Comments on: AFL 2008 Round 14 pt1 wrapup

By: Phillip Molly Malone

Phillip Molly Malone — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 08:28:37 +0000

Very true but it doesn’t help either.
Molly

Phillip Molly Malones last blog post..MMM AFL Podcast – Round 14 week 1, Polaks injury and Interchange blunders

By: Jermayn

Jermayn — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 08:25:51 +0000

BUT it does not mean that they will ALWAYS win.

Hawthorn were down several players against the Eagles but still won by 60 points. The weekend before Essendon were down a player from 10 minutes into the 1st quarter and yet still won by 30 points.

Jermayns last blog post..When I Grow Up – The Pussycat Dolls

By: Phillip Molly Malone

Phillip Molly Malone — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 08:14:21 +0000

Yeah to a degree but the game evolves and now if you are 22 vs 20 in the first half, it give the 22 a huge advantage!
Molly

By: Jermayn

Jermayn — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 07:55:39 +0000

The problem is that no matter how many you add on the interchange bench or how many you have in ‘reserve’ you will still have the same problem. The fact that injuries happen…

I do not see how having ‘reserves’ yet keeping it fair (not just for injuries) changes the problem? The interchange bench used to be none then one, two and then four, these changes were brought in for the same exact problem and guess what? The problem is still hear. Adding ‘reserves’ will not solve the problem.

By: Phillip Molly Malone

Phillip Molly Malone — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 07:43:32 +0000

Yeah, too some degree. I suggested changing it to 3 on the bench and 3 emergencies. Personally leave it as is, but if you do change it, don’t have the injury part.
JMTC
Molly

By: Jermayn

Jermayn — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 07:39:10 +0000

It will also only fasten the game and imo AFL does not need to be any faster…

By: Phillip Molly Malone

Phillip Molly Malone — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 07:33:57 +0000

I agree with you on the extended bench and injures. Thats why I say that if we bring in an extended bench, it has to be open for any use not just injures.
Molly

By: Jermayn

Jermayn — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 05:09:57 +0000

Extra people on the bench on stand by? If this is the case you would get ‘fake’ injuries just so they can play a fresh player.

scenerio one: Starts to rain so a tall player ‘fakes’ an injury so you can play a smaller guy.

scenerio two: Have one ruckman in reserve and then once he plays his heart out. You swap him so he will be able to provide some good ruck work in the final quarter.

It just has too much gray areas for my likeing. Leave it as it is imo

Jermayns last blog post..When I Grow Up – The Pussycat Dolls

By: SunCity_Royal

SunCity_Royal — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 04:23:19 +0000

A couple of things…first off i dont think staker will get traded from the Eagles, in my view he has had a good year. compared to last year he has really stepped up the anti, and although of late he’s been a bit down he’s much improved and the Eagles would be silly to trade him.

HOW GOOD ARE THE DOGGIES?!?!?! on top of the ladder at the moment, and nobody expected them to be where they are this year after a shocker last year.
interesting to note that Port Adelaide beat the Dogs in hard ball gets/contested possessions, yet the dogs still blew them out of the water…it shows to me that they are not limited to one game style and can adapt if need me…the sign of a true premiership contender.

also even though i still think Malthouse is a complaining baby…i do think that the idea of having two players on standby to come into the game to replace a damaged player is a good idea. the pace of the game is far faster than it was twenty, even ten years ago and i do think the interchange needs to be assessed. i think a 6 man bench or the idea i just mentioned would be ideal. because the people losing out are the teams. Freo had one player on the bench for a half of footy…now the thing that worries me, is that with 19 players forced to do a 22 man workload, it increases the risk of further and worse injuries