AFL ponders bigger bench size. 

 

13 minutes ago, Demonland said:

AFL ponders bigger bench size. 

 

Two, I would like a reduction in bench size.

Bigger bench size to accommodate Petracca's thighs?

Edited May 27, 20205 yr by John Demonic

I’d be keen to see a poll amongst ‘landers. Would a bigger bench work with shorter quarters? 

51 minutes ago, John Demonic said:

Bigger bench size to accommodate Petracca's thighs?

And Dangerfield’s ego. 

I think it would be good for us with the age and shape of our list. kids like Jackson and Rivers could get a taste without being over exposed early in their careers, or guys like Petty and Sparrow could break into the team and then never look back. but the biggest benefit could be bringing in known performers like Bennell and AVB and not having to push their bodies to the edge to gain the fitness they would normally need to play.

I suspect this has something to do with the absence of the VFL.

Not really in favour given 16 minute quarters

I would like non discriminatory benches.

26 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

I suspect this has something to do with the absence of the VFL.

Not really in favour given 16 minute quarters

I think its more to do with only being allowed to train as a team with physical contact for about 2 and a half weeks before the games start. an attempt to lessen the contact and soft tissue injuries on players by giving them less overall game time. for this year I don't have a problem with it anyway as this is not a normal year.

I thin the more people we have available to play, the further our depth is exposed.

 

7 hours ago, ManDee said:

Two, I would like a reduction in bench size.

Agreed,  'MD'.   Reduce it to two chairs.   No bench.   Seriously.

And cap the rotations as well.

5 hours ago, willmoy said:

I would like non discriminatory benches.

19th and 20th women,  wm'.?

Bigger benches are not needed, especially given quarters are being shortened.

If they do make the decision to extend the bench capacity though, it suits players like Bennell and Vanders who can get gametime and have an impact in bursts whilst managing loads on their bodies.

I would prefer more on the bench to shorter quarters.  The AFL have been trying to make shorter games for ages and now they have an excuse.  It's no different to food companies reducing the amount in each pack but keeping the prices the same. 

Why? The AFL says we can't have 20 minute quarters because we need consistency across the season but then say they are considering increasing the interchange?

I have seen no rationale offered for why they would increase the bench. It was originally floated when they were looking at a compressed season but now with a normal fixture going ahead (no mid week games) there is absolutely no reason for it

The game is run by absolute buffoons, shorter quarters plus an increased interchange equals low scoring snoozefests

 

Edited May 28, 20205 yr by Dr. Gonzo

3 hours ago, RalphiusMaximus said:

I would prefer more on the bench to shorter quarters. 

Given our new baseball style MFC logo, how about a dug out with the full list sitting in there chewin gum in their trackies waiting to be subbed in. I've watched too many basebal. movies over the years, and there's a heap of good ones!

Before people interject with the 'stop Americanising footy' - I'm not being serious! Although 6 would be my preference going forward.

 

Edited May 28, 20205 yr by John Demonic

I'm not entirely up for the idea of 6 on the bench but if it were to happen this year I'd throw Bennell in for the first game with small bursts. 

I really hope they don't maintain the shorter quarters for the future, and it definitely shouldn't be more people on the bench going forward. I can understand it for this year as things are just completely out of whack and it gives more players a chance to perform, though I hope they'd maintain a similar (if not lower) amount of interchanges encouraging them to have the players out there for longer periods.

 

13 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

Good. Who wants less footy?

Gil has stated on radio this morning that bench is limited to 4 as per last year.

Yeah I wasn't sure about this and didn't really get the rationale behind it. Shorter quarters but more on the bench. The people 'for' shorter quarters use the point that the best players stay on longer so how would this help that argument? One or the other I think.