SA Footy

gadj1976 wrote:

Jim05 wrote:

Armchair expert wrote:Geelong being dodgy, colour me surprised.


Subbed off = ruled out for 14 days

easy fix that should have been implemented from day dot, another **** up by Steve sHocking

That is exactly what should happen.
If you are subbed out you miss 2 weeks

I agree with the concept but not 14 days though, make it 10 so that if you get subbed out on a Sunday you can still play the following week's Thursday or Friday night game. I think missing two games is too harsh.

I don’t think it’s harsh at all. If it’s not a serious enough injury for you to miss 2 weeks you stay out there until the end.
Need to send a message to the coaches that a sub is only to be used for serious injury or concussion replacements

The problem Saturday night was that Sidebottom was unable to finish the last quarter with cramp.
We couldn't replace him, as cramp isn't an injury.
Would've been handy to get Brown on for his fresh legs.

Jim05 wrote:

gadj1976 wrote:

Jim05 wrote:

Armchair expert wrote:Geelong being dodgy, colour me surprised.


Subbed off = ruled out for 14 days

easy fix that should have been implemented from day dot, another **** up by Steve sHocking

That is exactly what should happen.
If you are subbed out you miss 2 weeks

I agree with the concept but not 14 days though, make it 10 so that if you get subbed out on a Sunday you can still play the following week's Thursday or Friday night game. I think missing two games is too harsh.

I don’t think it’s harsh at all. If it’s not a serious enough injury for you to miss 2 weeks you stay out there until the end.
Need to send a message to the coaches that a sub is only to be used for serious injury or concussion replacements

Ridiculous. You blokes ever played footy, if you have you'd know there's a multitude of injuries that cause a player to sit out the remainder of a game that have a quick recovery time. Laceration that won't stop bleeding, rolled ankle, continued cramp, mild muscle tweaks, back spasms, blurred vision, sickness, just to name a few. Just make it 4 on the bench again, I'd even go 6 on the bench if there wasn't so many clubs.

Vamos wrote:Ridiculous. You blokes ever played footy, if you have you'd know there's a multitude of injuries that cause a player to sit out the remainder of a game that have a quick recovery time. Laceration that won't stop bleeding, rolled ankle, continued cramp, mild muscle tweaks, back spasms, blurred vision, sickness, just to name a few. Just make it 4 on the bench again, I'd even go 6 on the bench if there wasn't so many clubs.

Yes, 25 years worth but that's another issue.

Of course I know that injuries can resolve themselves in less than a week.

We were talking in the context of a team subbing someone off with a faux injury, so we don't get in a situation where people are being subbed out due to being tired and having fresh unutilised legs on the bench.

However the rule will more than likely be changed to include the ruling that King(?) stated where the opposition team can put their sub on when the first team activates their sub, making the entire conversation, moot!

The irony of the AFL creating the sub rule to make it fair when it's making it unfair

gadj1976 wrote:

Vamos wrote:Ridiculous. You blokes ever played footy, if you have you'd know there's a multitude of injuries that cause a player to sit out the remainder of a game that have a quick recovery time. Laceration that won't stop bleeding, rolled ankle, continued cramp, mild muscle tweaks, back spasms, blurred vision, sickness, just to name a few. Just make it 4 on the bench again, I'd even go 6 on the bench if there wasn't so many clubs.

Yes, 25 years worth but that's another issue.

Of course I know that injuries can resolve themselves in less than a week.

We were talking in the context of a team subbing someone off with a faux injury, so we don't get in a situation where people are being subbed out due to being tired and having fresh unutilised legs on the bench.

However the rule will more than likely be changed to include the ruling that King(?) stated where the opposition team can put their sub on when the first team activates their sub, making the entire conversation, moot!

32 years for me, how's your arthritis?

My opinion is the Sub adds nothing to the game, if they're named to play they should be able to come on whenever it suits. Who was the Sub in the AA side last year?

Personally think there should be some sort of a repercussion for subbing players out, maybe one that says 15 or less subs per year allowed per club and you can name as many subs as you want (only counted as a match played if you get subbed in). If you want to use 3 subs in a game, go for it. That would stop clubs doing it tactically at least for the majority of the season.

