More substitutions in football

[Scarecrow]

Pep said today that he'd like to see a change in the rules to allow for 4, 5 or 6 substitutions in a single game. You can read the whole article here:

http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/38270906

I am inclined to agree with him. Why are substitutions limited to just three per game? I think six is a bit excessive but one or two extra would definitely help the players and teams, in the increasingly congested calendar.

What do you think? Pros and cons.

 

[Kostur]

Isn't there a league where 4th sub in the extra time has been introduced? Can't remember for shit which one it was.

Pep's a cnut btw.

Edit: extra time, not added d'oh.

 

[Scarecrow]

Isn't there a league where 4th sub in the added time has been introduced? Can't remember for shit which one it was.

Pep's a cnut btw.

I don't know. That's a bit daft though. What use is an extra sub in the added time?

 

[Samid]

Pep was probably wishing he had 11 subs at HT today.

 

[duffer]

There should be fewer, not more.

More subs would lead to bigger squads and the rich teams stockpiling even more of the best players, making it harder for the smaller clubs to compete.

Plus all the stop starting would be annoying.

There should be 2 outfield subs allowed, 1 goalie.

 

[Regulus Arcturus Black]

Rubbish idea, pick the right team from the off fecko!

 

[Kostur]

I don't know. That's a bit daft though. What use is an extra sub in the added time?

Think it was argued by some statistics and other shit that there are far more injuries in the added time because players sometimes aggravate their minor injuries due to lack of subs left and another 30 minutes of playing time, etc.

 

[pcaming]

He's right, the number of games is increasing, but the players are still human. They're not run on energizer batteries.

 

[legolegs]

Think it was argued by some statistics and other shit that there are far more injuries in the added time because players sometimes aggravate their minor injuries due to lack of subs left and another 30 minutes of playing time, etc.

I was about to write how it makes sense but I think the problem here might be added time which isn't the same as extra time. I initially thought you just wrote added time instead of extra time but now that I think about it what league has extra time?
That being said an added sub for extra time makes sense imo.

 

[Theafonis]

With all the matches players are involved in, I'm inclined to agree.

Subs should be increased to 8, and 5 substitutions should be allowed.

 

[Scarecrow]

Think it was argued by some statistics and other shit that there are far more injuries in the added time because players sometimes aggravate their minor injuries due to lack of subs left and another 30 minutes of playing time, etc.

Oh, that added time. I thought you meant the 3 odd minutes at the end of the game, as you said it's implemented in a league.

Yeah, I know about that. Think it should be a given in any tournament. You play 1/3 more so you get an extra sub, it's logical.

 

[Kostur]

Oh, that added time. I thought you meant the 3 odd minutes at the end of the game, as you said it's implemented in a league.

Yeah, I know about that. Think it should be a given in any tournament. You play 1/3 more so you get an extra sub, it's logical.

@legolegs Both of you guys, yeah, I've actually worded myself poorly here, I've meant extra time.

 

[duffer]

He's right, the number of games is increasing, but the players are still human. They're not run on energizer batteries.

The number of games is lower than it used to be. The leagues are smaller, there's fewer cup replays and players actually get rotated and subbed off nowadays.

Alan Hansen played 67 club games in 1983/84.

 

[Keeps It tidy]

The number of games is lower than it used to be. The leagues are smaller, there's fewer cup replays and players actually get rotated and subbed off nowadays.

Alan Hansen played 67 club games in 1983/84.

Game is played at a faster pace now.

 

[Snow]

There should be fewer, not more.

More subs would lead to bigger squads and the rich teams stockpiling even more of the best players, making it harder for the smaller clubs to compete.

Plus all the stop starting would be annoying.

There should be 2 outfield subs allowed, 1 goalie.

More subs won't change the rules about squad registration and size.

 

[SteveW]

There should be fewer, not more.

More subs would lead to bigger squads and the rich teams stockpiling even more of the best players, making it harder for the smaller clubs to compete.

Plus all the stop starting would be annoying.

There should be 2 outfield subs allowed, 1 goalie.

I agree with the parts in bold.

 

[SteveW]

More subs won't change the rules about squad registration and size.

Being able to use more subs would make it easier for big teams to keep more top players satisfied though?

 

[duffer]

Game is played at a faster pace now.

And they are also better trained, don't eat steak and chips the morning before a game and don't drink 10 pints the evening afterwards. Players today have it easy.

 

[Snow]

Being able to use more subs would make it easier for big teams to keep more top players satisfied though?

You can still only register 25 players and 12 of those slots need to fill certain requirements. Wouldn't change a thing.

 

[doodle]

If the game goes into extra time, both teams should have 1 more sub.

 

[Gio]

There should be fewer, not more.

More subs would lead to bigger squads and the rich teams stockpiling even more of the best players, making it harder for the smaller clubs to compete.

Plus all the stop starting would be annoying.

There should be 2 outfield subs allowed, 1 goalie.

