Bring back the subs

[GVGjr]

Bring back the subs (https://www.afl.com.au/news/390418/bring-back-the-subs-fitness-guru-wants-six-on-the-bench)

I'm not against this suggestion but need to give it some more consideration. It comes down to a choice between having 6 players on the bench or the 4 and 2 sub option as detailed below. The easier solution is the 6 man IC bench

CARLTON'S highly respected fitness boss Andrew Russell has called for the AFL to implement four-man benches with an additional two substitutes upon its return to action in an effort to limit the burnout on players, with more games expected in a reduced period of time.

The League is still hopeful of completing its 153-game season at some stage this year, having been forced to suspend competition after round one due to the global outbreak of the COVID-19 virus.

A number of efforts to ensure the season is completed have either been implemented or floated, with game time already reduced to 16-minute quarters in order to ease the burden on players throughout the year.

However, with the matches likely to be scheduled into an even more condensed period due to the loss of time, Russell believes reducing in-game risks by allowing clubs an additional two substitutes on the bench will helps players cope with the increased workload.

"How far we can push them, none of us really know," Russell said.

"We're all hypothesising, but (the shorter game time) does change it dramatically and we can take some more risks.

"We can do certain things when we get back and I'd like to see one or two subs that allow us to actually manage our players during a game.

"A lot of the time within an AFL game, you'll get to the second half and you'll have a decision to make with between one and three players.

"Do you leave them out there to enable you to win the game, stay in the game or get back in the game, but knowing if you keep them out there you could lose them for one, two or three weeks? We make those judgement calls all the time.

"It would be fantastic if some of the best players like Patrick Cripps are struggling and we can say, 'let's get him out of the game to ensure we get him back in four days' time'. Otherwise we'll let him play the whole game and we might miss him for three weeks.

"I think that flexibility is going to be super important, because we do string players out and we do take big risks with players every week. Reducing that in-game risk, I think that will be important."

Carlton has a number of players who enter the shutdown period in the rehabilitation group, including Charlie Curnow (knee), Harry McKay (groin), Matthew Kreuzer (foot), Zac Fisher (ankle), Brodie Kemp (knee), Eddie Betts (calf) and Nic Newman (elbow).

A handful of those players have undergone surgery as a result of their injury issues, though cannot complete their recovery at the club due to AFL guidelines in the wake of the suspension of play.

However, Russell sees no issue in them managing their recovery from home and believes that daily phone conversations and one-on-one updates will help in their return to action.

"Some of them are no problem whatsoever because they know exactly what we want them to do," Russell said.

"We're in contact with them daily and so is (Carlton rehabilitation physio) Dan James, who is still on board working with the players and myself.

"We can still catch up with the players at a medical rehab clinic. We obviously are not allowed to go to the club, but if it's essential and we need to see them or change a program that's a really important part of where they're going then we can get our eyes on them.

"Obviously that's one-on-one with the player and we can change their program, then they can go away and do it.

"Up until this point in time, it's been pretty smooth."

[GVGjr]

Gia has just tweeted a return to the AFL playing ranks might be on the cards

[bornadog]

Bevo has put forward a proposal to Hocking that we have 4 interchange plus two subs. Any sub that comes on means the injured player cannot play the following week.

Thoughts?

[soupman]

Bevo has put forward a proposal to Hocking that we have 4 interchange plus two subs. Any sub that comes on means the injured player cannot play the following week.

Thoughts?

Geez imagine of Bontempelli got concussed in the first quarter. That's a tough call to make knowing if you sub someone on for him Bont is out next week as well.

[bornadog]

Geez imagine of Bontempelli got concussed in the first quarter. That's a tough call to make knowing if you sub someone on for him Bont is out next week as well.

You may not choose to sub him out, just use the interchange

[GVGjr]

Bevo has put forward a proposal to Hocking that we have 4 interchange plus two subs. Any sub that comes on means the injured player cannot play the following week.

Thoughts?

He wasn't supportive of the same suggestion before the season started.
While I actually agree with it, how practical is it to change during the season?

I would have preferred that he had some vision and been more vocal at the beginning of the season

[Grantysghost]

Bevo has put forward a proposal to Hocking that we have 4 interchange plus two subs. Any sub that comes on means the injured player cannot play the following week.

Thoughts?

I don't mind the sub idea. I'd do away with interchange and just have subs personally. But the ruled out the next week part i don't like at all.

[bornadog]

He wasn't supportive of the same suggestion before the season started.
While I actually agree with it, how practical is it to change during the season?

