Lanterne Rouge Posted October 27, 2021 Report Share Posted October 27, 2021 Ifab: Football law makers recommend five substitutes - BBC Sport It`s being proposed that five subs be allowed in the future after they were during Covid. You can change half your team. Thoughts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted October 27, 2021 Report Share Posted October 27, 2021 As long as it’s 5 from 7 I’ll just about accept it. I don’t want 5/9. I’d prefer today if it was 3/5 rather than 3/7. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Isewater Posted October 27, 2021 Report Share Posted October 27, 2021 1 minute ago, Lanterne Rouge said: Ifab: Football law makers recommend five substitutes - BBC Sport It`s being proposed that five subs be allowed in the future after they were during Covid. You can change half your team. Thoughts. I reckon , once again, it would help the bigger clubs who could afford to bring on quality subs as the opposition were tiring . Down with this sort of thing. 8 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingswood Robin Posted October 27, 2021 Report Share Posted October 27, 2021 Not keen myself. Makes games that are becoming difficult to watch, even more difficult to watch (and it gives the big boys even more of an advantage). 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Horse With No Name Posted October 27, 2021 Report Share Posted October 27, 2021 All the above, plus more added on time at the end, and we all know what happens in added on time. So no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted October 27, 2021 Report Share Posted October 27, 2021 4 I could take 5 no, that's replacing half the outfield Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1960maaan Posted October 27, 2021 Report Share Posted October 27, 2021 I would rather 3 from 9, then you could have the concussion protocol properly used by having a like for like positional sub. Plus , if like us last year when we had 2 head injuries in the first half, it covers that, as many as needed. 5 basic subs is too many IMO. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myol'man Posted October 27, 2021 Report Share Posted October 27, 2021 Bloody substitutes Back in my day you had to stay on and play on unless you'd been carted off to A&E in the back of your mates van. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted October 27, 2021 Report Share Posted October 27, 2021 Just now, 1960maaan said: I would rather 3 from 9, then you could have the concussion protocol properly used by having a like for like positional sub. Plus , if like us last year when we had 2 head injuries in the first half, it covers that, as many as needed. 5 basic subs is too many IMO. That's a good suggestion I like that one 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted October 27, 2021 Report Share Posted October 27, 2021 Getting technical but 3 from 7 however you can make an additional 2 subs if they're home grown academy players who've played less than x amount of games before the season starts, ie for City we could make 3 subs then bring on a Conway/Bell/Towler. Would limit it to 10/15 games as a way to ensure its very new players to first team level to try to keep having young players brought up. If you don't have young players you deem good enough don't name any on the bench and stay with 3. Just rewards good academies. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBW Posted October 27, 2021 Report Share Posted October 27, 2021 Will be great fun when a team have used no subs and are 1-0 up with three minutes left... 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Geoff Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 7 hours ago, TBW said: Will be great fun when a team have used no subs and are 1-0 up with three minutes left... We still wouldn't win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calculus Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 10 hours ago, myol'man said: Bloody substitutes Back in my day you had to stay on and play on unless you'd been carted off to A&E in the back of your mates van. Quite right too - no subs for me. Bert Trautmann even played on in a Cup Final with a broken neck. Don't remember players having ham strings or metatarsals then either. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBristolian Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 Personally I think the fairest thing would be to be allowed three tactical subs but also to be allowed as many injury subs as you needed, with the proviso that anyone brought off as an injury sub cannot be selected for the next game (to prevent injury subs being exploited) 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 45 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said: Personally I think the fairest thing would be to be allowed three tactical subs but also to be allowed as many injury subs as you needed, with the proviso that anyone brought off as an injury sub cannot be selected for the next game (to prevent injury subs being exploited) Next 3 games not just 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonBristolian Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 13 minutes ago, Monkeh said: Next 3 games not just 1 That sounds fair Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrahamC Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 Not a fan. 3 from 7 is fine, with the concussion protocol as the exception for a 4th. Just an excuse to disrupt the game more, & as the original reason given for it was player fatigue due to Covid resulting in virtually back to back seasons, I don’t get the logic now. Probably is more down to the big clubs wanting it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rossi the Robin Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 Not if it encourages time wasting at the end 3 is enough plus a head injury sub Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheddarReds Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 A lot of people saying it'll favour the big boys which is a fair take. But it won't be all bad, there's also reason for it to benefit smaller clubs, fans and players. E.g. - more room for tactical changes in games to push for a draw or shut up shop - increased likelihood of youngsters getting game time. This will benefit smaller clubs as they can still offer academy players more game time than the big sides. - already overworked footballers will likely get more rest, increasing performance levels we see and more importantly not running players into the ground. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arrytheb Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 I think (and I've not fully read the article) that if it changes to 5 subs, and let's be honest, it will, then it should be restricted to 3 changes plus an additional at HT if that makes sense? So can change 5 players but have to make the changes in a maximum of 3 stoppages during 90 mins game time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View from the Dolman Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 21 minutes ago, arrytheb said: I think (and I've not fully read the article) that if it changes to 5 subs, and let's be honest, it will, then it should be restricted to 3 changes plus an additional at HT if that makes sense? So can change 5 players but have to make the changes in a maximum of 3 stoppages during 90 mins game time That's exactly what the proposal is. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeAman08 Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 I wouldn’t be mad at 4 with the concussion sub still available if need be. Think 5 pushes it too far in favour for clubs with more money. We think oh it is a small change but keep getting these small changes that favour clubs with money. Need to push back imo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTeamInBristol Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 Couldn't you get round the time wasting aspect by not allowing any tactical substitutions after the 90th minute? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSN Red Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 I would have liked a rule that prevents any subs after 90 mins, injury or tactical. Would prevent the annoying time-wasting multiple subs with a minute to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSN Red Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 4 minutes ago, OneTeamInBristol said: Couldn't you get round the time wasting aspect by not allowing any tactical substitutions after the 90th minute? Beat me to it 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 4 hours ago, OneTeamInBristol said: Couldn't you get round the time wasting aspect by not allowing any tactical substitutions after the 90th minute? Concede in the 91st minute then can't bring on an attacking player to change the outcome? And we all know time wasting starts much earlier than the 91st minute 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Red Hat Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 20 hours ago, myol'man said: Bloody substitutes Back in my day you had to stay on and play on unless you'd been carted off to A&E in the back of your mates van. You were lucky...In my day we used to be rolled off t'local vitinry ont' system of knobbly logs........... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OneTeamInBristol Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 8 minutes ago, Lrrr said: Concede in the 91st minute then can't bring on an attacking player to change the outcome? And we all know time wasting starts much earlier than the 91st minute Why can’t the 11 already on the pitch try and change the outcome? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
semblar Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 7 hours ago, GrahamC said: Not a fan. 3 from 7 is fine, with the concussion protocol as the exception for a 4th. Just an excuse to disrupt the game more, & as the original reason given for it was player fatigue due to Covid resulting in virtually back to back seasons, I don’t get the logic now. Probably is more down to the big clubs wanting it. Cue some clubs giving lessons on how to "fail" the concussion protocol on the correct sign from the touchline...even with an enforced layoff for following matches Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swanker Posted October 28, 2021 Report Share Posted October 28, 2021 (edited) 9 hours ago, Calculus said: Quite right too - no subs for me. Bert Trautmann even played on in a Cup Final with a broken neck. Don't remember players having ham strings or metatarsals then either. Broken neck? That’s nothing mate, I know a bloke who had a broken neck and dislocated shoulder, he played the full 90 mins and added time. Went back to the pub after the game and had a few pints as well They don’t make um like that anymore. Edited October 28, 2021 by swanker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.