Equally, the rule makers were too quick to defend it before anyone had a chance to analyse its effects. In club land they were saying that fatigued players would be more likely to be injured, while head office declared it would not impact on any particular type of player.
After two rounds in which I have watched all 16 games I am not sure that either comment is correct - sometimes when you are trying to defend your position you do not necessarily allow circumstances to run their course.
The 2011 AFL season has started off full of action. As in any year you will always get a couple of blowout games, but the evenness of the competition is still a major strength with many close games and already two draws.
Watching the teams and their coaching staff come to terms with the new substitute rule has certainly added another dimension to our great game, whether you like the law or not.
Each club is still coming to terms with how to use it, and already mistakes have been made and patterns are evolving. It is clear that as always a little luck is needed, as early injuries - particularly if there is more than one - hurt a team's flexibility.
The bonus of the new rule is that an early injury no longer leaves a team 25 per cent down in rotation capability compared with its opposition.
In round one, Carlton lost Jarrad Waite and Adelaide lost Jason Porplyzia, but they were still on an equal footing with their opponents, allowing both clubs to run over their opposition late in the game.
Last Friday night the same applied with Richmond and Jack Riewoldt, resulting in a draw.
What is clearly evident is that the new rule has worked in making the contest a greater endurance test and opening up the flow of the game late in matches.
Tactically, this means you need to be creative in both the selection of your team and how you manipulate positional moves and rotations, as more than ever these decisions can impact your winning chances.
Although some people will avoid conceding the fact, the new system is more suited to a mid-sized runner than it is to an extra key position type, or certainly a secondary ruckman, which has been shown in several games already.
In round one, I thought the Hawks damaged their chances of winning at three-quarter time when they substituted Brad Sewell for Brendan Whitecross, leaving four talls in Brent Renouf, David Hale, Lance Franklin and Jarryd Roughead to play out the final stanza. The Hawks were run over, and in hindsight they would have been far better removing one of their lumbering big players.
The next day at the MCG the Sydney Swans were overrun with an extra ruckman in Mark Seaby as their sub. Instead of injecting some explosive power running or excitement to the team late in the game as their opponents did with Ricky Petterd, the Swans ground to a halt with too many big men on the field.
They did not fall for the same mistake two weeks in a row, and omitted Seaby for an extra runner in last weekend's round two win over Essendon. In another close and exciting finish it could be argued that the extra legs helped them achieve victory.
Last Sunday at the MCG I witnessed first hand how the sub rule can give a team extra legs, even though its use may have been accidental.
The Hawks and Alastair Clarkson were keen to inject some second-half grunt into their team and chose Jordan Lewis as their substitute. The accident came when Brent Renouf was concussed and David Hale took over the first ruck duties assisted by Roughead.
It had an immediate impact, with the fresh Lewis dominating the third quarter and giving the Hawks an extra runner. At the same time they used Shaun Burgoyne more sparingly through the midfield, and he played much of the game forward. The fresh Burgoyne kicked three last-quarter goals.
So successful was the move that you would have to question if the Hawks can continue to play both Renouf and Hale in the same team.
The most successful use of the substitute rule has been by West Coast, which has used the same player in Andrew Gaff to inject youthful run late in games.
Gaff has had a major impact in the Eagles' last-gasp victories in both rounds one and two.
AFL clubs will continue to analyse this rule, but I sense that those who can manipulate the positioning of their players in the game through rotations and substitutions can gain an advantage.
The views in this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of the AFL or its clubs