I would have preferred that he had some vision and been more vocal at the beginning of the season

I took it as a short term solution for this year only. I think this is due to the number of games being played in a short space of time, and the players not selected just sitting around and unable to participate, other than the odd scratch match.

[GVGjr]

I took it as a short term solution for this year only. I think this is due to the number of games being played in a short space of time, and the players not selected just sitting around and unable to participate, other than the odd scratch match.

I get that but he was on record as saying that it wasn't needed even though there was a fair bit of speculation that games could be squashed together at some point during the season. As I said, I don't disagree with the suggestion, it has merit

I guess it's the season to adapt but if we make the change does it's stay for the balance of the season including finals even if we get back to a more normal once a week footy schedule or is it just an option for the compressed component for the home and away season?

[Bulldog Joe]

I don't mind the sub idea. I'd do away with interchange and just have subs personally. But the ruled out the next week part i don't like at all.

You mean like they had in our 1954 premiership season (and until interchange came in)

[bornadog]

There will be no change to interchange caps or subs introduced for 2020.

[bornadog]

Injury substitution, not just concussion, all but certain for 2021 AFL season (https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/injury-substitution-not-just-concussion-all-but-certain-for-2021-afl-season-20210316-p57b5a.html)


AFL Commission approval is all that stands in the way of medical substitutes being introduced for season 2021.

Just two days from the start of the men’s season, the AFL’s football department, in consultation with senior coaches, has decided to introduce the rule that would allow an injured player to be replaced in the game by a 23rd man, according to sources familiar with rule change discussions.

The player must be ruled out of the game with injury or concussion in order to be eligible to be replaced.

The AFL was working through the finer details of the rule on Tuesday morning but the prevailing view was that it would be introduced and had only to be ratified by the commission.

The last-minute nature of the rule – which drew criticism from the AFLPA – was because the rule only gained traction when AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan and footy boss Steve Hocking met with the AFL senior coaches at a breakfast last Thursday, exactly one week from the start of the season.

Coaches and players are concerned that players will be more fatigued than usual given a cut on the interchange cap, increase in quarter length and the man on the mark rule opening up the game for 2021.

The decision to make it medical – meaning any game-ending injury, not just concussion, would trigger a substitution – would mean that both Richmond and Geelong would have been able to substitute Nick Vlastuin and Gary Ablett respectively in last year’s grand final, had Ablett been deemed unfit to continue.

It appears the player substitute would not be able to return at all in the game. It is unclear what it would mean for whether an injured player could play the next week. In the case of concussion, they have to be out for 12 days so cannot play the next week.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

I think with so few interchanges this is necessary. Losing a player early in a game can make it near impossible to keep up and weakens the fairness of a game.

[soupman]

Not a fan, but at least if it's for any injury it makes sense instead of just being a concussion sub.



Coaches and players are concerned that players will be more fatigued than usual given a cut on the interchange cap, increase in quarter length and the man on the mark rule opening up the game for 2021.


Isn't that the entire point of the interchange cap? So that we can finally open up our game and return to the halcyon days of the 1990's?

[ratsmac]

Not a fan, but at least if it's for any injury it makes sense instead of just being a concussion sub.



Isn't that the entire point of the interchange cap? So that we can finally open up our game and return to the halcyon days of the 1990's?

Thats what I thought too

[bornadog]

Not a fan, but at least if it's for any injury it makes sense instead of just being a concussion sub.



Isn't that the entire point of the interchange cap? So that we can finally open up our game and return to the halcyon days of the 1990's?

Why do we want to fatigue players. I want to see the skilled players at their best. The theory is it will reduce congestion - I call bullshit

[kruder]

I hate the sub.

Id prefer to see the player play at least a half at the VFL rather than sitting on the pine potentially not playing.

[Before I Die]

Why do we want to fatigue players. I want to see the skilled players at their best. The theory is it will reduce congestion - I call bullshit

I disagree. I think the interchange and constant rotations led to the introduction of the flood and zone defences. This removed one on one competitions and neutralised the truly skilful players. I also think the sub, in this case, should only be for concussion, as that is the whole reason the idea has come up. It’s not about replacing a player who can’t come back due to a game ending injury, it’s about taking away the pressure on a concussed player to try and con the doctor because they don’t want to let their team mates down. Or at least, that’s why I think it has been suggested. To reduce the chance of long term brain injury.

A team is unlikely to get two concussions in the one game, but there is a much higher chance to get more than one concussion or game ending injury. If the concussion happens second the introduction of the sub rule doesn’t achieve its aim.

