Has decreasing player rotations off the bench from 120 to 90 really improved the game?

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • GVGjr
    Moderator
    • Nov 2006
    • 44620
    #16
    Re: Has decreasing player rotations off the bench from 120 to 90 really improved the game?

    Originally posted by bornadog
    Who cares if 4 players run off the ground? How does stopping that improve the game.

    No one here has put up a valid argument on changing the rotation numbers which was supposed to improve the game.

    KB is calling for 50 only rotations - I don't get the point.
    Because you don't want to get the point. I've raised the benefits of having limited rotations. To get rid of the sub, the IC limits had to come in.
    Western Bulldogs Football Club "Where it's cool to drool"

      Comment

      • Ghost Dog
        WOOF Member
        • May 2010
        • 9404
        #17
        Re: Has decreasing player rotations off the bench from 120 to 90 really improved the game?

        Originally posted by GVGjr
        The ridiculous wave of players running to the bench
        It means teams that cop an injury early in the game aren't as disadvantaged as they were previously

        I could go on.
        Not to mention players with the ball being continually caught out by players leaping off the bench to tackle them unawares. That really annoys me.
        You don't develop courage by being happy in your relationships every day. You develop it by surviving difficult times and challenging adversity. ― Epicurus

          Comment

          • Bornadog
            WOOF Clubhouse Leader
            • Jan 2007
            • 66687
            #18
            Re: Has decreasing player rotations off the bench from 120 to 90 really improved the game?

            Originally posted by GVGjr
            Because you don't want to get the point. I've raised the benefits of having limited rotations. To get rid of the sub, the IC limits had to come in.
            I don't think so. No one has pointed out that having 90 rotations is better than having 120 How does getting rid of the sub = IC limits coming down?
            FFC: Established 1883

            Premierships: AFL 1954, 2016 VFA - 1898,99,1900, 1908, 1913, 1919-20, 1923-24, VFL: 2014, 2016 . Champions of Victoria 1924. AFLW - 2018.

              Comment

              • jazzadogs
                Bulldog Team of the Century
                • Oct 2008
                • 5640
                #19
                Re: Has decreasing player rotations off the bench from 120 to 90 really improved the game?

                As far as I'm concerned all of the benefits attributed to the interchange cap are aesthetic only. I also don't have access to Champion Data or other stats but would love to see yearly trends for TOG percentage per player, number of interchanges per player and number of soft tissue injuries.

                I couldn't care less if four people interchange after each goal, but I do care if Jack Macrae is expected to run at 100% for 10% longer and it causes him to tear his hamstring (not saying this was necessarily the cause).

                I am far more concerned on the impact this cap could have on our players (particularly if it gets dropped further) than on the aesthetics of rolling mauls and mass interchanges.

                  Comment

                  Previous 1 2 template Next
                  Working...