Interchange games

Well, AussieRulesBlog is wrong again!

 

Back in January, we predicted that interchange rates would increase with the reduction to three interchange seats for 2011. That is, we thought the total number of interchanges would be down, but the number of interchanges per interchange seat would be up.

 

How could we have got it so wrong?

 

In fact, Essendon and four other teams managed more interchange rotations in round one of 2011 than their 2010 interchange rotation average. In the Bombers’ case, their 134 interchanges eclipsed even their highest number of interchanges for any 2010 game: 122.

 

The AFL’s own announcement of the change to the composition of the bench cited a desire to curb the increasing interchange numbers. Well, it’s been an outstanding success at that, don’t you think, Adrian? No less than five teams beat their 2010 average with one fewer interchange player available in round one of 2011.

 

Kevin Bartlett’s Rules of the Game committee was offered three alternatives:

• three interchange players and one subtitute
• two interchange players and two substitutes
• four interchange players, with a cap of 80 interchanges per game

 

Now we freely concede that a team losing a player to injury is less disadvantaged through the 3:1 rule than they would have been under an unrestricted 4-man interchange. But we can’t see how that disadvantage is not also countered by the cap option, which mandates a reduction in interchange rotations.

 

Clearly the Committee erred in its recommendation of option one by favouring the fairness criterion over the rest. The numbers from round one prove the error. Unless the Bombers suffer a sudden rash of injuries attributable to high interchange rates — such as multiple bum splinters from jumping on and off ‘the pine’ — it’s pretty obvious that the twelve coaches who didn’t maximise their rotations in round one are going to be following the Bombers’ and the Barcodes’ leads, and then the rule will be seen to be a total crock.

 

We heard Brad Scott on AFL Insider on FoxSports suggest that the AFL leave the game alone for two or three years and just see how it evolves to deal with this current set of rules before making changes with unforeseen consequences. Hear hear, Brad!