The Sub Rule - spread the word.

[Throughandthrough]

OK, need to get this off my chest. Have heard many people (including some AFL players) discuss the sub rule and I think they are missing a key component.

You do NOT (looking at you Chad Cornes) need to nominate the sub before the game starts.

It can be anyone of your four players.


BUT one of them will have to sit there and where the orange safety vest, BUT it is allowed to be swapped between players until (presumably) someone comes on and is declared "the sub".

(They need to advise the interchange steward that they are, and they can not have come on before)

So, for example, if you have two on ballers, a backman and a ruckman on the bench, and IF your main ruckman went down at the first bounce, you could nominate him as your sub (if you wanted to!)

Will be interesting to watch this pan out.

[boydogs]

they can not have come on before

That means you need to select the sub before you start your interchanges. It would have to pretty much be the warmup or opening bounce for you to about face and change who it is going to be.

I suspect the team sheets will include a nominated sub on there as well.

[The Coon Dog]

T & T, are you 100% sure?

According to an article in another thread, it says this:

Clubs will need to officially name their substitute - who will wear a green vest while on the bench - when the final teams are lodged 90 minutes before the bounce.

Source (http://www.afl.com.au/news/newsarticle/tabid/208/newsid/107121/default.aspx)

[Scorlibo]

It will take about 5 minutes of game time for the other three players to be interchanged and for the sub to be set in stone.

[Throughandthrough]

yeah I am sure tcd......
But I have been wrong before!

[The Adelaide Connection]

I hope that when the dust settles on the AFL 2011 season this is the rule that will finally make them stop and say:

"You know what, this tampering isn't panning out, lets just leave all the rules alone for a few years."

We can only hope.

[The Coon Dog]

This is today's Herald Sun:

Clubs must nominate the designated substitute on the team sheets released 90 minutes before a game. That substitute must wear a green vest from that point, even when he joins the traditional warm-up on the ground, and until he's activated to play.

Source (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/green-light-for-subs-on-bench/story-e6frf9jf-1226014396119)

And this from another Herald Sun article:

Teams will play with a bench of three interchange players and one substitute this season, with the sub named 90 minutes before the first bounce.

To avoid confusion, the sub will immediately pull on a bright green vest.

"Whenever the players go on to the field after that 90-minute threshold, the substitute player must wear the bright green vest," Gieschen said.

"Even if he's in his suit. Even if he's out there, just walking around bouncing the ball and having a look at conditions, he's got to have the vest on."

Source (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/nice-look-on-a-suit-for-subs/story-e6frf9jf-1226014397755)

[LostDoggy]

T&T TCD has Torn you new one.

Interesting take on the use of the rule tho

[Sockeye Salmon]

"Even if he's in his suit. Even if he's out there, just walking around bouncing the ball and having a look at conditions, he's got to have the vest on."[/I][/B]


Geez the AFL are a bunch of wankers.

Remember guys, don't kick it to the bloke in the suit.



It's going to be a good look in the GF team photo.

[Throughandthrough]

T&T TCD has Torn you new one.

Interesting take on the use of the rule tho


indeed!


Am completely wrong!

Dunno where i got the idea though, I read it somewhere or heard it from someone who should have known!

MAybe <<<< clutching at straws>>>>> that was the rules for the NAB Cup?

[mjp]

indeed!


Am completely wrong!

Dunno where i got the idea though, I read it somewhere or heard it from someone who should have known!

MAybe <<<< clutching at straws>>>>> that was the rules for the NAB Cup?

Nice try, but nope.

[LostDoggy]

indeed!


Am completely wrong!

Dunno where i got the idea though, I read it somewhere or heard it from someone who should have known!

MAybe <<<< clutching at straws>>>>> that was the rules for the NAB Cup?

T&T. I think it's called a DREAM ;)

[bornadog]

Controversial substitution formula cops a blast from North Melbourne coach Brad Scott (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/controversial-substitution-formula-cops-a-blast-from-north-melbourne-coach-brad-scott/story-e6frf9jf-1226020451312)


The sub rule is probably the biggest joke idea the AFL has ever implemented and already its only the preseason and we have one coach complaining and suggesting maybe we need three subs.

Mark my words, this rule is going to change again next year, the AFL have got it completely wrong all due to a knee jerk reaction to the number of rotations.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Controversial substitution formula cops a blast from North Melbourne coach Brad Scott (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/sport/afl/controversial-substitution-formula-cops-a-blast-from-north-melbourne-coach-brad-scott/story-e6frf9jf-1226020451312)


The sub rule is probably the biggest joke idea the AFL has ever implemented and already its only the preseason and we have one coach complaining and suggesting maybe we need three subs.

Mark my words, this rule is going to change again next year, the AFL have got it completely wrong all due to a knee jerk reaction to the number of rotations.

The rules committee have made many worse calls than this one.

It seems to me that the only issue is that it makes the coaches job a bit harder.


I really don't want to end up with US style offensive team and defensive team.


I can clearly remember the days when we had 2 reserves.

[Hotdog60]

I just thought I would revisit the sub position.

