Substitutions...

[mmmmsnouts]

Coming to a Premier League near you!

1. Fourth official calls for 3 minutes added time at the end of a 1-0 match
2. Winning manager subs off 4 players who all waste as much time as humanly possible
3. Ref still blows the whistle on exactly 3 minutes

 

[McBain]

even better, we can sub off two outfield players and have three goalkeepers, might be able to keep some shots out then

I dream of the day we field an entire bench of goalkeepers. We can put in out list of Footballing firsts with flood lights and undersoil heating.

 

[degsy]

Don't like it

This

 

[Lineker]

...as long as they swap jerseys when they come off so we can stay 1-11

 

[PhilM]

Personally, I think it'll benefit the squads with the deepest pockets. We're moving towards 50% of the outfield players being substituted which is a big boost.

Clubs like ourselves, Burnley and many others will see a sizeable reduction in the quality on the pitch; clubs like City or Chelsea won't see such a drop.

 

[Khalekan]

FIFA look set to make the use of five substitutions per team, per game a permanent situation.

If it's approved, then the Premier League - and all others - will come under pressure to follow suit.

Can only see this benefitting those clubs with deep squads... hardly likely to benefit the current Everton squad.

Agreed, Andy.

 

[Khalekan]

People said the same about 3 subs meh

And I think their point was validated.

With so many players on the bench and with three subs, the benches of the richer clubs became stuffed with better quality reserves.

And these players were happy enough because it kept them involved with the match day team.

Previously, when only one sub was allowed and he was the only one on the bench, these better reserves would have been moving away and strengthening the first teams of other clubs.

The talent was more evenly spread and that is a very good thing, IMO.

Allowing five subs and probably eventually the whole named squad to sit on the bench will only lead to a greater concentration of good players feeling involved enough to sit around waiting the odd call up off the bench.

Bad move, in my opinion.

 

[dublinbluenose]

And I think their point was validated.

With so many players on the bench and with three subs, the benches of the richer clubs became stuffed with better quality reserves.

And these players were happy enough because it kept them involved with the match day team.

Previously, when only one sub was allowed and he was the only one on the bench, these better reserves would have been moving away and strengthening the first teams of other clubs.

The talent was more evenly spread and that is a very good thing, IMO.

Allowing five subs and probably eventually the whole named squad to sit on the bench will only lead to a greater concentration of good players feeling involved enough to sit around waiting the odd call up off the bench.

Bad move, in my opinion.

But the ultimate resolution then is revert to 11 and no subs is it not?

 

[kev]

But the ultimate resolution then is revert to 11 and no subs is it not?

One sub (to cover for injury) made sense. Substitutions now are used mainly for 'tactical' reasons or to waste time. 'Tactical' substitutes can only benefit the richer teams, that is a fact.

 

[Simon Buttle]

If it comes into play then hopefully it will encourage us to sort out our awful bench situation/squad depth.

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

Fine with it to be honest

One bonus is that it might see more youngsters getting a run out later on in games when they perhaps wouldn't normally get a chance with the 3 sub rule

If it gets the likes of Simms, Gordon and Dobbin on the pitch more often then I'm on board

 

[gonetomorrow]

I dream of the day we field an entire bench of goalkeepers. We can put in out list of Footballing firsts with flood lights and undersoil heating.

That's the sort of thinking we like to encourage around here.

 

[TheBigIguana]

If it comes into play then hopefully it will encourage us to sort out our awful bench situation/squad depth.

Logically if the big clubs now need more depth it is going to be even harder for us to have enough quality players to have depth ourselves. We're at some level beholden to the market.

 

[Runub]

Fine with it to be honest

One bonus is that it might see more youngsters getting a run out later on in games when they perhaps wouldn't normally get a chance with the 3 sub rule

If it gets the likes of Simms, Gordon and Dobbin on the pitch more often then I'm on board

I take your point but would that strategy be risked if the result is in doubt? And given Everton being 2 or 3 up with a handful of minutes to go the result is still in doubt lol

 

[Mikey_Fitzgerald]

I take your point but would that strategy be risked if the result is in doubt? And given Everton being 2 or 3 up with a handful of minutes to go the result is still in doubt lol

Even if it's as simple as us using 3 subs already and then someone like Simms gets 5-10 minutes because a player gets hurt or is on a yellow and needs hooking

That's a scenario that doesn't exist anymore

In theory it should enable us to keep our more experienced players fitter whilst giving our younger ones more of a chance due to two extra slots

If they're good enough to be on the bench then they're good enough to get on the pitch, this just increases the odds