The problem in Kings idea is what if the sub is activated 5 minutes into the first quarter.
Is the opposition obliged to make it as well?
Just make the rule that you can sub anyone off at any time for any reason.
They no longer take part in the game but are available the following week.

tigerpie wrote:The problem in Kings idea is what if the sub is activated 5 minutes into the first quarter.
Is the opposition obliged to make it as well?
Just make the rule that you can sub anyone off at any time for any reason.
They no longer take part in the game but are available the following week.

That is just the old sub rule that everyone hated

Armchair expert wrote:

tigerpie wrote:The problem in Kings idea is what if the sub is activated 5 minutes into the first quarter.
Is the opposition obliged to make it as well?
Just make the rule that you can sub anyone off at any time for any reason.
They no longer take part in the game but are available the following week.

That is just the old sub rule that everyone hated

I'm not a fan either, but the current model sucked for us.
Geelong got a clear advantage from an injury.
If we could've subbed sidey out then it would've been even.

Armchair expert wrote:

tigerpie wrote:The problem in Kings idea is what if the sub is activated 5 minutes into the first quarter.
Is the opposition obliged to make it as well?
Just make the rule that you can sub anyone off at any time for any reason.
They no longer take part in the game but are available the following week.

That is just the old sub rule that everyone hated

Why do we need it, are clubs requesting it?

Vamos wrote:

gadj1976 wrote:

Vamos wrote:Ridiculous. You blokes ever played footy, if you have you'd know there's a multitude of injuries that cause a player to sit out the remainder of a game that have a quick recovery time. Laceration that won't stop bleeding, rolled ankle, continued cramp, mild muscle tweaks, back spasms, blurred vision, sickness, just to name a few. Just make it 4 on the bench again, I'd even go 6 on the bench if there wasn't so many clubs.

Yes, 25 years worth but that's another issue.

Of course I know that injuries can resolve themselves in less than a week.

We were talking in the context of a team subbing someone off with a faux injury, so we don't get in a situation where people are being subbed out due to being tired and having fresh unutilised legs on the bench.

However the rule will more than likely be changed to include the ruling that King(?) stated where the opposition team can put their sub on when the first team activates their sub, making the entire conversation, moot!

32 years for me, how's your arthritis?

My opinion is the Sub adds nothing to the game, if they're named to play they should be able to come on whenever it suits. Who was the Sub in the AA side last year?

We've got two things in common! Arthritis and the hate of the sub.

gadj1976 wrote:
We've got two things in common! Arthritis and the hate of the sub.

I'm surprised that subway haven't jumped all over the sub for some marketing.

I too think it's a bullshit concept open to be manipulated with.

It is another of the Steve Hocking inspired changes to distance the AFL from all other leagues.

These arsewipes love to tell people they are custodians of the game yet they seek to make it only about the elite few at the expense of all others without a care.

666, stand, protected zone, rotations, subs, 4 interchange, score reviews, mid season draft, pre season draft, covid top ups, percentage that is not percentage, deliberate and especially a 50 metre kick that does a left turn after it's sixth bounce, GWS, Gold Coast, special mention to them drawing 4000 (not a typo) to their game on Saturday, clash jumpers, umpires in every colour bar white, repeated drug violations are ok if you claim mental health which simply demeans any person with genuine needs, if you go in to get the ball you will most likely be the one penalised unless you flap like a chook and do love taps to the football, no Tasmanian side.

We do not watch better football because of all the changes. Leave the game alone.

DOC wrote:It is another of the Steve Hocking inspired changes to distance the AFL from all other leagues.

These arsewipes love to tell people they are custodians of the game yet they seek to make it only about the elite few at the expense of all others without a care.

666, stand, protected zone, rotations, subs, 4 interchange, score reviews, mid season draft, pre season draft, covid top ups, percentage that is not percentage, deliberate and especially a 50 metre kick that does a left turn after it's sixth bounce, GWS, Gold Coast, special mention to them drawing 4000 (not a typo) to their game on Saturday, clash jumpers, umpires in every colour bar white, repeated drug violations are ok if you claim mental health which simply demeans any person with genuine needs, if you go in to get the ball you will most likely be the one penalised unless you flap like a chook and do love taps to the football, no Tasmanian side.

We do not watch better football because of all the changes. Leave the game alone.

The holding the ball where a player doesn't have the ball at the bottom of a pack (difficult to get rid of it if you don't have it) and nominating ruckman are my two major gripes on top of what you've stated above.

Yep.

If they stopped umpiring 35 metres off the ball (there are 3 of them) after a stoppage then they could quickly blow it up and ball it up.

