Limited interchange

[Xie Shan]

Originally posted by Young Blood
Not so simple. Teams kick goals more often when they move the ball quickly. If you can do that with a series of uncontested possessions, that's fine. But particularly in the forward half, it's better to go quickly to a one-on-one contest than to wait and wait for someone to get free to take an uncontested mark.

Sounds like the Swans' game plan! Are you Paul Roos?

Originally posted by Sanecow
A leading player with a guaranteed mark is better than a contested situation without it being a question of trust.

Well that explains why we were playing such stop-start footy earlier in the season then - lack of confidence. I think we've just solved the game plan v execution argument from a few months ago!

[Young Blood]

Originally posted by sydfan83
Sounds like the Swans' game plan!

There's no doubt they played their best this year when they were prepared to play on and take a risk. Whereas the 'uncontested' game plan just reminds me of that awful game at Manuka early in the year.

[Lucky Knickers]

Why is flooding so bad? What is the difference between flooding (what the swans do) and getting numbers behind the ball (what the Victorian teams do) according to expert commentators?

Is there a a tongue in cheek emoticon?

[Doctor]

The Swans tend to do it in a fairly positive way anyway. They certainly do it in a Premiership winning way anyway :-)

On the interchange, I'd say that any change that happens, and I don't think one will, would be developed in conjunction with the AFLPA. They AFL wouldn't go through all of the hassle of changing rules to end up with a lockout on their hands.

[Glenn]

Re: Re: Limited interchange

Originally posted by garethb83
The NRL system works on a 4-man bench, and there are 12 changes allowed per game. If by chance the 12 changes have occurred and a player gets hurt, its too bad. If the player can't go on, then the side plays a man down.

Obviously this sort of situation will never happen in the AFL, just answering your question.

Also the NRL system allows a player who is injured by player, that is put on report or sent off to be replaced as a "free" substitution ie not counted as part of the 12 subs

[garethb83]

Re: Re: Re: Limited interchange

Originally posted by Glenn
Also the NRL system allows a player who is injured by player, that is put on report or sent off to be replaced as a "free" substitution ie not counted as part of the 12 subs

Really?? I didn't know that, must only be a new rule. I recall a game last year or perhaps the year before when a team had to finish with 12 players...

[Glenn]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Limited interchange

Originally posted by garethb83
Really?? I didn't know that, must only be a new rule. I recall a game last year or perhaps the year before when a team had to finish with 12 players...

Been part of the 12 interchange rule,since the beginning AFAIK
I am guessing those that finished with 12 players ran out of uninjured subs.

In a AFL scenario limited subs is going to be impossible to use IMHO, for example in the warmer months at the start of the season how are you expected to rotate a limited number of subs, when temps are 30degrees+

[goswannie14]

Re: Re: Re: Limited interchange

Originally posted by Glenn
Also the NRL system allows a player who is injured by player, that is put on report or sent off to be replaced as a "free" substitution ie not counted as part of the 12 subs

I thought that when someone was sent oiff they were off...no subs. The team then has to play a man short like in soccer

[Mike_B]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Limited interchange

Originally posted by goswannie14
I thought that when someone was sent oiff they were off...no subs. The team then has to play a man short like in soccer

Glenn means that if a player on Team A needs to be replaced as a result of an injury caused by a player on Team B that results in that player from Team B being either placed on report or sent off, the replacement doesn't count in Team A's allocation of 12 interchanges.

[goswannie14]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Limited interchange

Originally posted by Mike_B
Glenn means that if a player on Team A needs to be replaced as a result of an injury caused by a player on Team B that results in that player from Team B being either placed on report or sent off, the replacement doesn't count in Team A's allocation of 12 interchanges.

Oh OK thanks for clearing that up

[timbo]

just because we win a premiership they want to change the rules so we cant win another.

our game plan uses the rules to our advantage. the afl wants to take away our advantage by changing the rules. not fair.

bring in the unions...

[goswannie14]

Originally posted by timbo
just because we win a premiership they want to change the rules so we cant win another.

our game plan uses the rules to our advantage. the afl wants to take away our advantage by changing the rules. not fair.

bring in the unions...

This is like Chinese whispers, it starts as barrys opinion, and now it sounds like the AFL will definitely be changing the rules LOL

[AussieAnge]

Re: Limited interchange

Originally posted by barry
I'm fairly convinced that the AFL will introduce a limited interchange into the game within the next 3 years to combat flooding.

The swans are the ones most likely to be hurt by this rule as our interchange is a revolving door of move after move.

Thanks for reminding me, I had forgotten that the Swans are the only team in the comp that floods.

[Q...]

Rather than punish coaches and teams that apply their nouse to create an effective game plan within the rules of the game by changing the rules shouldn't we be punishing the coaches and players of teams that are incapable of coming up with strategies and tactics to prevent it happening?

It seems bizarre to me. If any rule changes are made to alleviate the flood then surely the AFL would be the only regulator on the planet to intentionally encourage less capable professionals (in particular coaches) to participate.

Paul Roos has somewhat modified the way AFL is played. He has done this by being astute. There is nothing to stop any other coach from at least attempting something new to combat Roos and the Swans.

If every other coach is more prepared to request rule changes than use the skills that they have for the job that they have been given then long live the Swans' premiership reign! (apologies for that very ugly sentence)

[Guzzitza]

i dont think its just barrys opinion as ive heard it mentioned on fox footy by their footy "big-wigs" suggesting that it needs to be stopped.
And of course they were looking at our interchange compared to other teams and calling our bench a revolving door. Demetriou also commented in an article that he felt it would be SAFER for there to be less interchanges as then the came wouldnt be played at full pace the whole time and hence would be less physically damaging (ie. you wouldnt get hard hits and tackles for all game)
Clearly there is some AFL driven thought behind it, its not just a rumour.
EDIT:
Found the article, here is the relevant quote: (and no this ISNT the full article, so no reason to scrap this .. just a quote)

Bench restrictions are on the cards
By Samantha Lane
August 21, 2005

"AFL chief executive Andrew Demetriou has forecast restrictions to the interchange bench in a bid to reduce collision injuries.

Demetriou said yesterday that the league wanted players to be more exhausted so they would not hit each other with such force. AFL football operations manager Adrian Anderson is examining ways of doing that, with one suggestion being to limit the number of interchanges in a match.

"It is the subject of a discussion we are having at management next week because the interchange is one area that will be seriously reviewed," Demetriou told radio station 3AW.

"That will be along the lines of the four on the interchange and whether they are all going to be interchange or whether there will be two reserves or three reserves or how many interchanges.

"Because there are a number of rotations, what we are seeing is the players are just as fit . . . at the end of the game as they are at the start of the game. It is causing the game to be played at breakneck speed."
.........