the traditional football players over the athletes returned to the game.

[Bornadog]

Re: AFL to officially scrap sub rule and slash number of rotations in bid to reduce on-field congestion

So if I read this correctly you don't actually have a reason for your unlimited changes stance other than you are sick of the changes.

Never said that.

I can't see the problem with having players come on and off the ground.

I would welcome the interchange going back to 2 and having unlimited interchange. Yes that is a change back.

My concern is the AFL don't know what they are doing and all they do is mess with the game.

[GVGjr]

Re: AFL to officially scrap sub rule and slash number of rotations in bid to reduce on-field congestion

Never said that.

I can't see the problem with having players come on and off the ground.

I would welcome the interchange going back to 2 and having unlimited interchange. Yes that is a change back.

My concern is the AFL don't know what they are doing and all they do is mess with the game.

I'll ask again, why do you favour the unlimited option over a limit of 90? Did you think the 120 limit this year was inhibiting and every team needed more?

I've mentioned the reasons why I think a limit is essential, especially with dropping the sub, because it disadvantages a side who cops a game ending injury to a player early in the match.

[Rocket Science]

Re: AFL to officially scrap sub rule and slash number of rotations in bid to reduce on-field congestion

I'll ask again, why do you favour the unlimited option over a limit of 90? Did you think the 120 limit this year was inhibiting and every team needed more?

I've mentioned the reasons why I think a limit is essential, especially with dropping the sub, because it disadvantages a side who cops a game ending injury to a player early in the match.

I'll proffer one angle; traditional positions as we know them are increasingly moot.

Forwards are expected to relentlessly defend and defenders are expected to aggressively attack, while mids basically play square to square while also doing both. Speed, mobility, pressure and around-the-ground flexibility are king, just ask our current coach.

Have players ever been asked to cover so much ground?

Well executed - a la US at our best - the consensus is this makes for a searing, code-promoting spectacle.

As a punter, I'd happily wear extra interchanges to encourage and effect this.

[Greystache]

Re: AFL to officially scrap sub rule and slash number of rotations in bid to reduce on-field congestion

You say you don't like the constant changes and yet the game was originally designed to have just a 19th and 20th man that replaced injured or out of form players once during a game. I don't see the fascination of unlimited changes, tell me why it's better for the game outside of the fact that you are sick of the changes?

Exactly, everybody wants the rules changed back to the way they were when they were young. My grandfather swore to never watch another game after they brought interchange, he said it was ridiculous American garbage. My Great Grandfather swore to never watch another game after they brought in that stupid centre square, he said it took all the physical players out of the game an turned it into a sport for skinny runners.

Throw it back another 30 years and there'd be a generation complaining that they won't watch because players don't wear hats and knickerbockers anymore.

[Bornadog]

Re: AFL to officially scrap sub rule and slash number of rotations in bid to reduce on-field congestion

Exactly, everybody wants the rules changed back to the way they were when they were young. My grandfather swore to never watch another game after they brought interchange, he said it was ridiculous American garbage. My Great Grandfather swore to never watch another game after they brought in that stupid centre square, he said it took all the physical players out of the game an turned it into a sport for skinny runners.

Throw it back another 30 years and there'd be a generation complaining that they won't watch because players don't wear hats and knickerbockers anymore.

I don't think people want rules changed back to where they were. People are sick of constant changes, reactive rules and the fact the AFL doesn't know what they want and where they want the game to go. It is impossible to make the game look like what you want it to with a rule change. We have old farts changing rules to try and make the game the same as the 80's - it will never work.

The game is constantly evolving, so let it evolve as long as players safety is looked after.

[Murphy'sLore]

Re: AFL to officially scrap sub rule and slash number of rotations in bid to reduce on-field congestion

Agree with what you say, BAD.

The AFL commission are like a teenage boy with his hand down his pants. For God's sake, leave it alone!

[Happy Days]

Re: AFL to officially scrap sub rule and slash number of rotations in bid to reduce on-field congestion

Exactly, everybody wants the rules changed back to the way they were when they were young. My grandfather swore to never watch another game after they brought interchange, he said it was ridiculous American garbage. My Great Grandfather swore to never watch another game after they brought in that stupid centre square, he said it took all the physical players out of the game an turned it into a sport for skinny runners.

Throw it back another 30 years and there'd be a generation complaining that they won't watch because players don't wear hats and knickerbockers anymore.

I was reading a book the other day that claimed a group of traditionalists wanted to ban the hanger the other day after Charles "Commotion" Pearson (killer handle) took the first recorded one back in 1890-something. The hanger!

There's an innate need for each passing generation to think the way they did something is better.

[F'scary]

Re: AFL to officially scrap sub rule and slash number of rotations in bid to reduce on-field congestion

I like the change and agree with comments to the effect that the it is positive because likely outcomes are:

• players will have to pace themselves more and won't be able to run from stoppage to stoppage as much.
• floods and presses will likewise be less pronounced.

Another benefit in my view is that the eyesore of players constantly running on and off the ground will be reduced.

What would really help and doesn't require rule changes is

• the umpires adopting a clear policy of balling/throwing it up faster to reduce the time available for players to mill in around the stoppage.
• Be harsher on players hatching the ball.

[Sedat]

Re: AFL to officially scrap sub rule and slash number of rotations in bid to reduce on-field congestion

What would really help and doesn't require rule changes is

• the umpires adopting a clear policy of balling/throwing it up faster to reduce the time available for players to mill in around the stoppage.
• Be harsher on players hatching the ball.

This x 1000. All they need to do is get rid of the stupid bounce - we are the only idiotic sport that requires our umpires to have a skill - so that the ball can be thrown up quickly and reduce congestion. Also the whole notion of "no prior opportunity" is flawed. It is a skill to win the ball and successfully dispose of it under extreme duress - any mug can hatch it and wait for the stoppage. Might be harsh to begin with but teams will adjust very easily - those teams that move the ball quickly (like us) will be rewarded.

[Bornadog]

Re: AFL to officially scrap sub rule and slash number of rotations in bid to reduce on-field congestion

This x 1000. All they need to do is get rid of the stupid bounce - we are the only idiotic sport that requires our umpires to have a skill - so that the ball can be thrown up quickly and reduce congestion. Also the whole notion of "no prior opportunity" is flawed. It is a skill to win the ball and successfully dispose of it under extreme duress - any mug can hatch it and wait for the stoppage. Might be harsh to begin with but teams will adjust very easily - those teams that move the ball quickly (like us) will be rewarded.

The only time the ball is bounced is in the middle of the ground. Umpires have been throwing the ball up for a few years now.

[Sedat]

Re: AFL to officially scrap sub rule and slash number of rotations in bid to reduce on-field congestion

The only time the ball is bounced is in the middle of the ground. Umpires have been throwing the ball up for a few years now.

They take far too long to throw it up - they posture around, tell everyone to move away from behind them and then eventually throw it up. Just get it and throw it up right away to stop the crowd gathering.