Horses sub selections......??

[ernie koala]

Well after 8 rounds the swans sub selections are as follows:
R1 : Seaby - Should of been in the 21, played ok, no real impact.
R2 : Meredith - Underdone and one paced, no impact
R3 : Rohan - Excellent, got to heaps of contests and made a big impact.
R4 : Rohan - Back to the well, needed a full game, little impact.
R5 : BYE
R6 : Everitt - One paced, got to very few contests, no impact.
R7 : Moore - Never going to impact..too slow for a sub.
R8 : Parker - 1st game..Needed a full game to settle into his work, came on in junk
time and looked good.

So IMO, that's 1 good result...6 bad results..They have tried all different types but seem no closer to perfecting the new art of sub selection....Who's next ?

[R-1]

We, thankfully, haven't needed anyone to cover an injury yet. The subs chosen may have been more useful in that situation.

[ernie koala]

We, thankfully, haven't needed anyone to cover an injury yet. The subs chosen may have been more useful in that situation.

Only if that sub happened to be a similar type player. That's guessing.
IMO there are 2 main considerations:
1 - Versatility
2 - Likely hood to impact the game in approx one quarter.
So far Rohan in round 3 has been the only success.

[Bloody Hell]

Of all the players on the list Jetta appears most suited for this role....but has never played. I don't get it.

[Big Al]

The perfect sub has all the attributes of a bloke you'd want to start anyway. All clubs will be going through the same problems with sub selection.

It's a stupid rule and more evidence of the AFL trying to crack a walnut with a sledge hammer. If they want to limit the Interchange to slow the game down just put a limit on it otherwise just leave it alone.

[Bloody Hell]

I think the most important attribute for the role is that they be quick. Able to get to and run away from alot of contests. Endurance shouldn't be an issue, so pace is required.

[BSA5]

Thought Moore just had s bad game, the theory behind it was fine. He lacks endurance, and playing him as a sub actually allowed him to play some minutes in the midfield. He just played like @@@@.

What was wrong with Parker as sub? Came on, played well, who's complaining?

[GongSwan]

No complaints from me about Parker, looked very good and seems a good way to blood youger players and give them some confidence. I think the coaches will trend toward using a midfield hard running player as a sub because they are the type of player you want on, no matter who goes off. If yr ruck goes down, well that's just plain bad luck and hopefully yv got talls who can cover it, otherwise, a running midfielder who can cover a lot of ground is the obvious choice

[ABloodsMan]

He came on with 10 minutes to go playing against dead opposition. Very disappointed with Horse on this one.

[ernie koala]

Thought Moore just had s bad game, the theory behind it was fine. He lacks endurance, and playing him as a sub actually allowed him to play some minutes in the midfield. He just played like @@@@.

What was wrong with Parker as sub? Came on, played well, who's complaining?

No problem with Parker as such, I just think it's asking a lot of a first gamer, to sit nervously on the pine for 3 and a bit quarters, then be expected ( or at least thinking he should) come on, pick up the pace and intensity of the game immediately, and have an immediate impact.
Given Parker came on in junk time, against a beaten and deflated Port, meant he had a nice little intro and played well. But against stiffer opposition in a close game..IMO it's too big an ask for someone who's never played at this level before..I like to see first gamers given 4 quarters to get into it.

[Bas]

So you're saying that Horse has gone with a few donkies so far.

I think this year will be experimental for all Clubs unless there is an early injury. There's 17 Clubs all with different strategies.

I thought Parker came on far too late but the dilemma the coaching staff have is that if you bring the sub on too early and there is an injury, you're left with 2 on the bench.

Look at the Hawks game today where they were forced to use their sub after 5 minutes.

[barry]

These sub errors have cost us at least one win (Seaby, v Melbourne), and probably another one.

[barry]

I think its a great way to bring new players into the team. Worked well against Port.
Also a great way to bring back long term injured who may not last a whole game (eg Malceski)

[Captain]

Thought Moore just had s bad game, the theory behind it was fine. He lacks endurance, and playing him as a sub actually allowed him to play some minutes in the midfield. He just played like @@@@.

He lacks endurance and he lacks speed. What does he have then?

[Captain]

Kennelly might be a good sub when Eski is back.