even though all the people who actually play and the coach the game have been adamantly against this idea... lets do it anyway?
Injured and sore players having to remain on the ground in the last quarter is good for footy, yeah?
If it were up to players and coaches, interchange would be unlimited. They both have a massive vested interest in it being as easy as possible. The problem is not the interchange, but the coach's inability to properly manage resources. If he insists on a game plan that runs them into the ground, that is his fault, not the fault of the rules.
But what's the real reason for bringing it in? It doesn't have to happen, it's not urgent and everybody is against it.
I'm sure they have some 'impact injury' stat they can rattle off, but I bet they have no data to support it.
They are doing just.... 'cause.
No idea, don't care. Same could be said of every increase they have made. It was a 19th and 20th man once. Should have stayed there, and then we'd still be playing pure footy, with teams full of 'footballers' rather than this Gaelic hybrid full of so called 'athletes' we have now. They are doing it because years ago they started ■■■■■■■ with the rules and they are constantly trying to fix the things they have ■■■■■■ up with their constant tinkering.
even though all the people who actually play and the coach the game have been adamantly against this idea... lets do it anyway?
Injured and sore players having to remain on the ground in the last quarter is good for footy, yeah?
If it were up to players and coaches, interchange would be unlimited. They both have a massive vested interest in it being as easy as possible. The problem is not the interchange, but the coach's inability to properly manage resources. If he insists on a game plan that runs them into the ground, that is his fault, not the fault of the rules.
But what's the real reason for bringing it in? It doesn't have to happen, it's not urgent and everybody is against it.
I'm sure they have some 'impact injury' stat they can rattle off, but I bet they have no data to support it.
They are doing just.... 'cause.
Stoppages. Just about every single new rule in the last 10 years can be tied back to reducing the number of stoppages. Kevin Bartlett hates them and therefore so does the footy public.
That's easily fixed.
Actually pay Holding the Ball occasionally.
Spot on.
They've traded free kicks for ball ups and this is absolutely a conscious decision.
It's why midfielders average around an extra ten possesions more now than they used to.
A bit against the trend here but it should be capped at around 10 a quarter. The idea that this would place the players at risk is pure rhetoric. Soccer and rugby don't need to constantly replace players, why should we. It's always annoyed me that a team's interchange policy has become part of the team tactics. If teams get tired in the final half, tough luck. One of the real blights on the game is an interchange gate that looks like a Bourke Street rush hour. The 120 "limit" is a joke.
Because like any employee, they will push for whatever is easiest for them, rather than what is best for the game. Same reason you don't listen to coaches.
I assume that Matt Finnis and the ALFPA who are so very concerned about issues involving the duty of care towards players and whose members have resolutely opposed the idea of an interchange cap will be kicking up one almighty stink about this.
So what happens if the AFL stewards can't count. Lord knows they struggle with getting the interchange rule right, now they can also miscount the number and give free kicks at the death of a game when it is in the balance.
You have Demetriou pre-judging the issue saying a cap is coming in before he's even got any meaningful data on it.
You've got the rules committee making a mountain out of a mole-hill by imposing a cap given interchanges per match are rising, when anyone with an ounce of common sense would realise that a natural cap will occur anyway.
And then there is the obvious issue of properly maintaining the count, the AFL stewards have already proven they can screw up a simple thing like counting whether there are 4 players on the bench before imposing themselves, now you're giving them a more complicated task with a greater chance of f'ing it up.
Or more bluntly, once again the AFL Rules Committee is making yet another new rule, just to justify their existence
