Round 1 teams

[Kirkari]

Isn't it now 3 interchange and 1 sub? Do the teams have to say who's who before the game? (I suppose they do.)

[liz]

For me the new rule with one of 4 players on the bench only a direct sub and cant come off again

That is a different understanding to my interpretation of the rule. I don't think it is that the sub can't come off once he has gone on, but that the player subbed off can't go back on. I would expect the substitute would participate in his fair share of rotations once on the ground.

Isn't it now 3 interchange and 1 sub? Do the teams have to say who's who before the game? (I suppose they do.)

Can't see how they wouldn't. Wonder how long before the start of the game they have to name who's sub. Will it be a Thursday / Friday night election?

(Silly rule anyway!)

[Auntie.Gerald]

oops thanks liz .......... i said it wrong way round.........youre right

chrs

[ScottH]

That is a different understanding to my interpretation of the rule. I don't think it is that the sub can't come off once he has gone on, but that the player subbed off can't go back on. I would expect the substitute would participate in his fair share of rotations once on the ground.



Can't see how they wouldn't. Wonder how long before the start of the game they have to name who's sub. Will it be a Thursday / Friday night election?

(Silly rule anyway!)

I wonder how long before a team has 3 injured players and an already (healthy) subbed player sitting on the pine??

[707]

Of all the rules that the AFL as changed/tampered with in recent years this substitute rule has to be the most ill thought through, cumbersome and silliest - thanks Vlad!

I think it will take a while for teams to work out the best way to play it. The biggest change I reckon is that after it being common opinion that to win a flag you needed two good ruckman, Collingwood's flag and the new subtitute rule in particular have changed the scenario. Teams are now more likely to go with one ruckman who has endurance plus a multi purpose back up.

This Substitute rule now means every team needs one less genuine ruckman so 17, soon to be 18 talls won't be playing AFL. All this at a time when we hve got our greatest quality ruck depth in memory!

So when putting together a potential team for 2011, you need to consider how the bench/substitute will play out - maybe it's just one ruckman and a pinch hitter like White as part of a ruck/key fwd rotation? I haven't posted a round 1 team yet because we've got too many first choice players now!

[aardvark]

I'd suggest that if Seaby and Mummy are fit they will play every game. Where they play is debatable. Malthouse, talking about game plans, said after the premiership win that "What works this year may not work next year". Coaches will sit back over the break and work out ways to counter Malthouses game plan which hopefully means it will be less effective next year. If we cant find a way with two legitimate Ruckmen to exploit the time Leigh Brown spends in the ruck then maybe we need a new coach. Playing Jesse White as our "Pinch Hitter" is nothing short of ridiculous especially if he is still learning to play as a key position forward. His ruck skills are non existent IMO.
I agree totally about the Sub rule. Stupidest thing they have done for a while. Its like the Rules committee need to be seen to be doing something to justify their pay packets.

[liz]

I'd suggest that if Seaby and Mummy are fit they will play every game. Where they play is debatable. Malthouse, talking about game plans, said after the premiership win that "What works this year may not work next year". Coaches will sit back over the break and work out ways to counter Malthouses game plan which hopefully means it will be less effective next year. If we cant find a way with two legitimate Ruckmen to exploit the time Leigh Brown spends in the ruck then maybe we need a new coach. Playing Jesse White as our "Pinch Hitter" is nothing short of ridiculous especially if he is still learning to play as a key position forward. His ruck skills are non existent IMO.
I agree totally about the Sub rule. Stupidest thing they have done for a while. Its like the Rules committee need to be seen to be doing something to justify their pay packets.

I agree with Aardvark in that I believe rumours of the demise of the second ruckman are prematue. Who knows how this substitute rule will play out, but if a team has an advantage of two strong ruckmen, why not try to use it to advantage. Surely midfielders are going to get more tired chasing tail because an opposition ruckmen is taking advantage of a second rate pinch-hitter and feeding his team with taps to advantage?

I also agree that many seem to alight on the most recent premiership and decide it is THE way to win a premiership - whether that be game style, list construction, or anything else. When the Hawks broke through in 2008 it seemed to validate the thought that you have to tank to develop a premiership contending squad - ignoring the fact that really only Buddy and Roughead were significant contributors from the Hawks' bout of tanking (if indeed they did) and that the Cats constructed their team differently.

