Even before he ran into Tippett's knee.H Shaw.
Now that's concussed.
I dont mind the rule.
It stops coaches being forced to send guys back on that probably shouldnt be. Get to have them assessed properly and not have the team penalised by being one down. If he tests all clear he comes back on.Do the AFL have a doctor who tests as well as the club doctor?
edit: I ask because I imagine the scenario where a gun player gets knocked out in a grand final with the game on the line. A club doctor may well be persuaded by coaching staff to "just let this one slide, mate."
I'd be surprised if any club doctor did this. If the player came back on and showed signs of concussion again or got hit again, massive issue for the club.
With the increasing focus on concussion, reckon they need 2 subs now. 1 specific for concussion (dunno if you designate which or not). Give the 20 min assessment temp sub period, but if sub is officially activated for concussion then the concussed player can’t play the next week. Avoids it being abused too badly and the league adopts a conservative position to the treatment of concussion.
Last night what's his face went off in the third quarter, close to the time the sub would usually be made anyway. This allowed Caddy to come in (admittedly got smacked around) and have a light run, while the other player had a 20 min rest. Then made a different sub in the last quarter.
If teams wanted, they could 'concussion' sub a player who's underdone to rest them for the last quarter, while giving their sub a chance to get the pace of the game.
No, I favor looking after players with concussion on the slight chance a team fakes a concussion rather than limited when the sub can be made. It isn't as if there is evidence to show this rule is being used in the wrong spirit.
I dont mind the rule.
It stops coaches being forced to send guys back on that probably shouldnt be. Get to have them assessed properly and not have the team penalised by being one down. If he tests all clear he comes back on.Do the AFL have a doctor who tests as well as the club doctor?
edit: I ask because I imagine the scenario where a gun player gets knocked out in a grand final with the game on the line. A club doctor may well be persuaded by coaching staff to "just let this one slide, mate."
I'd be surprised if any club doctor did this. If the player came back on and showed signs of concussion again or got hit again, massive issue for the club.
The AFL doctor is too busy doing presentations to cameras they didn't know were there... Maybe they needed the concussion test before stepping on stage.
Simple answer - get rid of the sub rule. It's ■■■■■■ ridiculous anyway.
Simple answer - get rid of the sub rule. It's ■■■■■■ ridiculous anyway.
This. Never liked it from the start, doesn't add anything to the game
Simple answer - get rid of the sub rule. It's ■■■■■■ ridiculous anyway.
This. Never liked it from the start, doesn't add anything to the game
Can't agree. It's not meant to add anything to the game (other than a bit of intrigue), it's meant to be insurance against injury, because people complained they lost games due to injuries.
Team's are already exploiting the rule by using it when a player isn't injured, and then complaining when there's an injury that they are at a disadvantage.
I guarantee if there's 5 on the bench coaches would still want a sub AND complain that they lost a game because of injuries.
I wouldn't care if we made the sub Hardingham every week, and didn't use him unless there was an injury.
When the rule was introduced it was to limit injuries in the game, create an element of strategy and finally build excitement as fresh legs hit the ground (impact players or whatever). These are the elements I refer to as "adding to the game", all touted as positives at the time of the change.
In that sense, I don't think it adds to the game. On injuries, haven't seen any stats to say yes or no so I'll put that to the side. On strategy, yes there is an element but there is it any more than if you kept a player benched most of the game so he would have more legs late in the game? And the fresh legs/impact player thing, that doesn't seem to be happening (except on rare occasions) because 1) the green vest goes to young players more often than not, guys that are just getting started and thus they don't create a bang when they get on, and 2) the players coming on need time to get up with the speed of the game. How many times has a player come on and turned a match with a big last quarter?
Take the rule away and what changes? The dumb luck element of subbing a guy then copping an injury is gone. Kids get more of a go. That makes more sense to me that what it does for the game now.