[SquirrelGrip]

Why do we want to fatigue players. I want to see the skilled players at their best. The theory is it will reduce congestion - I call bullshit

As BID says, it’s all about tiring the defensive side of the game. A reducing the defensive pressure opens the game up and enables more scoring, and therefore more ad breaks for Channel 7. Ironically more goals doesn’t make any difference for Fox Footy.

As for the concussion rule. I think there should be unlimited subs for unlimited concussions. As long as the person diagnosed with concussion then has an enforced 12 day break. If it’s about health and safety, it can’t just be for the first player to have concussion, it has to be for all of them.

[bornadog]

23rd Player as sub has now been introduced:

From the Age (https://www.theage.com.au/sport/afl/afl-s-medical-sub-rule-approved-for-round-one-20210317-p57bhf.html)


Under the rule, a substitution can be made at any stage of the game, but the decision will rest with the club doctor and have medical accountability in order to avoid any exploitation by clubs to gain a advantage.

The surprise part of the decision was the AFL’s willingness to include injured players rather than only those who had been concussed, to be replaced by the substitute.


Equity and fairness were part of their reasoning in the initial discussion, which had been around concussion.


Clubs were being briefed on the rule change at 11am on Wednesday. The rule only became a realistic possibility after a meeting between the coaches, AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan and AFL football boss Steve Hocking last Thursday.

It has been strongly backed by Hawthorn coach Alastair Clarkson but has support overall from AFL coaches, who felt it would improve the game and make it fairer and safer.

But AFLPA boss Paul Marsh said on Tuesday that clubs would exploit the new injury substitute rule for tactical purposes, not just to replace injured players.

“It clearly has the capacity to be gamed and will be, we would expect,” Marsh said.

AFL sources said that even a small gain in player safety – such as a player not trying to stay on the field when mildly concussed or hampered with injury – made the change worthwhile even though it has not been ratified until the day before the first game, between Richmond and Carlton.

[Axe Man]

AFL statement on new medical sub rule (https://www.afl.com.au/news/563193/)

The AFL has on Wednesday advised all Clubs the AFL Commission had approved a recommendation to introduce a Medical Substitute for each team during matches played in the 2021 Toyota AFL Premiership Season.

The Medical Substitute will require AFL teams to name an additional Player on the interchange bench who can only be activated once a Player is determined to be medically unfit to continue to participate in a match by the Club doctor.

AFL Executive General Manager Football Operations Steve Hocking said the decision was made to ensure the league continued to best protect the health and safety of all players in the AFL competition.

The health and safety of each player in the game remains the priority and the introduction of a medical substitute ensures that player safety remains paramount in our game,” Mr Hocking said.

Over recent years we have continued to take action to strengthen match-day protocols and amend the Laws of the Game to improve safety.

We continue to listen and learn and where we can reasonably make our game safer at any stage of the season, we will.

On behalf of the AFL, I thank all Senior Coaches, the AFL Doctors’ Association and the AFLPA for their input and consultation as part of this decision.”

The Medical Substitute process is detailed below:
AFL Teams will be required to name an additional Player on the Interchange Bench referred to as a “Medical Substitute”.

1. A Medical Substitute will be selected from the Emergency Players listed in the Team list, which is lodged with the AFL the day prior to the scheduled match.

2. The Medical Substitute will be permitted to warm up with the Team on the Playing Surface prior to the commencement of the match.
a. The other three Emergency Players are not permitted on the Playing Surface at any stage as per current AFL Regulations.

3. A Medical Substitute can be activated immediately after it is determined a Player is medically unfit to continue to participate in the match and, due to the nature of the injury sustained, it is reasonably determined the player will be medically unfit to participate in any match for at least the next 12 days.
a. Only the Club Medical Officer can determine a Player is medically unfit.
b. A Medical Substitute can be activated at any stage during the match.
c. A Medical Substitute can occur even after the Interchange Cap of 75 has been met as per current AFL Regulations when an injured player has exited the Playing Surface.
d. On or before the first working day after the match, the Club Medical Officer must provide a Medical Certificate to the AFL certifying that the Player replaced by the Medical Substitute Player sustained the injury.

4. The Medical Substitute Player will be permitted to participate in another match in another competition (e.g. a State League competition) in the equivalent round regardless of whether they are activated during the AFL match.

A Concussed Player:
A player who is substituted out of the match with concussion will be sidelined for a minimum of 12 days as per current 2021 AFL Concussion Guidelines in place.

Sanctions:
A Club that is found to be in breach of the Regulations relating to the Medical Substitute is subject to sanction under the AFL Rules, including, for serious transgressions, for a breach of AFL Rule 2.3 (being the prohibition on conduct unbecoming or prejudicial to the interests or reputation of the AFL or to bring the game of football into disrepute).