This. Another tweak to further entrench the boring gulf between the haves and have nots.

 

[paulscholes18]

Pep was probably wishing he had 11 subs at HT today.

Just about to put that

 

[VorZakone]

So are footballers really exhausted if they play 2 times in a week?

 

[Xivon]

Isn't there a league where 4th sub in the extra time has been introduced? Can't remember for shit which one it was.

Not in the league but in the DFB Pokal.

 

[RedElf]

Pep was probably wishing he had 11 subs at HT today.

 

[Raees]

4 subs would be okay. Any more and gets ridiculous

 

[Kostur]

Not in the league but in the DFB Pokal.

Right! Knew it happened somewhere, cheers for correcting me.

 

[lysglimt]

So are footballers really exhausted if they play 2 times in a week?

Exhausted no...carrying knocks and minor injuries...of course

 

[SirAnderson]

I'd be for it. 4 makes it a bit better without taking away the tactical challenge of the game.

 

[flappyjay]

No way this is not basketball or nfl 3 is enough. 2 more if there is extra time makes sense not 4-5 subs in a 90 minute match

 

[Gopher Brown]

I'd be for it. 4 makes it a bit better without taking away the tactical challenge of the game.

I think it's more of a tactical challenge if you limit the bench to just 3 players and allow 3 subs. Having 7 subs to choose from should be enough to cover every eventuality. Take it down to 3 and the manager has some serious thinking to do.

 

[pacifictheme]

Hm. aside from the fact that any friendly that sees mass subs becomes shit, this would need a total revamp to work.

Imagine being 1 nil down to west brom. pulis would be able to bring on a sub every two minutes for the last ten to break the game up. would be a disaster.

You'd need to limit number of times a sub could come on to 3, so two at a time. and potentially make it so that whatever touchline a player is closest to he has to jog to when subbed and walk around the pitch. not walk from one side to the other.

Otherwise games would just become disjointed messes.

 

[Crossie]

A fourth sub in extended time has been introduced in a couple of domestic cup competitions as well as in a couple of tournaments.

Pep was probably wishing he had 11 subs at HT today.

More subs would lead to bigger squads and the rich teams stockpiling even more of the best players, making it harder for the smaller clubs to compete.

Exactly my thinking.

 

[Pexbo]

Pep said today that he'd like to see a change in the rules to allow for 4, 5 or 6 substitutions in a single game. You can read the whole article here:

http://www.bbc.com/sport/football/38270906

I am inclined to agree with him. Why are substitutions limited to just three per game? I think six is a bit excessive but one or two extra would definitely help the players and teams, in the increasingly congested calendar.

What do you think? Pros and cons.

Pep is reminding me more and more of Arsene Wenger.

Set in his ways, a single approach to football that seems to carry some sort of morale higher ground in their mind and they both think the rules of the game should be adjusted; in their mind to improve the game, in reality it's just something that would benefit them.

 

[izec]

Yes more players on the bench, 2-3 more and 4 subs would be good. One extra sub in cup competitions when it goes in overtime.

 

[jojojo]

It just sounds like another way for the rich clubs to protect themselves by operating a bigger rotation. I also worry that it might lead to the rise of specialistlist subs - the striker who plays the last 10 minutes, that kind of thing. At least at the moment, managers have to reserve a sub to do something like that.

I wouldn't mind seeing a goalie sub left available though - a 3+1 perhaps. Particularly in Cup ties with extra time. I know sticking an outfield player in the net can be funny, but it also feels like it devalues the game.

 

[SirAnderson]

I think it's more of a tactical challenge if you limit the bench to just 3 players and allow 3 subs. Having 7 subs to choose from should be enough to cover every eventuality. Take it down to 3 and the manager has some serious thinking to do.

But the point is not only about the challenge, its about the health and wellness of the modern day player, as was Pep's concern, which made him give the suggestion of alleviating it a bit by perhaps increase the amount of subs. From a purely player management perspective, it makes sense and is reasonable to increase it to 4. From a purely tactical challenge point of view, most definitely it will take some serious tactical genius to pre-think what changes you will need to have only 3 changes on the bench and get it right before even seeing how the game pans out. I'm not to sure there is a manage in the world that can predetermine how every match will play out to get it right even half of the time.

But then again, back to the point of the demands on players these days, I think they need some kind of protection, whether increasing the subs makes a slight difference or not, I agree to the principle that something must and can be done to make our beautiful game even more beautiful by keeping the players playing at the peak form most of the time and at the same time keeping the tactical challenge that is engraved in any great sport.

 

[ivaldo]

He's right, the number of games is increasing, but the players are still human. They're not run on energizer batteries.

That's why there is a squad of 25 players it's up to Pep if he wants to select the same ons week in week out.

 

[buckooo1978]

A rule that benefits the big clubs

If it ain't broke...

 

[JinnerJamie]

There should be a fourth sub in the event that a goalkeeper gets injured and it couldn't be used in any other circumstance.