Do we need a Substitute player?

Not disrespecting North but I suspect the main reason they were as close to Port at the final siren as they were was due to Port losing 2 players in the first quarter.
Given the way the game is played, losing players early in the game is usually fatal. Apart from this week, I cannot recall a game recently where a team that has been down to 1 sub by half time has won. They seem to always get overrun in the last quarter as fresher legs take over. Even losing one player by half time seems to have a significnt effect.
Doesn't seem right that injuries can have such an impact on results.

Should we use the same substitution system as the AFL?
Or can we have a sub that can only be used in case of a pre-half time injury that rules a player out for the rest of the game. Perhaps one of your named emergencies can double up from the Ressies if needed.

South had all their interchange on before half time against Norwood 3 weeks ago, then Norwood were in the same position their following match

Don Cooper, from FOOT-e TIMES, wrote an opinion piece on this very topic a couple of weeks ago...

http://footetimes.com/dons-say-subject-of-change-interchange-that-is/

i wish everyone would just leave the game alone, in this case every club has stories like ''we were down to 16 men & one sat in the forward pocket with a broken collarbone'' as i said every club has stories like that, that help build traditions, folklore & so forth, the game is about natural deterioration of the bodies & then who has the will to win etc etc, but no we have so many changes a game from 20 years ago looks an alien game to today, they changed the 25 minute quarters to 20 minutes (time still goes roughly the same as it used to   to look after the longevity of the players life span in footy), then they let players kick out for a point before the goal umpire waves the flag to make the game quicker, another example is the ''trial by video'' system it was quite rightly brought in for thuggery & now every little mickey mouse touch gets players reported ..............i have plenty of examples about rule changes where they contradict each other but i'm sure you get the drift, but just leave the game alone is what i say

I say less interchanges
Limit of 25 per games
Better players on the ground more often

As for the Sub, an emphatic no

NO

No.

I don't mind the sub rule, but it's another victory for the coaches who are the main cause of rule changes. They then exploit those rule changes so further rules are introduced or changed. Has to come a time when enough is enough as Bayman has mentioned. Unless there is going to be a cap on rotations though, then I think a Sub needs to be seriously considered.

I'm a traditionalist and do not support it as well as suggesting the bench be reduced by one. "Run what you brung and hope you brung enough" as the old saying goes!