THE INTERCHANGE is ruining footy ?

[mal]

The Interchange was first brought in because sides were disadvantaged when having injured players during a game
Well thats my understanding how the 4 man interchange evolved.
These days a side with injuries is equally disadvantaged as the oppostion will
rotate players and take advantage.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE AFL
_______________________

Make the Interchange a limit of 10 per game
Make teams only use Interchanges to treat injuries only
Piss of rotations which breeds athletical players and not skillfull players as a rule
Rotations = flooding= ugly football

I sure am glad I played footy in a different era
I love playing a full game of footy and getting my hands on the footy and playing
to the best of my ability
If i played now and was rested for rotations that would piss me off.

15 years ago i will use Robert Harvey as an example
Harvey would probably contend with one tagger a game and try wear out the tagger
Now Harvey might have to take on 3or4 taggers and they would wear him down

The AFL has introduced several rules in recent times specifically to beat the floods
HOLDING THE BALL IF YOU JUMP ON IT AND SIT ON THE FOOTY
50 METER PENALTIES IF A PLAYER IS SLIGHTY IMPEDED BY THE OPPOSTION
PLAY ON FOR KICKING SIDEWAYS OR BACKWARDS
SOFT FREE KICKS TO FORWARDS WHO HAVE THIER ARMS CHOPPED AT IN A CONTEST
SOFT FREE KICKS TO FORWARDS WHO ARE NUDGED IN THE BACK
And more just to impede flooding[my opinion]

Lets get more skills back and let players play a full game not a fool game

Lets enjoy footy again

[PhilG]

..

[mal]

Get some back up and write to the clubs and see how far you get, Mal.

Admirable theory - but the interchange is needed to be unlimited to PREVENT injury, or to be practical reduce it's incidence. That's why it won't change.

PG how does unlimited interchanges prevent injuries ?

[Armytank]

The AFL want the game to be faster and more flowing, taking away the interchange will only slow the game down and create more flooding and crap football. Look at the last quarter of the Melbourne vs Fremantle game, Melbourne were down to 17 fit players at one stage and the game just turned to garbage and very unentertaining.

Pi$$ off all of the "new" rules or "interpretations" and get back to letting the game evolve on its own. If the AFL left it alone the game would evolve out of the flooding tactics as coaches and players would need to come up with new tactics to combat this to remain competitive.

Todays breed of super human fitness freaks being played over more skilled players is not much different to the 80's when you had to spent an awful long time in the strong room before playing league footy.

I agree someting needs to change Mal but I think we just need to change footy back to letting it be footy and not overly controlling it. I always thought that the great thing about footy is that is is so full of grey areas and had an apparent lack of rules to an uneducated onlooker

[scoob]

more interchange = faster/ stop start bursts from players.... harder hits - more flooding

I agree with mal...

[mal]

more interchange = faster/ stop start bursts from players.... harder hits - more flooding

I agree with mal...

I agree with Scoob

Players come on for 10 minutes run back flood , chase, tackle, flood.....
And then have a breather on the interchange for 10 minutes
And do it again

If thier on the field doing that for 120 minutes by half time they would need
to be in a hospital on a drip.

I dont mind a guy copping a hard knock and comes off for 10 minutes of treatment.
What gives me the shits is the ones that come off for a rest only.

[Rik E Boy]

mally's right. Footy has turned into Lacrosse. The only reason you can run a 'full court press' in football is if you have an extended interchange. Bring back 90's rules. Attendence figures are up in spite of the way the game is being played today, not because of it.

regards,

REB

[Armytank]

Pi$$ off all of the "new" rules or "interpretations" and get back to letting the game evolve on its own. If the AFL left it alone the game would evolve out of the flooding tactics as coaches and players would need to come up with new tactics to combat this to remain competitive.

I agree something needs to change Mal but I think we just need to change footy back to letting it be footy and not overly controlling it. I always thought that the great thing about footy is that is is so full of grey areas and had an apparent lack of rules to an uneducated onlooker

[JK]

Problem is, if the AFL does address it they will introduce a new rule/law which the coaches will then use to their advantage and in a manner not intended from the AFL hierachy ... The Rules committee is the most culpable department in the changing face of our great game IMHO.

