Three only interchange players and 1 substuite player

[BIGSHOW]

Can anyone please explain to me the stupid logic of dropping the bench number to three players.And this sub-player rule is just insane this is AFL not soccer or gridion.If anything I believe that the bench should be expanded to five but limit the total interchanges to 20 per quarter any thoughts.This wouldn't be brought into the sydneyAFL I HOPE.cheers bigshow

[Norris Lurker]

Makes no sense to me. I know the AFL's rules committee need to tinker with the rules every year to justify their existence, but I don't like this one. Something smelly's going to hit the fan when a team makes their substitution and then gets 4 injuries and has to keep an injured player on while there's a perfectly fit player on the bench - and it will happen.
I don't see why open interchange is broke, so why fix it?
Like BigShow, I don't see the need for it in our league.

Another factor in our league, which can apply particularly if a club is short of numbers and teams are split at multiple grounds on the same day, is that a team may have less than 22 players available. If a team that was running short had to designate a substitute, it would make it even harder for that team.

[Cephalik]

In that situation I doubt there will be an uproar, if Coach's use the sub wisely then there won't be a problem, and if they don't.... they brought it upon themselves.

[ShortHalfHead]

First I have heard of it. Any link to this rule and does it apply to Sydney AFL?

[Pickup]

AFL should bring it back to 2 subs only no interchange. Make it a game of attrition and an 18 man game instead of a 22 man game.

[Norris Lurker]

Can't agree with that. Would inevitably lead to injured players being left on the field. Or farcical scenes like in soccer, where when someone needs a breather and a drink of water they roll around on the ground and hold up play while they're being stretchered off, only to immediately run back on.