Interchange Cap: Horrible Idea

The AFL is about to implement a cap on the number of interchanges (bench rotations, in American parlance).
Here's an article discussing how the cap may affect each club and certain players.
Here's a little background.


The AFL argues that the game is getting too fast, that the value of extreme physical fitness is being diminished, and that managing fatigue is part of the game, for both players and coaches.
I'm not sure about the game getting too fast; that doesn't really seem possible.  I do agree with the other points, though.  Top physical form should be paramount, and playing all-out should always be measured against saving something for later in the game.  When players can simply take a quick breather on the sidelines whenever they want, getting a drink and a leg rub, they are able to have an impact on the field without being as physically fit as possible.  This is disappointing, especially for a game in which fitness has traditionally been both a prerequisite to success and a point of pride.

The interchange cap, however is a terrible way to fix this.

Just think how this will play out.  The job of keeping exact count of every interchange will be extremely difficult, and inevitably, something will go wrong.  It won't be long before game review shows that a winning side made too many interchanges.  What then?  Change the result?  Penalize the club in some way?  What a mess.

Instead of a cap on interchanges, I suggest reducing the number of interchange players.  I think allowing one interchange player and three substitutes would work well.  There would be only one player available for resting at any given time, so while unlimited interchanges would be allowed, there's only so much resting that can be done with only one player on the bench.  And players who need some additional conditioning will simply have to choose how long they can remain in the game.  Sorry, Dane Swan, but if you can't hack it the whole game, maybe you should just play half the game.

I just don't want to see any controversies from this cap, but I think we will.