General footy chat AFL introduces medical substitute

[dejavoodoo44]

Joey's comment has me more confident that Warner may be picked.....but it won't be at the expense of Rowbottom. Maybe Hewitt?

He might be picked as the 23rd man, as the AFL has just introduced a medical substitute. Essentially, if a player fails a concussion test, or picks up an injury serious enough for them to be unable to continue, then the 23rd man can take their place.

[Meg]

He might be picked as the 23rd man, as the AFL has just introduced a medical substitute. Essentially, if a player fails a concussion test, or picks up an injury serious enough for them to be unable to continue, then the 23rd man can take their place.

But as we fervently hope there are no serious injuries it means the 23rd player sits on sidelines twiddling their thumbs. Might not matter for first match but once reserves matches are under way that’s a waste of playing and development time for an up-and-coming player.

I reckon (if AFL were going to do anything) they should have just brought back the old sub rule but made it a 23rd player. There is some justification for it with return to 20 min quarters. That was the way a few developing players got their AFL introduction, coming on late in match.

[bloodspirit]

He might be picked as the 23rd man, as the AFL has just introduced a medical substitute. Essentially, if a player fails a concussion test, or picks up an injury serious enough for them to be unable to continue, then the 23rd man can take their place.

It's weird that the 23rd player will be credited as having played the match for their career tally, and get a premiership medallion in the GF, even if they don't take the field. I presume they would not "debut" a player in this manner. I don't want a return to the old substitute players. That was a crap situation for players and distracting for coaches. The 23rd player will only be twiddling their thumbs in the same way that travelling emergencies do, except from the bench instead of the stands. Not necessarily for this game in the wet, but I would think there will be a bias towards picking an extra tall as the emergency because they will be harder to replace if they go down.

[Markwebbos]

Isn’t 23rd man the same as an emergency that can be called on to play after the game has started?

[Meg]

Isn’t 23rd man the same as an emergency that can be called on to play after the game has started?

True.

[Thunder Shaker]

AFL introduces medical substitute

New rule: AFL brings in 'medical sub' ahead of R1

AFL confirms the approval of medical substitute for use by teams in 2021

[707]

He might be picked as the 23rd man, as the AFL has just introduced a medical substitute. Essentially, if a player fails a concussion test, or picks up an injury serious enough for them to be unable to continue, then the 23rd man can take their place.

Wow, will this be rorted! Bring on a fresh player after half time and take someone off who is "unable to continue" but that player makes a miraculous recovery during the week and is right for next game.

Very excited by the three debutants and what a great way to tell them, well done to Horse. Noted that McDonald was named as a best mate by the other two - and vice versa (I think) Perth boy settling in well.

[dejavoodoo44]

Wow, will this be rorted! Bring on a fresh player after half time and take someone off who is "unable to continue" but that player makes a miraculous recovery during the week and is right for next game.

Very excited by the three debutants and what a great way to tell them, well done to Horse. Noted that McDonald was named as a best mate by the other two - and vice versa (I think) Perth boy settling in well.

I probably should have mentioned, that player has to be assessed by the club doctor before being replaced. Then once they are replaced, they can't play for a minimum of twelve days. That should cut down on the rorting.

New rule reveal: AFL brings in 'medical sub' ahead of R1

[chalbilto]

I am pleased that they have made it compulsory that any medical substitute is not permitted to play within 12 days and that a medical certificate has to be provided regarding the injury of that player. This should stop teams manipulating the system.

[MattW]

Sorry, can someone explain to me the logic of crediting an unused injury sub with a game on their career tally? Ugh.

Also, surely an independent AFL commissioned doctor is required.

[707]

I am pleased that they have made it compulsory that any medical substitute is not permitted to play within 12 days and that a medical certificate has to be provided regarding the injury of that player. This should stop teams manipulating the system.

Critical game to make the finals/win a final/GF there will be a fringe player sacrificable to the cause and just pay any AFL fine, money means nothing to clubs on $35 mill annual budgets.

Clubs will know whether 12 days will cost the player 1 game or 2 and fringies are not important in the big scheme.

Mark my words - this will be rorted! AFL are idiots

[MattW]

Wait, it's an *injury* substitution, not a concussion substitution?! WTAF?! And it looks like the 12 day break thing is open for negotiation. Shocker.

https://twitter.com/agerealfooty/status/1372053139017199621?s=19

[Rod_]

Critical game to make the finals/win a final/GF there will be a fringe player sacrificable to the cause and just pay any AFL fine, money means nothing to clubs on $35 mill annual budgets.

Clubs will know whether 12 days will cost the player 1 game or 2 and fringies are not important in the big scheme.

Mark my words - this will be rorted! AFL are idiots

I feel a tightening of a players calf with 20 min to go... poor player was taken off on a stretcher.... I hear you and have marked your words as most likely!

[Aaron]

I really hate the 23rd man the way it's been structured. We will have to rotate players through this spot if we want to ensure that the selected players get enough game experience.

From the AFL explanations at New rule reveal: AFL brings in 'medical sub' ahead of R1 :

"The medical substitute player will receive a full match payment regardless of whether they are used in the match, with the payment to fall outside the club's salary cap.

The player will also be able to participate in that weekend's State League match regardless of whether they take part in the AFL match."

[stevoswan]

Why do the AFL constantly stuff up in this way. When I first heard about the sub, I took it that it was strictly a concussion sub and liked the idea. Have they added the 'other injuries' caveat since that announcement? It smacks of more Hocking madness and goes against his late 2020 pledge not to introduce new rules in Jan/Feb! This is March FFS, two days before the start of the season. Surely the AFL know that by adding 'other injuries', this will be rorted to the hilt. Geeze they are dumb morons!

MattW, where did you get that the 12 day rule is not set in concrete? I'm sure in regard to concussions, it's not up for negotiation but if it is just for 'other injuries', it will be rorted for sure. 'Injured' but not concussed players won't even miss a game. FFS!