Jump to content

Medical Sub

Demonland
in Melbourne Demons

Featured Replies

 
5 hours ago, Demonland said:

 

Concussion sub seems like a no brainer to me.

**no pun intended.

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Shocked 1

    i think it's a bad idea. what makes a concussion so much more important than an acl or a shoulder or hammy that it requires a 23rd man. same deal with any other injury imo if u get a concussion bad luck ur out for the game and u can't be replaced otherwise replace all injuries and if thats the case it should only be valid for injuries in the first quarter because after that it is a big difference having an extra set of wheels just join in the action

  • Quote
    • Like 7
    • Love 1
     
    6 minutes ago, Turner said:

    i think it's a bad idea. what makes a concussion so much more important than an acl or a shoulder or hammy that it requires a 23rd man. same deal with any other injury imo if u get a concussion bad luck ur out for the game and u can't be replaced otherwise replace all injuries and if thats the case it should only be valid for injuries in the first quarter because after that it is a big difference having an extra set of wheels just join in the action

    I agree.  it is bad luck for the team and the player for any injury that stops them taking the field.  That's why overtime we have risen to 4 interchange players.  The flexibility is already in the system.

  • Quote
    • Like 3
    • Thanks 1

    I’m not a fan of subs for the reason they have to warm up and then just sit and watch. With the limited interchange and longer game, I think the disadvantage when a concussion occurs is actually reduced. 

  • Quote
    7 hours ago, Turner said:

    i think it's a bad idea. what makes a concussion so much more important than an acl or a shoulder or hammy that it requires a 23rd man. same deal with any other injury imo if u get a concussion bad luck ur out for the game and u can't be replaced otherwise replace all injuries and if thats the case it should only be valid for injuries in the first quarter because after that it is a big difference having an extra set of wheels just join in the action

    Presumably the AFL's thinking is that players/clubs need an incentive to ensure a concussed player does not play on, whereas they don't see any long term legal suits over a hammy etc. So they don't care if the player comes back on with those injuries.  But given some of the arguments against it other have posted, perhaps penalties rather than incentives is the way to go. Though not sure how to manage penalties.

  • Quote

    I assume they are considering this as the the first 'Sub' works so well??!!

    oh dear

    dont overthink the game AFL, player gets knocked out, they come off.  the game keeps going

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
     

    Number of rotations is spread over fewer players.  Concussion leads to more opportunities to rest the remaining players!  
     

    some issues:  what if you get 2 concussions?  Why is concussion worse than an ACL?  What if your player is [censored]- drag him, give him a concussion test and sub in someone for fresh legs in the second half...

    Pandora’s box this one.  And Pandora hasn’t bathed in a while...

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Haha 1

    Of course coaches want it, they want to be able to have total control and losing players limits their capacity to make moves.

    How about this - instead of the interchange we revert back to subs only. They can have 4, 6 or even 8 players sitting on the bench - hell why not the whole squad? But they can only come on as a sub, interchange is out. I'm sure the coaches will love that idea.

  • Quote
    • Like 4
    • Angry 1
    12 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

    Of course coaches want it, they want to be able to have total control and losing players limits their capacity to make moves.

    How about this - instead of the interchange we revert back to subs only. They can have 4, 6 or even 8 players sitting on the bench - hell why not the whole squad? But they can only come on as a sub, interchange is out. I'm sure the coaches will love that idea.

    You beat me to it Dr. 

  • Quote

    It would seem to me that if you subbed off a player due to the concussion rule, they would be excluded from next weeks game. So you’d only be using it if necessary rather than tactical or to address a specific players poor performance.

    I agree though with the points made above and don’t think it’s a great idea.

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    What a ridiculous idea. 
    Subs do not work, we already know this

    They are really not that smart at HQ

    Concussion is the same as an injury 

    The team is a man down 

  • Quote
    • Like 2

    It’s not about being a man down, it’s about acting in the abundance of caution for an injury you can’t see and can’t easily detect at the time.