AFL coaches will adapt to this change, as they have adapted to every other riduculous bit of tinkering that Anderson and his cohorts have introduced over the past decade. The only "certainty" is that this change will fail to have whatever effect Anderson and co hope / expect it will have and that they will introduce yet more changes next year or the year after as they continue their futile efforts to bend the game to accord with their whims.

[Auntie.Gerald]

The Jesse White Factor is a big one for us I feel............He played strong year 1...........struggled year 2.............But for me.........if he lifts..... and starts catching the ball and driving home goals it changes our 22 on any given day. The guy is an athlete for his size, strength and height.......a little time maybe all he needs.....hard to say just yet hence why he is still with us.

Can we have White, Braddy, Goodes, Seaby and Mumford in the 22 against a top 4 team............hhhhhmmmmmmm not sure..........but lets find out..........if they are all firing !

[top40]

Mattner LRT C.Bolton
Kennelly Gundy Malcelski
Jetta Jack Kennedy
Mumford J.Bolton Hannebery
McVeigh Goodes O'Keefe
McGlynn Bradshaw Dennis-Lane

Interchange: Seaby Shaw White
Substitute: Rohan

Hard to exclude Bevan, Smith, Pyke, Reid, Everitt, Moore and Richards, all more than capable senior AFL players. We then have our top National draft pick to consider, (I know it is number 21, but you never know). Hopefully Lewis Johnstone will come through in 2011. I also have a feeling the Swans will pick up an established player in the December Pre-Season draft (a la Craig Bolton in 2002). Gee, if the Swans don't have any serious long term injury problems, they are likely to be a top four team in 2011.

[aardvark]

I couldn't leave Smithy out. The kid's just a class act. TLD, White and Marty are the vulnerable ones IMO. Could be interesting if they promised Spider Jnr a game, might be a few boys upset if he jumps the queue.

[Captain]

Smith Grundy Bolton
Shaw LRT Mattner
Malceski Jack McVeigh
ROK White Hannerbery
Jetta Bradshaw McGlynn
Mumford Goodes Kennedy
Bolton Seaby TDL S: Richards
Emer: Kennelly Everitt Bevan

[liz]

I couldn't leave Smithy out. The kid's just a class act. TLD, White and Marty are the vulnerable ones IMO. Could be interesting if they promised Spider Jnr a game, might be a few boys upset if he jumps the queue.

I struggle to see how anyone could leave Smith out. Regardless of how people view him in the pecking order, he plays a defensive role that few others in the team can play.

It is a bit ironic that, after years of bemoaning the Swans' tagging culture, we now find ourselves a little light on for competent taggers, what with Kirk's retirement and the emergence of Jack as a dangerous offensive weapon. No doubt Jack will still finding himself playing some tagging roles, and Shaw may need to continue to reinvent himself as a tagger. But there is still a gap to be filled.

Kirk may not have had his best season in 2010, and certainly his attacking output was down (apart from a surprising contribution on the scoreboard) but we shouldn't underestimate the defensive contribution he still made. It wasn't 100% in the midfield, but when needed he locked down on the opposition's main inside ball-winner - just ask Andrew Swallow! It is a contribution we're going to miss more than we think unless someone else can step up to the mark. Smith looms as the most likely to take Kirk's mantle, having cut his teeth on mid-sized forwards. If B2 can regain his fitness, he is capable of playing on the type of smaller forward that Smith took this year, with Reg now holding down CHB.

And if Smithy does move into that vacated Kirk-role, he will win plenty of his own ball too.

[aardvark]

And if Smithy does move into that vacated Kirk-role, he will win plenty of his own ball too.

Exactly Liz. He will play more and more time in the Mid. He will eventually be one of our better Mids IMO.

[Auntie.Gerald]

I Kirkcur !!

Smithy is an extremely important player in our 22..............and may .....may........pick up were Brett left off on the field in ability etc but Brett's leadership on and off the field will be the biggest gap in 2011.......I wonder who will rise up !

[BSA5]

I Kirkcur !!

Surely conKirk is a more phonologically accurate pun?