SANFL Bench 2008 - 4 players ???

[Blue Boy]

I think that the SANFL should introduce the 4 player interchange system as of next year !!!

Surely they would have this on there agenda or is it just going to pass them and clubs by again ???

[Dirko]

Why ? I can't recall my mob being short-changed this year with three on the bench...
Would you field four in the ressies/19's/17's too ? If so that's a extra 4 blokes that the club
needs to cater for...

[Blue Boy]

Why ? I can't recall my mob being short-changed this year with three on the bench...
Would you field four in the ressies/19's/17's too ? If so that's a extra 4 blokes that the club
needs to cater for...

Would probably in the reserves and not the 19s and 17s !!!

And yeah we were caught short so to speak a few times !!!

[Ian]

4 on the bench has to happen eventualy, and it should happen sooner rather than later.
I can recall plenty of times in the past 2-3 years where injured players have been forced to return to the game because there was no one else.
The game is getting faster, with the lack of rain the grounds are getting harder, the clubs and the league owe it to the players, they have a responsibility to provide the safest possible environment for them to play in, and extra player on the bench would go a long way towards better protecting them, and allow better injury management.

[Dirko]

Why ? I can't recall my mob being short-changed this year with three on the bench...
Would you field four in the ressies/19's/17's too ? If so that's a extra 4 blokes that the club
needs to cater for...

Would probably in the reserves and not the 19s and 17s !!!

And yeah we were caught short so to speak a few times !!!

I reckon every game you played against Glenelg this year you'd been caught out ?
There will be a day when it comes I guess, but whether it's a good thing or not remains to be seen...
The interchange with three blokes need good management and practise to get the best out of resting blokes...

[Blue Boy]

Why ? I can't recall my mob being short-changed this year with three on the bench...
Would you field four in the ressies/19's/17's too ? If so that's a extra 4 blokes that the club
needs to cater for...

Would probably in the reserves and not the 19s and 17s !!!

And yeah we were caught short so to speak a few times !!!

I reckon every game you played against Glenelg this year you'd been caught out ?
There will be a day when it comes I guess, but whether it's a good thing or not remains to be seen...
The interchange with three blokes need good management and practise to get the best out of resting blokes...

You are right about the management but - with the game @ SANFL stepping up another level in terms of speed and muscle I think now is the time !!!

Yeah and that day down @ the Bay was probably our worst !!!

[Dogwatcher]

The competition I play in has had four on the bench for quite some time.

[HeartBeatsTrue]

Not straight forward to change though. The salary cap will need to rise slightly and that needs to be approved by the AFL at a guess???

[smac]

Nup, AFL don't approve the SANFL cap.

They don't approve of it, but that's another story.

Make it 4, not sure why anyone would have a problem? The salary cap would need to be increased by 1/21 - not much at all.

[finn]

Not straight forward to change though. The salary cap will need to rise slightly and that needs to be approved by the AFL at a guess???

why not follow the amateur league in this one - 3 on bench during season and then four during finals.
it works well.

[cd]

Would have an impact on salary cap and recruiting and would need to know well in advance as to introduction and at what levels eg just league and reserves?

The number of players on the required club lists would need to be looked at in terms of the 1 to 35 list and the 36 to 50 list - would it go to 1 -36 and 37-52? or 1 to 37 and 38-52? or what and this has implications re contracts and $ and salary cap.

[JK]

Some good points made on here, but some issues/questions on raising to 4.

1) As it stands, the 3 I/C is the same for both teams, so no team goes into a match with an advantage over the other (some would say that following Norwood means we are disdvantaged from the start, but thats beside the point).

2) Increase to 4 for greater injury management has some merit, but at which point do we stop? If 4 players go down injured in a game do we lobby for 5 I/C players ... And so on and so on?

[smac]

I reckon 4 is about right - almost a quarter of the playing side on interchange. Currently only 1/6 of the playing side, in a body contact sport (and let's face it - the human body was not designed to do anything remotely like play Aussie Rules).

Go to 5 on interchange and it starts to get to a level where wholesale changes can be made to change the nature of the side - too much like gridiron.

[Blue Boy]

2) Increase to 4 for greater injury management has some merit, but at which point do we stop? If 4 players go down injured in a game do we lobby for 5 I/C players ... And so on and so on?

You are probably talkin about @ least say 20 years for that I rekon ( the 5 players ) !!!

[Dogwatcher]

A bit out of the circle, but they could make it that the fourth player has to be AFL listed....

[am Bays]

There is actually a train of thought that an increase in the interchange bench has actually led to a further increase in teh speed of te game as palyers are rotated through the midfield in high intensity running bursts for 5-10 mins.

So increasing the size of the interchange could lead to a further increase and more overuse stres injuries for footballers who don't have the same level of conditioning.

Personally I say leave it as it is but if it does change to cover for injuries in a game make wo players interchange and two as reserve players i.e once they replace someone that player can't come back on as per the old replacement rule pre 1977.

In other words two players could only be used for injury or late tactical change.

[Hondo]

Personally I say leave it as it is but if it does change to cover for injuries in a game make wo players interchange and two as reserve players i.e once they replace someone that player can't come back on as per the old replacement rule pre 1977.

In other words two players could only be used for injury or late tactical change.

Good idea 1980TM I like it - better than limiting the no of interchanges as the AFL is currently looking at