    So I’m supportive of the rationale but I don’t think it’s the best solution. I think the best solution is independent doctors. Thats the best way to be cautious, take out any risk and take out any incentive for subbing someone on. 

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    The impact of a man down depends on whether you think teams play with 18 and a bench or if you think they play with 22 who are constantly rotating through the bench. 

     Coaches clearly think it’s the latter. They see 21 as a disadvantage, and 20 as a major disadvantage. 

    It’s hard to argue against that but I think it’s fair to say if we manage concussions perfectly then they can be treated like any other injury. It all comes down to how concussions are managed. 

  • Quote
    46 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

    It’s not about being a man down, it’s about acting in the abundance of caution for an injury you can’t see and can’t easily detect at the time.

    So I’m supportive of the rationale but I don’t think it’s the best solution. I think the best solution is independent doctors. Thats the best way to be cautious, take out any risk and take out any incentive for subbing someone on. 

    If a player is concussed during play. They are off for the day. Man down. 
    subs don’t work we already know this

    subs sitting on the bench waiting for a concussion will not work. They are not match fit and therefore are disadvantaged 

     

  • Quote
    • Like 2
    • Love 1
    54 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

    It’s not about being a man down, it’s about acting in the abundance of caution for an injury you can’t see and can’t easily detect at the time.

    So I’m supportive of the rationale but I don’t think it’s the best solution. I think the best solution is independent doctors. Thats the best way to be cautious, take out any risk and take out any incentive for subbing someone on. 

    So Oliver goes down with potential concussion. Are we more likely to think "ah let's just sub him off, we've got James Jordon to replace him"

    Also, re the player subbed off being unable to play the following week how does that work for the GF? Effectively you'll have a 23rd man you can sub on at anytime.

  • Quote
    9 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

    So Oliver goes down with potential concussion. Are we more likely to think "ah let's just sub him off, we've got James Jordon to replace him"

    Also, re the player subbed off being unable to play the following week how does that work for the GF? Effectively you'll have a 23rd man you can sub on at anytime.

    If you really trying to get an advantage I think you could instruct one of your lesser players to stay down after a tackle to be subbed for fresh legs. Unlikely but it’s a factor to consider. 

  • Quote
    • Like 1

    18 minutes ago, Sir Why You Little said:

    If a player is concussed during play. They are off for the day. Man down. 
    subs don’t work we already know this

    subs sitting on the bench waiting for a concussion will not work. They are not match fit and therefore are disadvantaged 

     

    Not sure what you mean by ‘subs don’t work’. Some teams got good use out of the sub rule. Gia was the super sub for the dogs I believe.

    For home games it’s pretty much just having your first emergency a little more warmed up and ready to play. It really disadvantages travelling sides but if Adam Simpson is calling for it that shows how keen they are to not be a man down. And given how regularly guys get injured it’s more 2-3 men down that really worries them. 

    Good teams won’t use the same player too often and will factor in development. That’s what happens now with emergencies.

    I’m actually more concerned by the 23rd player than the sub. I’m in favour of less players (16 on field) than keeping on adding players. 

  • Quote
    23 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

    I’m actually more concerned by the 23rd player than the sub. I’m in favour of less players (16 on field) than keeping on adding players. 

    Lateral thinking but why not reduce both teams by one if there is a concussion.

    Won't happen but it evens up the teams and could make for a more interesting outcome.

  • Quote
    53 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

    So Oliver goes down with potential concussion. Are we more likely to think "ah let's just sub him off, we've got James Jordon to replace him"

    Also, re the player subbed off being unable to play the following week how does that work for the GF? Effectively you'll have a 23rd man you can sub on at anytime.

    I would assume the sub could only be activated after a player has failed the concussion test with a Dr ruling them out. Wouldn't be an immediate sub and they would have to go through the protocols. 

  • Quote
    •  
    21 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

    Lateral thinking but why not reduce both teams by one if there is a concussion.

    Won't happen but it evens up the teams and could make for a more interesting outcome.

