Much of the early concerns about the rule focused on the quality of football late in games being compromised by players' levels of exhaustion.... But statistics to the end of round 16 confirm that the game's most eye-catching elements are happening more often, not less, in the final quarter.

With nearly three-quarters of the season gone, a substantial sample size, the numbers show that long kicking and contested marking are at their peak in the final quarters of games. There are also more scores, greater accuracy and greater kicking efficiency.

http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/its-official-subs-rule-has-brought-back-more-marks-and-goals-20110713-1he3a.html

IMO, we need to go further, a little bit more.... 2 interchange / 1 sub: / 1 Emerg: for hospitalized player. (Must miss @ least one following match)

leave it as it is. 3 bench 1 sub is working well. next year the fitness guys will have adjusted to the demands further....god i wish they would just leave the game alone sometimes and let it develop naturally. soccer has it all over afl in this regard

But has the sub rule caused more blow outs in the last q? I don't have any stats but my feeling is that there has been a lot more blow outs this year and i suspect it is because the older clubs with more mature, strong bodies are able to absorb the impact of the sub rule more effectively, whilst the young clubs like the dees, north , rich and gc tire more easily.

Blowouts should be a concern for the AFL (and channel 7 and Foxtel) as it makes for alot of crappy games whih don't hold the interst of neutrals.

But has the sub rule caused more blow outs in the last q? I don't have any stats but my feeling is that there has been a lot more blow outs this year and i suspect it is because the older clubs with more mature, strong bodies are able to absorb the impact of the sub rule more effectively, whilst the young clubs like the dees, north , rich and gc tire more easily.

Blowouts should be a concern for the AFL (and channel 7 and Foxtel) as it makes for alot of crappy games whih don't hold the interst of neutrals.

That scenario only happens when a club goes through a total & radical fast rebuild where the whole list in young.

In past decades prior to the extended interchange bench teams were Not so young but rebuilt constantly and slowly/progressively.

These are new happenings due to the 4 man interchange and the sports science.

The game needs to step back towards its roots to recoup lost character.

What happens when the clubs get properly used to the new subs rule and can comfortably run out whole games? 2-2... then 1-3...

But has the sub rule caused more blow outs in the last q? I don't have any stats but my feeling is that there has been a lot more blow outs this year and i suspect it is because the older clubs with more mature, strong bodies are able to absorb the impact of the sub rule more effectively, whilst the young clubs like the dees, north , rich and gc tire more easily.

Blowouts should be a concern for the AFL (and channel 7 and Foxtel) as it makes for alot of crappy games whih don't hold the interst of neutrals.

Binman it may also be true that as there gets more teams the the talent pool gets spread further

and as a result a growing number of teams are simply not good enough.

Hence the blow outs.

Do the AFL understand cause & effect or do they prefer to sell their rule changes with spurious statistics? Don't answer that.

After 16 rounds, long kicking is up 18 per cent on last season, and a whopping 41 per cent on 2009, while handball is down from an average 340 per game to 309. Contested marking has risen 12 per cent on last year, but is up nearly 34 per cent on 2005, when there were an average of just 19 contested marks taken per game. The 2011 figure is 25.4.

There is every chance the press and changed tactics have contributed to those stats.

There is every chance the press and changed tactics have contributed to those stats.

...and these have occurred as a consequence of the rule change with introduction of the sub.

But has the sub rule caused more blow outs in the last q? I don't have any stats but my feeling is that there has been a lot more blow outs this year and i suspect it is because the older clubs with more mature, strong bodies are able to absorb the impact of the sub rule more effectively, whilst the young clubs like the dees, north , rich and gc tire more easily.

Blowouts should be a concern for the AFL (and channel 7 and Foxtel) as it makes for alot of crappy games whih don't hold the interst of neutrals.

No. Many of the blowouts have been due to factors of differences in talent that have ben evident throughout the game. The introduction of GC would have helped also. In addition, multiple injuries have at various times crippled MFC, Freo and North this year.

As for T, i reckon Swans games c 2005 were awful negative affairs up until the final 5 minutes.

...and these have occurred as a consequence of the rule change with introduction of the sub.

That is possible, too. But it could also be coincidental, rather than causal.

There was another stat that i heard on SEN last week. The average interchange per game hasn't changed from last year, with players receiving less recovery time on the bench (on average).

Don't hold me to this particular stat, but last year it was something like 1minute 30 sec on average on the bench versus this year approx 30 seconds. Obviously less time on the bench has allowed the FDs to maintain their interchange numbers but one wonders at what cost to the players' welfare.

The extra fatigue factor and lack of rest/recovery time from this fatiguing could go some way towards explaining the increase in injuries/break downs this year compared to last. Albeit we shouldn't place too much emphasis on one year's data and one year's attempt to adjust to the new sub rule.

Edited July 14, 201114 yr by Rusty Nails

With all this 'Statistical' anal ysis, where does the 'Enjoyment of the regular footy supporter', come into this equation when all we want is to see some more kicks, some more Looong kicks, and some more regular high marks. Not to mention more "one on one" play,,, and players, at least a bit more often resembling a positional player instead of everyone on the bloody ball.

Today is Fair Dinkum played like it was played 30 years ago @ the local kindergarten teams. Everyone follows the ball all over the ground!

10 or 12 years of this crap is too much...