I cannot recall a stretch of 3 games where we didnt lose someone to injury.  Loving this stat!

2 minutes ago, buck_nekkid said:

I cannot recall a stretch of 3 games where we didnt lose someone to injury.  Loving this stat!

Harmes.

15 minutes ago, buck_nekkid said:

I cannot recall a stretch of 3 games where we didnt lose someone to injury.  Loving this stat!

 

12 minutes ago, TRIGON said:

Harmes.

Killjoy

2 hours ago, TRIGON said:

Harmes.

Ok.  Got me.  I had forgotten about Harmes and his wrist.  Probably because he played out the game and we didn’t use the sub.  How about 2 weeks?....(not really).  Cant remember the team being so settled in a long time.  This is a good thing- if it is hard to get in to the team, nothing is gifted .  Best chance of developing the game style and cohesion that we need to keep winning 

1 hour ago, buck_nekkid said:

Ok.  Got me.  I had forgotten about Harmes and his wrist.  Probably because he played out the game and we didn’t use the sub.  How about 2 weeks?....(not really).  Cant remember the team being so settled in a long time.  This is a good thing- if it is hard to get in to the team, nothing is gifted .  Best chance of developing the game style and cohesion that we need to keep winning 

Not trying to 'get you' @buck_nekkid. It's good to see the team settled. Possibility of a couple of changes for this week; may depend on the weather, the long-range forecast looks wet and cold.

 

2 hours ago, Demonland said:

 

So, one in ten played the next week. It will be interesting to see if that number increases as the coaches keep pushing to change the medical sub to a 5th interchange.  

I'm not against the concept of the medical sub. However, I don't trust coaches not to use it to their advantage. I would change it so that any player subbed off does not play again until the 12th day after being subbed out.  (Still doesn't stop the medical sub rule being abused in a Grand Final to replace a poor performer on the day.)

 

 

 

 

21 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

Odds of winning a premiership in relation to use of medical sub please? 😅

 

It needs to be changed next season earning a game against your tally as a sub. Surely someone can go back after the game and add the game played if they pull off the vest. 

Edited August 30, 20214 yr by Pates

Does seem odd to count it,

 

Still pretty funny we have used the medical sub the least but had it used against equal top.

 

 

16 minutes ago, roy11 said:

Does seem odd to count it,

 

Still pretty funny we have used the medical sub the least but had it used against equal top.

 

 

superior fitness?

There is no doubt in my mind that both teams in the Grand Final will use their sub, whether needed or not. If not already activated due to an injury, the team which is behind in the last quarter will activate him for fresh legs while the team which is leading will activate him so he can enjoy the feeling of being a true part of the Premiership team.

 

Predictable...

3 became 3+1 because injuries can disadvantage one team

3+1 became 4 because why can't we just use all 4?

4 became 4+1 because injuries can disadvantage one team...

Voss: "I can't see why we just can't play the 23"

 

Didn't Voss use the medical sub recently then say he expected the 'injured' player to play the following week?

Scott is building a habit of bringing on a fresh medisub in the last quarter, it helps his aging team.  Calculated.

Another of AFL 'initiatives' that is slowly watered down by coaches not playing to the spirit of the rules.

As it is the team who doesn't have an 'injured' player is disadvantaged by the 'fresher' team.

Easy fix:  the player replaced by the medsub cannot play the following game, regardless of the injury type.

On 8/31/2021 at 11:49 AM, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

There is no doubt in my mind that both teams in the Grand Final will use their sub, whether needed or not. If not already activated due to an injury, the team which is behind in the last quarter will activate him for fresh legs while the team which is leading will activate him so he can enjoy the feeling of being a true part of the Premiership team.

 

Didn't age well.

As sorry as I am for Jordon that he didn't get a run in the GF, I'm proud of the club for upholding the spirit of this rule on the day. 

I can understand why the "concussion sub" became a generic medi-sub (because players who pull a hamstring would also just happen to have concussion as well, thereby leading to abuse) but the AFL should have held firm and stated that any player who is subbed out will have to miss the next game and a minimum of 12 days. 

Totally agree if you sub the player is out for the next game. You can elect to play one down or sub. It should get rids of the fresh legs subs. As for Voss, seriously 23? That will become 24 because its a disadvantage to lose one of your 23 to injury and so on. 

On 8/31/2021 at 11:49 AM, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

There is no doubt in my mind that both teams in the Grand Final will use their sub, whether needed or not. If not already activated due to an injury, the team which is behind in the last quarter will activate him for fresh legs while the team which is leading will activate him so he can enjoy the feeling of being a true part of the Premiership team.

 

Swing and a miss DL sorry! 

Scrap the sub and just have 10 on the bench!

Can we scrap this BS rule please!?  4 on the bench is plenty and accounts for any injuries that occur during the match

Counting a game for these poor blokes who more often than not, we not make it on the field is a dead set joke.

even the teams on Thursday night are messed with, counting a bloke who didnt play as an out.

We tried the sub rule 10 years ago and it failed and now they go again.  Injuries are part of the game and play into the theatre of sport, overcoming adversity etc.

not to mention messing with the fitness of a bloke on the verge of the 22 who could be playing in the 2's keeping fitness and form up

9 minutes ago, DubDee said:

Can we scrap this BS rule please!?  4 on the bench is plenty and accounts for any injuries that occur during the match

Counting a game for these poor blokes who more often than not, we not make it on the field is a dead set joke.

even the teams on Thursday night are messed with, counting a bloke who didnt play as an out.

We tried the sub rule 10 years ago and it failed and now they go again.  Injuries are part of the game and play into the theatre of sport, overcoming adversity etc.

not to mention messing with the fitness of a bloke on the verge of the 22 who could be playing in the 2's keeping fitness and form up

I'd be happy to get rid of the medi-sub if we could be confident that clubs will bench a concussed player for the rest of that game. Do we have sufficient confidence in the integrity of every coach and medical staff that they will keep a concussed player off the field if there isn't a replacement player available?