PLUS ÇA CHANGE, PLUS ÇA CHANGE, PLUS C'EST LA MÊME CHOSE

Someone is going to have to crack open a can of #FootyMaths to assist in the AFL's on-going struggle with unintended consequences.

Since the introduction of the current substitute rule, footy fans have been party to the following justification:

"The substitute rule works brilliantly. Late in games players are tiring dramatically, allowing the games to open right up."

Of late, conspiratorially as a distraction from GWS shenanigans and other inspired AFL hi-jinx, it has been mooted that the game is too long:

"At 30+ minutes, quarters are too long. Late in games players are tiring dramatically, putting their well-being and careers at risk."

In a nutshell: We can make the game better by making the players more tired; by making the players less tired, we can make the game better.

The AFL, through its rules committee, introduces a new rule or rule modification - "tweak", to employ the prevailing user-friendly vernacular. Mind you, Kevin Bartlett remains dogged (tiger-like, even) in his defence: "there are next to NO new rules." This change, in turn, precipitates another change, and another, etc, et al, and so on. Which is great for KB, who gets to oversee another tweak. See how it works?

Next step: two substitutes.

Comments

[Random]

I'm pretty well fed up with people (mainly coaches) whinging about the substitute rule and blaming it for injuries or cutting careers short. Those are the conditions the game is now played under and it is the coaches job to adapt to those conditions and manage his team accordingly.

[Tony]

Personally, I did not see the point for the sub rule. I mean, so what if there are a lot of interchanges?

[The Usual Suspect]

It's grandpa's axe Tone - new handle, new head, new handle etc. Same game but different.

Besides, smart people in positions of power (whether in politics or sport) don't have to worry about unintended consequences. They have ways of fixing them.