Who should our Sub be?

[CrowAboutIt]

Seen a few "best 22" teams with players like Grigg, Lyons, M Crouch, Kerridge as our sub.

These players don't exactly stick out to me as game winners that will come on and outrun the opposition with their pace. They just don't seem to be impact players. Grigg is the most likely of the few but that is only off of 1-2 games and simply because he hits targets when we continually miss them.

Martin is another that has had an impact as sub however he seemed to play at another level once given the confidence as a starter.

Cameron could provide this role however would it stunt his development?

It's an interesting conundrum..

Who would you consider as our sub.. What type of player would you prefer as sub?

Obviously the sub will not remain the same each week but perhaps it could be a discussion each week as to who we would prefer.

 

[I Lost My Keays]

Grigg as bloody usual

 

[1990crow]

Mackay/Henderson.

End thread.

 

[headache1]

Jarritch Lyrigg

 

[LiquidCrow]

Maybe not in R1, but I wouldn't be surprised to see Scott Thompson as the sub at some point in the year.

 

[Pugsley]

Mackay/Wright.

 

[Red mist]

It will be horses for courses. Depends on the opposition. Generally we tend to pick a utility as they go into the midfield rotation either cycling through defence or forward. I think that type of player is best suited for the sub.
Your idea of Cameron being sub has credit for mine. He still is so new to AFL as a game so it may be a useful tool to have him see how the game is unfolding on occasion with feedback during game time. Then let him loose and tear it up on a struggling back. Could be damaging. But I don't advocate this happening all the time, just occasionally.
The approach I would like to see most is that the sub be the most marginal player from the week before. If you are going to promote a player then bloody start him! The way AFC used the sub on Griggs and Crouch and Lyons was wrong. You start these guys if they get the call up. Tells the marginal guy from the week before that there is competition for your spot in the team, not just a stop gap if you have another bad one.

 

[hendo8888]

I'd be happy with Hendo or Keg as the sub. Think they'd give us a good impact when they come on and are probably sitting in that 20-25 sort of bracket.

 

[SES SA]

Ideally it would switch so that they all maintain "match fitness". I can see Charlie Cameron being used as the sub at times because he isn't ready for a full season and is very explosive. Wright, MacKay (four year man) and a few others will probably find themselves in that spot over the course of the year.

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I'd be happy with Hendo or Keg as the sub. Think they'd give us a good impact when they come on and are probably sitting in that 20-25 sort of bracket.

Agree Hendo should be a regular candidate as a sub - but not kerridge as the Guy has elite endurance. Should be looking more for impact players.

Also, we should be rrotating the sub more & careful not to have the same player for consecutive weeks along with non-playing emergency as it runs players out of form.

I also think we could use it to partially rest key midfielders in games against lesser teams rather than giving the full week off.

There needs to be an overall player rotation management plan to keep players fresh, which includes resting players, sub & non-playing emergency. The sub & non-playing emergency should not necessarily be the 22nd & 23rd player picked!

 

[mattymac]

Wright makes a good sub.

 

[Godallblighty]

This idea of the sub as some sort of 'impact' matchwinner is a myth. Hardly ever happens, right across the comp. I think it should be rotated through all the midfielders to give them a break through the season when they need it.

 

[Doombs]

Jarrod Pickett

 

[woopedazz]

What happens when Talia/JJ/Tex/Whoever gets injured and we have Cameron as a sub? Same problem would occur if Danger/Sloane/Crouch went down. Need someone who works better as a jack of all trades and is borderline best 18 to fill the slot in my opinion.

Sure a midget sub might possibly push a game in our favour, but they will also flat out lose the game if we have no fallback.

 

[Bicks]

Jarryd...

 

[Tex200]

Garlett

 

[CrowAboutIt]

Grigg as bloody usual

"SCREW YOU SANDO"

 

[CrowAboutIt]

It will be horses for courses. Depends on the opposition. Generally we tend to pick a utility as they go into the midfield rotation either cycling through defence or forward. I think that type of player is best suited for the sub.
Your idea of Cameron being sub has credit for mine. He still is so new to AFL as a game so it may be a useful tool to have him see how the game is unfolding on occasion with feedback during game time. Then let him loose and tear it up on a struggling back. Could be damaging. But I don't advocate this happening all the time, just occasionally.
The approach I would like to see most is that the sub be the most marginal player from the week before. If you are going to promote a player then bloody start him! The way AFC used the sub on Griggs and Crouch and Lyons was wrong. You start these guys if they get the call up. Tells the marginal guy from the week before that there is competition for your spot in the team, not just a stop gap if you have another bad one.

Agreed. Pretty much what we've been all saying this year. How can we allow players to perform the way they are keeping us in 10th possie yet leave our possession kings in the SANFL.

 

[Vooligan]

No one. Scrap the damn sub rule.

 

[Golumless]

If need be, rotate it between Wright/Lyons/Grigg/Kerridge/Cameron/Knight etc... No need for a specialized sub at all.

 

[CrowAboutIt]

If need be, rotate it between Wright/Lyons/Grigg/Kerridge/Cameron/Knight etc... No need for a specialized sub at all.

Agreed somewhat however we did this in 2014 and stunted our young players growth..

 

[Golumless]

Agreed somewhat however we did this in 2014 and stunted our young players growth..

Well... it did and it didn't.

On one end, for Grigg especially, definitely could argue that it did to a degree in that he wasn't getting full game time, but if it's managed will, it won't stunt growth at all in that you give the sub as a every now and then as a "off week" so to say and freshen them up a little. If managed well it shouldn't impact, just our management last season was abhorrent.

 

[CrowAboutIt]

Well... it did and it didn't.

On one end, for Grigg especially, definitely could argue that it did to a degree in that he wasn't getting full game time, but if it's managed will, it won't stunt growth at all in that you give the sub as a every now and then as a "off week" so to say and freshen them up a little. If managed well it shouldn't impact, just our management last season was abhorrent.

Yet you don't seem to be providing options mate...

Do you agree we should continue to sparsely play Grigg,, Kedg, etc?

 

[Bosley]

I thought they were doing away with the sub? Mmmmmm ..... sub.

 

[Vooligan]

I thought they were doing away with the sub? Mmmmmm ..... sub.

I thought that too. So, perhaps our sub should be Chicken Classic on Itallian Herbs?