With the up and coming rotation cap arriving next season and our lack of a versatile 2nd ruck starting me thinking of a different strategy that may help our relieving ruck.

Our 2nd ruck options which needs to be resting in the forward line have been a bit below par in regards to goal scoring. Could we do away with him there.

Could we have our sub as a 1 st ruck, with 2 rucks sharing a game of two halves. Could a ruckman stay on the ground for a full two quarters without hitting the wall.
By doing this we could have a more dedicated forward that can score goals.

The first problem will be if we have a injuries to a small or mid field type and all we have in the bank is a 1st ruck.

May not be a problem with a forward replacing the mid and we go back to the resting ruck in the pocket scenario.

With the cap I'm think the game may slow down enough for this to work.

Does have any merit or just would not work. I had a deep thinking moment:o

[Topdog]

The problem with that is when you are bringing on your ruckman as the sub the other team are injecting more pace into their team and freshening the legs of their midfield group.

[Hotdog60]

The problem with that is when you are bringing on your ruckman as the sub the other team are injecting more pace into their team and freshening the legs of their midfield group.

True they can inject more pace but would we in theory have the advantage with the genuine ruck giving our mids first use when opposed to the opposition 2nd ruck.

With the cap wouldn't most player be buggered by the time the their sub comes in and if he can't get the ball his influence could be minimal. It was just an idea on trying to fix our resting ruck role which with the cattle doesn't appear to be working that well.

Maybe we would benefit better if they went back to the 4 interchange with a cap on rotations and scrap the sub.

[Topdog]

But they would still have their first ruck as well. They would rotate the first and 2nd rucks resting up forward so it would still be our second ruck vs Cox, Jolly, Sandi, etc. at times plus they have the extra fit midfielder.

[lemmon]

Was it the Swans who tried this really early on when the rule was introduced and it was pretty ineffectual? Seem to remember Horse Longmire calling it a coaching blunder

[Hotdog60]

Ok I'll shelve my coaches hat for awhile.:D

[bornadog]

the AFL has changed the rule again, with some common sense, but can it be exploited?

AFL announces concussion rule change (http://www.theage.com.au/afl/afl-news/afl-announces-concussion-rule-change-20130320-2geiz.html)


The AFL has announced a rule change allowing the use of a team's substitute player as a temporary interchange while a player is being assessed for concussion.
The rule change allowing the sub to be a temporary interchange for up to 20 minutes came as the AFL also revealed updated guidelines for the management of concussion in the sport.
AFL medical commissioner Dr Peter Harcourt said key features of the updated guidelines included:

- Any player with a medically diagnosed concussion will not be allowed to return to play on the day of injury

- Sideline video review by team doctors of the relevant on-field incident as a part of the clinical assessment will be used at all major AFL venues

- The extensive SCAT3 assessment to determine whether a player is fit to return to play cannot take place for a minimum of 10 minutes after the on-field incident

- A player with any neurological symptoms or signs, video features of concussion and/or any evidence of a disturbance of mental state or cognitive function following trauma, can be considered to have concussion and must not return to play

- Where there is any suspicion of concussion, the player requires further evaluation including video footage review and assessment of symptoms, orientation, balance and cognitive function (SCAT3) prior to a final determination

- If a player is cleared of a concussion following assessment, they can be allowed to return to play, but should be monitored for the duration of the game as concussion symptoms are dynamic and can evolve over time

- Club medical officers may be required to provide full documentation of clinical assessments of concussion to the AFL medical directors for review.

Full documentation will also be collected as part of ongoing research activities.

[chef]

It will be exploited most weeks IMO.

[bornadog]

It will be exploited most weeks IMO.

Simple solution - get rid of the sub;)

[Greystache]

Simple solution - get rid of the sub;)

And have to sit through every losing coach's press conference blaming the loss on being 1 rotation down due to an injury- No thanks.

[LostDoggy]

I can see a player struggling for form on a particular day suddenly being assessed for concussion.

[soupman]

I can see a player struggling for form on a particular day suddenly being assessed for concussion.

How would this rule affect that? Wouldn't you just sub them off like they have been these last two years. Unless you mean the out of form player is taken off, assesed for concussion against their will and then sent back on 20 minutes later having been told to do better.

The only benefit of using this rule dishonestly is to have the player you have chosen to sub off pretend to be concussed, therefore they are replaced. Then you go about the concussion assessment, buying you 20 minutes post sub where if you get an injury the injured player can still be replaced by the player originally subbed off who of course will be found "unconcussed".

[bornadog]

How would this rule affect that? Wouldn't you just sub them off like they have been these last two years. Unless you mean the out of form player is taken off, assesed for concussion against their will and then sent back on 20 minutes later having been told to do better.

The only benefit of using this rule dishonestly is to have the player you have chosen to sub off pretend to be concussed, therefore they are replaced. Then you go about the concussion assessment, buying you 20 minutes post sub where if you get an injury the injured player can still be replaced by the player originally subbed off who of course will be found "unconcussed".

A nice 20 minute rest and then back on.