I also forgot to mention how every umpire at every bounce/ball up has to tell the players that he will go out backwards.

DOC wrote:It is another of the Steve Hocking inspired changes to distance the AFL from all other leagues.

These arsewipes love to tell people they are custodians of the game yet they seek to make it only about the elite few at the expense of all others without a care.

666, stand, protected zone, rotations, subs, 4 interchange, score reviews, mid season draft, pre season draft, covid top ups, percentage that is not percentage, deliberate and especially a 50 metre kick that does a left turn after it's sixth bounce, GWS, Gold Coast, special mention to them drawing 4000 (not a typo) to their game on Saturday, clash jumpers, umpires in every colour bar white, repeated drug violations are ok if you claim mental health which simply demeans any person with genuine needs, if you go in to get the ball you will most likely be the one penalised unless you flap like a chook and do love taps to the football, no Tasmanian side.

We do not watch better football because of all the changes. Leave the game alone.

Thats my kinda rant, bravo!

gadj1976 wrote:

DOC wrote:It is another of the Steve Hocking inspired changes to distance the AFL from all other leagues.

These arsewipes love to tell people they are custodians of the game yet they seek to make it only about the elite few at the expense of all others without a care.

666, stand, protected zone, rotations, subs, 4 interchange, score reviews, mid season draft, pre season draft, covid top ups, percentage that is not percentage, deliberate and especially a 50 metre kick that does a left turn after it's sixth bounce, GWS, Gold Coast, special mention to them drawing 4000 (not a typo) to their game on Saturday, clash jumpers, umpires in every colour bar white, repeated drug violations are ok if you claim mental health which simply demeans any person with genuine needs, if you go in to get the ball you will most likely be the one penalised unless you flap like a chook and do love taps to the football, no Tasmanian side.

We do not watch better football because of all the changes. Leave the game alone.

The holding the ball where a player doesn't have the ball at the bottom of a pack (difficult to get rid of it if you don't have it) and nominating ruckman are my two major gripes on top of what you've stated above.

Doc for PM, Governor, King and Queen

Agree with the HTB gadj, but disagree with the ruckman. With the amount of running and ground the players cover, nominating the ruckman so the umpire knows where they are is a sensible safety precaution. I know that may not be why it was brought in, but why I think it has merit.

On the sub - make it so it can only be activated at half or three quarter time (the rule would stipulate which one, not a coaches choice), and if they don't want to make it too bad. The sub would then either play a reasonable amount of game time or not at all, rather than potentially just 10 minutes.

DOC wrote:It is another of the Steve Hocking inspired changes to distance the AFL from all other leagues.

These arsewipes love to tell people they are custodians of the game yet they seek to make it only about the elite few at the expense of all others without a care.

666, stand, protected zone, rotations, subs, 4 interchange, score reviews, mid season draft, pre season draft, covid top ups, percentage that is not percentage, deliberate and especially a 50 metre kick that does a left turn after it's sixth bounce, GWS, Gold Coast, special mention to them drawing 4000 (not a typo) to their game on Saturday, clash jumpers, umpires in every colour bar white, repeated drug violations are ok if you claim mental health which simply demeans any person with genuine needs, if you go in to get the ball you will most likely be the one penalised unless you flap like a chook and do love taps to the football, no Tasmanian side.

We do not watch better football because of all the changes. Leave the game alone.

Great post
Chopping the arms is another rubbish one I reckon, it's very netball like. Doesn't promote strong hands either.

Vamos wrote:

DOC wrote:It is another of the Steve Hocking inspired changes to distance the AFL from all other leagues.

These arsewipes love to tell people they are custodians of the game yet they seek to make it only about the elite few at the expense of all others without a care.

666, stand, protected zone, rotations, subs, 4 interchange, score reviews, mid season draft, pre season draft, covid top ups, percentage that is not percentage, deliberate and especially a 50 metre kick that does a left turn after it's sixth bounce, GWS, Gold Coast, special mention to them drawing 4000 (not a typo) to their game on Saturday, clash jumpers, umpires in every colour bar white, repeated drug violations are ok if you claim mental health which simply demeans any person with genuine needs, if you go in to get the ball you will most likely be the one penalised unless you flap like a chook and do love taps to the football, no Tasmanian side.

We do not watch better football because of all the changes. Leave the game alone.

Great post
Chopping the arms is another rubbish one I reckon, it's very netball like. Doesn't promote strong hands either.

Spot the bloke that played full back in the 90's