The lack of responses here would indicate a 'who cares' factor. 

In the big picture, I get that. But for what it's worth,  I would think a no sub, 5 person interchange is both simpler and inevitable, so why delay it?

The fact that Corn disagrees suggests that I am right. 😏

 

The sub rule sucks. just have an interchange bench. 

Messes with players fitness and match ‘touch’. Guys like Toby Bedford end up not playing in the 2’s or firsts

Or you could select a player as the sub and not use him. Stranger things have happened.

4 hours ago, DubDee said:

The sub rule sucks. just have an interchange bench. 

Messes with players fitness and match ‘touch’. Guys like Toby Bedford end up not playing in the 2’s or firsts

What a sad sight it is…  the sub running laps in an empty stadium after a loss, especially when it’s raining. 😭

 

 

Not sure if this warrants a separate thread, but:

Maxy will like this 

The Sub Rule is pathetic. It has never even been used correctly. 
But the AFL Keep it alive 

Just a shocking organization…

On 01/02/2024 at 18:19, DubDee said:

The sub rule sucks. just have an interchange bench. 

Messes with players fitness and match ‘touch’. Guys like Toby Bedford end up not playing in the 2’s or firsts

If the AFL changed the rule to a 5 person interchange bench, within one season an AFL coach will complain that it's unfair when a club has a player removed from the game because of concussion. That coach will call for a sixth player to be on the bench as a "medical substitute".

Nothing surer.

1 hour ago, Clintosaurus said:

Not sure if this warrants a separate thread, but:

Maxy will like this 

about time too.  With the bounces going all over the place half the time it is inevitable that there will be perceived blocking and ludicrous free kicks paid. 

1 hour ago, Clintosaurus said:

Not sure if this warrants a separate thread, but:

Maxy will like this 

I’m hoping Maxy delivers a straight arm to the Cox

6 hours ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

If the AFL changed the rule to a 5 person interchange bench, within one season an AFL coach will complain that it's unfair when a club has a player removed from the game because of concussion. That coach will call for a sixth player to be on the bench as a "medical substitute".

Nothing surer.

true but i reckon we could just ignore that coach

I am happy with the sub rule as is.

I love how fitness, both in game and as a factor throughout the season is managed as a strategic area. 

I also enjoy seeing the games break open in the 2nd half as the fitter teams push harder.

5 man bench will lead to stingier defences and more boring game styles.

19 hours ago, MrFreeze said:

I am happy with the sub rule as is.

I love how fitness, both in game and as a factor throughout the season is managed as a strategic area. 

I also enjoy seeing the games break open in the 2nd half as the fitter teams push harder.

5 man bench will lead to stingier defences and more boring game styles.

The game is more open than it was 5+ years ago and that might have something to do with the limit on rotations and/or the 6-6-6 rule

2013 - Unlimited rotations

2014 - 120 rotations

2016 - 90 rotations

2019 - Introduction of 6-6-6

2021 - 75 rotations

I reckon the sub will become the 5th interchange player sooner or later but they might limit the rotations to 60 eventually.  (or they won't)

Boring news.

I really hate anything vest related in our game but it's probably the best of a bad situation right now. 

On 01/02/2024 at 18:11, Palace Dees said:

The lack of responses here would indicate a 'who cares' factor. 

In the big picture, I get that. But for what it's worth,  I would think a no sub, 5 person interchange is both simpler and inevitable, so why delay it?

The fact that Corn disagrees suggests that I am right. 😏

 

 

On 06/02/2024 at 16:52, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

If the AFL changed the rule to a 5 person interchange bench, within one season an AFL coach will complain that it's unfair when a club has a player removed from the game because of concussion. That coach will call for a sixth player to be on the bench as a "medical substitute".

Nothing surer.

The sub legitimately exists so that teams are not severely disadvantaged by an early in-game injury to a player, it makes sense, and as LDVC says - going to 5 on the IC will negate that purpose.