Nick's Collingwood Bulletin Board

Thank you for that

Play Cox as the Sub and bring him on for the second half of the third and fourth quarters...trust me, it will work

Pies2016 wrote:The nominated extra player is now called the “ tactical substitute “
He can come on any time into the game and replace any one of the other 22 players. Once the 23rd player is introduced into the game, then one of the original 22 players is also simultaneously removed from the game. You no longer need to activate the sub for an injury only. You can now activate the sub anytime for tactical purposes also.
I also believe both the 23rd player and the player subbed out are able to play in the VFL on the same weekend and that decision is made at the discretion of the club. ( happy to be corrected if others know better )

It's truly amazing that they managed to come up with a new concept that's precisely the same as the old one that everyone (particularly players) hated.

https://www.afl.com.au/news/109578/sub- ... ap-reduced

From the tactical perspective, it becomes a lot easier decision to activate it when you’re behind on the scoreboard, than when you’re in front.
The sub is going to test the nerve of any coaches who find themselves a few goals down at qtr time. Do you make a change early while the game is still in reach and risk not getting an injury later in the game. Or do you trust your 22 players to come good and take the conservative approach on holding back your sub until later in the game.
So who makes for a good tactical sub ? Every situation and scenario is different but generally I’m looking for someone who can win the footy up the ground and also hit the scoreboard ( but not part of best 22 ) Maybe Carmichael ?

I love it.

Or early doors McInnes

another stupid tinkering of the rules.
what is the purpose?

Stupid rule.

A concussion Sub is a good thing, it should be simple. If a player is replaced the concussion sub they miss 14 days, no argument. If a player gets injured during the game, that's why you have an interchange bench. Are you disadvantaged by playing with 1 less player? yes you are, deal with it.

concussion is a serious issue and you don't want potentially concussed players returning to the field.

It stops potential abuse of the rule for "injuries" for tactical reasons. Also, it means if one sub is activated the other can be to eliminate the potential advantage of fresh legs. I can't see someone activating the sub unnecessarily (ie. no injury) before 3/4 time unless they're desperate.

- Ben

Ronnie McKeowns boots wrote:Play Cox as the Sub and bring him on for the second half of the third and fourth quarters...trust me, it will work

It'll work perfectly for us and Cox. We'll use the rule, win games and the AFL will change the rule mid season to our detriment.

What'sinaname wrote:

Ronnie McKeowns boots wrote:Play Cox as the Sub and bring him on for the second half of the third and fourth quarters...trust me, it will work

It'll work perfectly for us and Cox. We'll use the rule, win games and the AFL will change the rule mid season to our detriment.

I actually think he would be the worst person to use as a tactical sub. From memory we used the injury sub perhaps 50% of the time last year - so in all those instances you want someone who is more of a utility (Cox definitely isn't that). I would have thought someone like McReery would be a great sub (pace, pressure) when other players are tiring.

It is an improvement, clubs were inventing injury in order to activate the sub.

It just legalizes the use of the sub for strategic purposes.

The AFL has pretty much reverted back to the 2011 rule, but with 4 interchanges + 1 sub rather than 3 + 1.

Pies2016 wrote:From the tactical perspective, it becomes a lot easier decision to activate it when you’re behind on the scoreboard, than when you’re in front.
The sub is going to test the nerve of any coaches who find themselves a few goals down at qtr time. Do you make a change early while the game is still in reach and risk not getting an injury later in the game. Or do you trust your 22 players to come good and take the conservative approach on holding back your sub until later in the game.

I don’t think there’ll be much to test because we already saw how it went ten years ago: generally it was young/fringe players and guys like Jarryd Blair warming the pine until late third quarter / early fourth unless an injury forced coaches to use the sub earlier. I don’t think having five on the bench rather than four will change that equation all that much.

^^^
It’s going to be interesting to see the numbers regarding the activation of the sub. Injury vs tactical and what times they were activated. Obviously if you’re in front on the scoreboard, you’re in a better position to hold the sub back until later in the game because there is no need to change anything you’ve been doing.
It is called a tactical sub because in part, activating it ( anytime other than for an injury ) does lend itself to the coach having made some sort of tactical decision. By extension, I still believe most “ tactical activations “ will have much more likely come from the team who is behind than the one who is in front.
Ultimately, it’s still a rule that favours the stronger clubs because their 23rd player selected will likely be a more accomplished player than any 23rd player selected from a cellar dweller.