[bayman]

i agree with all that has been said & i'll go further the vf whoops the afl made these following changes to lengthen the lifespan of the player

extra players on the bench...........well we know what happens now
changed quarters to 20 minutes..................now 80% of the time they go longer than they did before
it has been said that these & other changes have been made for the betterment of football & footballers now i say this has been a game of attrition for 150 years & now it is not it is for the teams with the fewest injuries
the rest has already been said

the idea i like is to go back to like it was with a subtle difference i'd have the 4 players the coaches want on the bench BUT 2 of those NAMED ON TEAM SHEETS are actual reserves & they replace injured players or players not performing & if the reserve player comes on the injured or underperforming player CAN NOT COME BACK ONTO THE FIELD where as the other two can come on & off the ground as it is now

[Hondo]

The coaches will always find a way around whatever rules are changed. It's a vicious circle of change by the rules committee, counter-change by the Coaches, back to the rules committee, and so on. The game has been evolving for 100 years and will continue to do so. Sooner or later a coach will work out a way to play one-on-one footy and score quickly at the same time, then they'll all be doing it.

I am not a fan of the way the interchange is used either but not sure we should change the rules - we might fix one problem and create another.

One quick fix will be to find another Brisbane Lions circa 2001-2003 - teams that good will always score as many goals as they need to win regardless of the tactics of the opposition.

I quote I like from the past is Micky Nunan commenting on North Adelaide's game plan of the 80s ... something like "we don't care how many goals the other team kicks, we back ourselves in to kick more".

[giffo]

There is nothing weirder than seeing a player kick a great goal & then next minute they are walking the boundary. If I'd just kicked a goal the last thing I would want to be doing is cooling my heels, the adrenaline alone would carry me for longer. It's because the players can run harder over short periods that there is all this flooding as they can swarm up and down the ground.

[PhilG]

..

[mal]

Get some back up and write to the clubs and see how far you get, Mal.

Admirable theory - but the interchange is needed to be unlimited to PREVENT injury, or to be practical reduce it's incidence. That's why it won't change.

PG how does unlimited interchanges prevent injuries ?

It allows clubs to take players off when they are hurt in any minor way, and give them the chance to recover. In the old days they had to stay on, and risked something more serious. In this day and age of insurance and litigation - that's a bad thing.

See what I'm getting at?

Well explained and must agree with you [sort of said the same as well in another post]
But thats what an interchange should be to nurse injured players
Not to RORTate players for a breather

[mal]

There is nothing weirder than seeing a player kick a great goal & then next minute they are walking the boundary. If I'd just kicked a goal the last thing I would want to be doing is cooling my heels, the adrenaline alone would carry me for longer. It's because the players can run harder over short periods that there is all this flooding as they can swarm up and down the ground.

RATING

Agree 1,345,783,450,347,237,120 % with your comment


Theres a story I heard about big Ryan Occonor when he was playing for either NA or PA
He was rucking and having a great game and the runner came out and told him to come
off for the interchange, story has it he told the coach to........and didnt come off the ground

Geelongs HAWKINS kicked a few goals recently and was taken off after kicking a goal

If I was a player I would be pissed off coming on and off

[sydney-dog]

it's also about player welfare these days

back in our days, the blokes on the bench were not good enough for the starting 18, the bench was only used for injured players or to drag players

these days, it's almost impossible for a midfielder to play the entire game

[PhilG]

..

[bayman]

the other thing i missed was they (afl whatever committee) changes rules & laws to keep players longer in the game then they bring in a rule that you can kick out from a point immediately no wonder this is my last year as a member of footy park as they have almost succeeded in turning the game into touch football

[scoob]

these days, it's almost impossible for a midfielder to play the entire game

Yeah that is MAL point i think, limit the interchanage and these midfielders will have to play smarter footy by having to conserve their energy to get thru a game.... rather than doing sprints up and down a the oval for 8 / 10 min spurts...

[rd]

I would change the 4 interchange players to 2 interchange and 2 reserves as previously suggested. Secondly after a point has been scored, play resumes after the goal umpire finishes waving his flag as before but the player kicking the ball in must boot it back over the 50m line - no more boring 20m passes to the back pocket - kick the ball back to a crowded pack somewhere !!