    I'd love the hear the arguments about who gets removed from the ground in the non-concussed side. ?

  • Quote
    48 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

    Not sure what you mean by ‘subs don’t work’. Some teams got good use out of the sub rule. Gia was the super sub for the dogs I believe.

    For home games it’s pretty much just having your first emergency a little more warmed up and ready to play. It really disadvantages travelling sides but if Adam Simpson is calling for it that shows how keen they are to not be a man down. And given how regularly guys get injured it’s more 2-3 men down that really worries them. 

    Good teams won’t use the same player too often and will factor in development. That’s what happens now with emergencies.

    I’m actually more concerned by the 23rd player than the sub. I’m in favour of less players (16 on field) than keeping on adding players. 

    It’s a major disruption to certain players career. Certain players will be “Subs” It has already been tried. The Players said NO

    Do we have subs if Players do an ACL?

    Concussion is a by-product of a very brutal sport

     

  • Quote

    • Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

    Guest
    Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
    Reply to this topic...
    Go to topic listing

    Featured Content

    • WHAT’S NEXT? by The Oracle

      What’s next for a beleagured Melbourne Football Club down in form and confidence, facing  intense criticism and disapproval over some underwhelming recent performances and in the midst of a four game losing streak? Why, it’s Adelaide which boasts the best percentage in the AFL and has won six of its last seven games. The Crows are hot and not only that, the game is at the Adelaide Oval; yet another away fixture and the third in a row at a venue outside of Victoria. One of the problems the Demons have these days is that they rarely have the luxury of true home ground advantage, something they have enjoyed just once since mid April. 

      • 2 replies
      Demonland

    • REPORT: Gold Coast

      From the start, Melbourne’s performance against the Gold Coast Suns at Peoples First Stadium was nothing short of a massive botch up and it came down in the first instance to poor preparation. Rather than adequately preparing the team for battle against an opponent potentially on the skids after suffering three consecutive losses, the Demons looking anything but sharp and ready to play in the opening minutes of the game. By way of contrast, the Suns demonstrated a clear sense of purpose and will to win. From the very first bounce of the ball they were back to where they left off earlier in the season in Round Three when the teams met at the MCG. They ran rings around the Demons and finished the game off with a dominant six goal final term. This time, they produced another dominant quarter to start the game, restricting Melbourne to a solitary point to lead by six goals at the first break, by which time, the game was all but over.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland

    • CASEY: Gold Coast

      Coming off four consecutive victories and with a team filled with 17 AFL listed players, the Casey Demons took to their early morning encounter with the lowly Gold Coast Suns at People First Stadium with the swagger of a team that thought a win was inevitable. They were smashing it for the first twenty minutes of the game after Tom Fullarton booted the first two goals but they then descended into an abyss of frustrating poor form and lackadaisical effort that saw the swagger and the early arrogance disappear by quarter time when their lead was overtaken by a more intense and committed opponent. The Suns continued to apply the pressure in the second quarter and got out to a three goal lead in mid term before the Demons fought back. A late goal to the home side before the half time bell saw them ten points up at the break and another surge in the third quarter saw them comfortably up with a 23 point lead at the final break.

      • 0 replies
      Demonland

    • PREGAME: Rd 17 vs Adelaide

      With their season all over bar the shouting the Demons head back on the road for the third week in a row as they return to Adelaide to take on the Crows. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • 139 replies
      Demonland

    • POSTGAME: Rd 16 vs Gold Coast

      The Demons did not come to play from the opening bounce and let the Gold Coast kick the first 5 goals of the match. They then outscored the Suns for the next 3 quarters but it was too little too late and their season is now effectively over.

        • Like
      • 231 replies
      Demonland

    • VOTES: Rd 16 vs Gold Coast

      Max Gawn has a massive lead in the Demonland Player of the Year award ahead of Jake Bowey, Christian Petracca, Clayton Oliver and Kysaiah Pickett. Your votes please. 6, 5, 4, 3, 2 & 1.

        • Like
      • 41 replies
      Demonland
    View All