Scrap interchange: Lethal
Collapse
X
-
So that means the answer is 'no'.Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat.
"[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football."Comment
-
Hence what was the point of your original post?Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat.
"[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football."Comment
-
Football causes fatigue.No, I'm not blind...and I can read too.
Flooding does cause fatigue. Case in point round one vs WC. We'd all like to believe the true Bloods spirit came through to get us to within a point from nowhere, but the simple fact is WC ran themselves into the ground into the first half. Limited interchange would have magnified this problem for them.
All your arguments hinge on BOTH teams and ALL players being fatigued. This would not happen.
And not being able to interchange players that are on the field would make them more fatigued.Comment
-
Comment
-
Captain Logic is not steering this tugboat.
"[T]here are things that matter more and he's reading and thinking about them: heaven, reincarnation. Life and death are the only things that are truly a matter of life and death. Not football."Comment
-
The game was also slower "back in the day", and not just because of the interchange rules, but there are many rules that have made the game faster today.
Lethal is starting to think he's a football sensei, that he's some wise old man, i call it Sheedy syndrome. Rotating players keeps them fresh, helps them recover from any niggles, and keeps the level of football at it's optimum. I can't see any rational reason for Leigh's ideas, and don't see a problem with the current interchange rules.Comment
-
Exactly. It's fine for the AFL to introduce the "kick in" rule, the "30 second" rule etc to make the game quicker, but they want to limit the use of the interchange bench. Can't have it both ways. "Back in those days" I don't recall having to play in conditions where teperatures were in the mid to high twenties and travelling interstate regularly. It does make a bit of a mockery of their previously introduced rules to try and slow things down now...The game was also slower "back in the day", and not just because of the interchange rules, but there are many rules that have made the game faster today.
Lethal is starting to think he's a football sensei, that he's some wise old man, i call it Sheedy syndrome. Rotating players keeps them fresh, helps them recover from any niggles, and keeps the level of football at it's optimum. I can't see any rational reason for Leigh's ideas, and don't see a problem with the current interchange rules.Comment
-
Comment
-
I agree with that 100%. Those rules are stupid anyway.
What I like about the idea of a reduced or removed interchange is that players have to be a bit more versatile, and match day coaching is emphasised a little more. I also agree that because the 22 are all effectively players, with no real reserves, an injury or 2 really disadvantages the injured side.Comment
-
If anything, then a reduced rotation of the interchange is probably the best solution. My personal view is that the AFL have a duty of care to players welfare and removing the ability to interchange players during the game may increase their chances of injury and undue health risks. A team travelling to Brisbane early in the season may be exposed to conditions of high temperatures and humidity. The Brisbane team may be acclimatised to those conditions but the travelling team may be flown into a "steam room" and then have to endure those conditions for the entire match without the possibility of interchange. Unfortunately, all things aren't equal in this competition....I agree with that 100%. Those rules are stupid anyway.
What I like about the idea of a reduced or removed interchange is that players have to be a bit more versatile, and match day coaching is emphasised a little more. I also agree that because the 22 are all effectively players, with no real reserves, an injury or 2 really disadvantages the injured side.Comment
-
Actually I think you interpreted correctly from memory. Going back to the old days would crucify all the players playing under todays rules. Face it, the game is much quicker today than what it used to be. Making the bench smaller is farcical, limiting the number of interchanges is just making another rule for a rules sake. Hey why don't we split our ground into three zones and only allow a certain number of people in each zone at any one time?Comment
-
agreed.
how? I would have thought that the management of player fatigue through rotational means was a huge part of match day coaching....and match day coaching is emphasised a little more.Comment

Comment