Sub rule gone

[What 18,810]

Just heard on SEN the sub rule has been abolished and interchange rotations will be capped at 90 in 2016

Farewell to the worst rule the AFL ever made

[Gorgoroth 12,439]

Good on both counts.

[FarNorthernD 5,848]

I know everyone hated it inc our coach but I never really understood why. It was introduced to eliminate the clear advantage one team got when the other had a game ending injury. As far as I know it was successful in that regard. Not a valid enough reason to keep?

[Gorgoroth 12,439]

Lower rotations will even it up as well, should have dropped it to 60 though.

[poita 3,755]

About fricken time. The dope who proposed the sub rule should be banned from having any further say in the direction of the game.

[daisycutter 28,723]

About fricken time. The dope who proposed the sub rule should be banned from having any further say in the direction of the game.

in that case i hope it was fitzpatrick

[daisycutter 28,723]

90 still too much

but it's a start

[Lucifers Hero 37,524]

90 i/change! Down from 120 is a huge change!

It means players with stamina and speed will be highly valued.

David Misson will need to change the fitness/training regime.

This will have a significant impact on our list management and trading/recruiting, this season.

It might be why we let Cross go but are considering a contract extension for Jimmy.

Other 'slow' players or those with a poor 'tank' will be in danger of being delisted.

I'm trying to think or our players 'with speed' but struggling to think of many.

Hope we recruit a few.

[beelzebub 22,716]

How did common sense sneak back into footy ?

What next....consistency at the MRP...lol

[Gorgoroth 12,439]

How did common sense sneak back into footy ?

What next....consistency at the MRP...lol

Whoa!!!

Calm down... Let's not get carried away...

Ha ha

[stuie 7,374]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-09-03/sub-rule-abolished-interchange-cap-reduced

[What 18,810]

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2015-09-03/sub-rule-abolished-interchange-cap-reduced

The player tweets say it all.

[rjay 24,185]

90 i/change! Down from 120 is a huge change!

It means players with stamina and speed will be highly valued.

David Misson will need to change the fitness/training regime.

This will have a significant impact on our list management and trading/recruiting, this season.

It might be why we let Cross go but are considering a contract extension for Jimmy.

Other 'slow' players or those with a poor 'tank' will be in danger of being delisted.

I'm trying to think or our players 'with speed' but struggling to think of many.

Hope we recruit a few.

I think it more likely that players will slow down, but players with endurance will become more important. There will be a few changes and will be interesting to watch how it pans out next year...

[CityDee 738]

Bail

And jones are a chance to play on now .

[CityDee 738]

Hope the afl have put thought into the cap as changing it dramatically again will waste time for all concerned .

[daisycutter 28,723]

some arithmetic

current system

120 rotations, 3 on bench 18 on field = 21 players

lets ignore sub (as sub + subbed = 1 player)

120 minutes of play. 18 x 120 minutes = 2160 total minutes

divide by 21 = 103 min per player

so each player spends 17 minutes on bench

120 rotations divide by 21 = 5.7 rotations per player

103 min divide by 5.7 rotations = 18.1 min average stay on ground

17min divide by 5.7 rotations = 3 min average stay on the bench

new system

90 rotations, 4 on bench 18 on field = 22 players

120 minutes of play. 18 x 120 minutes = 2160 total minutes

divide by 22 = 98 min per player

so each player spends 22 min on bench

90 rotations divide by 22 = 4.1 rotations per player

98 min divide by 4.1 rotations = 23.9 min average stay on ground

22 min divide by 4.1 rotations = 5.4 min average stay on the bench

Nett:

total game time drops from 103 min to 98 min = 4.9% drop

time on ground interval increases from 18.1 min to 23.9 min = 32% increase

time on bench interval increases from 3 min to 5.4 min = 80% increase

ok, these are only averages and will vary from midfield to fwd to backmen, but gives an idea of impact

(probably some arithmetic errors, so pls check)

[dee-luded 2,958]

I know everyone hated it inc our coach but I never really understood why. It was introduced to eliminate the clear advantage one team got when the other had a game ending injury. As far as I know it was successful in that regard. Not a valid enough reason to keep?

because the coaches changed it from that idea; into just another interchange, effectively. The sub player became just a spare part, instead of being the 22nd man. as an emergency, for your concept.

[dee-luded 2,958]

90 i/change! Down from 120 is a huge change!

It means players with stamina and speed will be highly valued.

David Misson will need to change the fitness/training regime.

This will have a significant impact on our list management and trading/recruiting, this season.

It might be why we let Cross go but are considering a contract extension for Jimmy.

Other 'slow' players or those with a poor 'tank' will be in danger of being delisted.

I'm trying to think or our players 'with speed' but struggling to think of many.

Hope we recruit a few.

this should help Trenners,,,,, & $cully

[dee-luded 2,958]

Bail

And jones are a chance to play on now .

bail is cooked on both sides.

[KingDingAling 3,683]

About fricken time. The dope who proposed the sub rule should be banned from having any further say in the direction of the game.

I would go further than that, I would ban anyone who even tried to justify this terrible rule. Plenty of do-gooders came out in support of the sub, they justified the use of it, and shot down anyone who questioned the sub rule. I would ban them, possibly even give them life without the possibly of parole.

[dee-luded 2,958]

I would go further than that, I would ban anyone who even tried to justify this terrible rule. Plenty of do-gooders came out in support of the sub, they justified the use of it, and shot down anyone who questioned the sub rule. I would ban them, possibly even give them life without the possibly of parole.

LoL, parole from the pa trolling officer.

the sub rule changed from a substitution, back to a 50/50 insurance rotation policy.

lets not have a Sub rule, but let us have 21st & 22nd men... that means 2 interchange as the original interchange bench was, but return the 2 reserves to the team roster...

Lose one reserve, either the 21st, or the 22nd man, during the half time break, at the coaches decision.

[Cards13 9,117]

Bail

And jones are a chance to play on now .

Bring it back! Bring it back now!!!

[Gator 16,921]

Lower rotations will even it up as well, should have dropped it to 60 though.

Agreed.

I'd like to get down to 40.

[Je Roos Salem 661]

Fantastic news. This rule has always meant one less player gets a proper chance to prove themselves. I don't expect the game to get more attractive with less rotations though. It may open up eventually, but there's likely to be a lot of conservatism. Not sure what the end game is when it comes to AFL putting down rotations

[Adzman 2,086]

Good, sub rule is a joke.