Team selection with the inclusion of the Medical Substitute will be as follows:
5.45pm day prior to match commencing – Final Team lodged (22 + 4 emergencies named)
60 minutes prior to match commencing – 22 players + 1 medical substitute named

The Medical Substitute will not be implemented in the 2021 NAB AFW, VFL, VFLW or NAB League Competitions.

[Axe Man]

There is more to consider when selecting the sub than just the type of player they are. Looks like staying away from younger players and rookies may save some $$$.

HOW TO PAY THE SUBS?

Clubs will not have to include the match payment for a medical substitute within their salary cap after the AFL rushed in the rule just a day before the season begun.

But they will still have to pay the players their money outside of the total play payments model. It means some could consider using players who are on based contracts – such as a flat $300,000 annual income – as their medical sub rather than players who are on match payments to avoid having to pay the extra money.

Under the collective bargaining agreement, first and second-year players and rookies receive match payments of around $4000-5000 a game. Across the competition and season it could cost the clubs a total of around $2.5 million.

Any incentives triggered by the medical substitute won't be included within the club's salary cap.

However clubs are mindful that players may reach their triggers for a new contract through being the medical substitute, with many around the competition having games played triggers built into their deals that sees them automatically tick over for another year at their respective club.

Link (https://www.afl.com.au/news/563466/roos-make-move-on-key-young-docker-sitting-on-big-offer)

[bornadog]

Bevo not happy with the new sub rules.

[Grantysghost]

Bevo not happy with the new sub rules.

I just watched it he raises some good points.

Our medical team have not been briefed at all. It's the day before the game.

He says should've had 5 interchange if they were worried about injury/long term impact.

Has introduced inequity. If you get an injury first qtr no advantage. Other team then sees your move and can make a strategic change at 3/4 time for eg which you can not match.

Player who is a sub can't train that night so need to staff a training session the next day, considering the reduction in soft cap it's another layer of admin/cost.

It came from a coaches meeting he wasn't even at? Not sure why he wasn't there.

Seems like another round of his annoyance at certain coaches having Hocking's ear.

[bulldogsthru&thru]

I just watched it he raises some good points.

Our medical team have not been briefed at all. It's the day before the game.

He says should've had 5 interchange if they were worried about injury/long term impact.

Has introduced inequity. If you get an injury first qtr no advantage. Other team then sees your move and can make a strategic change at 3/4 time for eg which you can not match.

Player who is a sub can't train that night so need to staff a training session the next day, considering the reduction in soft cap it's another layer of admin/cost.

It came from a coaches meeting he wasn't even at? Not sure why he wasn't there.

Seems like another round of his annoyance at certain coaches having Hocking's ear.

They can't though unless they get a player injured right? I think it will become fairly obvious if teams start abusing the sub rule to simply make a strategic change.

[Grantysghost]

They can't though unless they get a player injured right? I think it will become fairly obvious if teams start abusing the sub rule to simply make a strategic change.

Yes that's my understanding. However, I guess the point is because of the rushed nature and poor planning around this it exposes all these types of scenarios no one has an answer to.

In a competition as close as this I'm certain teams look for any advantage they can get within the rules.

If it was me and I had a player with a niggle, I'd sub them at 3/4 time. Without the sub they play on or you're down a rotation.

[comrade]

Yeah the strategic move isn't as easy as just activating the sub at half time, though I expect coaches to exploit it over time.

There may be huge advantages to teams who cop an injury late in the game and bring on a completely fresh player (especially if the injured player is having a shocker!).

[Grantysghost]

Yeah the strategic move isn't as easy as just activating the sub at half time, though I expect coaches to exploit it over time.

There may be huge advantages to teams who cop an injury late in the game and bring on a completely fresh player (especially if the injured player is having a shocker!).

Question is what constitutes a sub worthy injury? If it's Treloar, then I would expect some calf or hamstring tightness.

How can you prove it wasn't the case? Is this what the intention is? So many questions!

[comrade]

Question is what constitutes a sub worthy injury? If it's Treloar, then I would expect some calf or hamstring tightness.

How can you prove it wasn't the case? Is this what the intention is? So many questions!

Yeah, that's Bevo's issue. All the extra admin stuff for doctors, the extra sessions for coach and player, the anxieties of sitting on the bench all game not knowing if you'll play.

If they REALLY cared about injury reduction, why bring rotations down to 75 while also going back to full 20 min quarters?