IFAB to extend five substitutes rule to cover all of 2020-21 season

[roseguy64]

https://theathletic.com/1915053/202...20-21-season-ifab/?source=user-shared-article

Tweet

— Twitter API (@user) date

Would be fine with it if they dictate that at least one of the bench roles should be a youth player or academy graduate.

 

[Rozay]

I think 5 subs is too much, but I’d like the 29 man squads to stay.

 

[RC89]

I wonder what the thinking is behind this. Is it because the next season is due to start so soon after the completion of this one with no real break and pre season?

 

[Womp]

I like it. Allows managers more freedom to influence the match, also accounts for injuries that may come about due to fatigue or fixture buildups. Not to add, it'll give younger players more of a chance to showcase their ability.

 

[Stobzilla]

I think 4 subs with 9 available is sensible, don't know about 5. But it could be good news for a lot of U-18's/23's next year depending on how big a clear out we end up having.

 

[Greck]

Impact could be huge. That's like getting another chance to pick the XI. Imagine a stacked team like City being able to change their front 3 and central midfield if things aren't working. Christ it may even become necessary to sub on a fresh CB or two to deal with an opponent's fresh wave of attackers. 5 subs sounds too drastic a change

 

[Maluco]

I’m pretty sure this hands the advantage to a team like City for next season.

A fully fit City today could have brought on Aguero, Sterling, Gundogan, Bernardo and Laporte today. Newcastle had absolutely nothing.

The only way it helps smaller teams is by allowing them to get more cards and get on fresh legs, but having that many quality players coming on against you is disheartening.

Liverpool will need to make sure they spend to keep up now because their bench is poor.

A big win for Chelsea too who have lots of attacking options now.

 

[paulscholes18]

What are they doing with water breaks, are they here to staying or stopping?

 

[Cheech Wizard]

City will just swat away teams for fives and sixes anytime. They won't bother with youngsters, might included a couple to look inclusive, but struggling midweek 0-0 to Brighton at home 20 minutes to go they'll wack on another big 5 everytime.

 

[Greck]

I’m pretty sure this hands the advantage to a team like City for next season.

A fully fit City today could have brought on Aguero, Sterling, Gundogan, Bernardo and Laporte today. Newcastle had absolutely nothing.

The only way it helps smaller teams is by allowing them to get more cards and get on fresh legs, but having that many quality players coming on against you is disheartening.

Liverpool will need to make sure they spend to keep up now because their bench is poor.

A big win for Chelsea too who have lots of attacking options now.

Especially as smaller teams have a huge drop off after their starting XI. They'd be bringing on vastly inferior players to hold off deep teams with deep pockets

 

[Maluco]

Especially as smaller teams have a huge drop off after their starting XI. They'd be bringing on vastly inferior players to hold off deep teams with deep pockets

That’s how I feel too. I don’t think it’s fair to teams like Burnley who do so well to compete with thin squads and whose game plans are based on containing elevens chosen by bigger teams.

It just means if the bigger teams get it wrong, they can change it far mor easily to get back in games.

 

[duffer]

Have they said why they're extending it?

 

[RDCR07]

What are they doing with water breaks, are they here to staying or stopping?

I hope that ends. It’s sucks the life out of the game. Players are back to fitness now. It can stop already.

 

[The Boy]

I think this is a terrible idea, I was fine with it for this period of games given they are coming so thick and fast, but this hands a huge advantage to teams with strong squads and given how far ahead those teams are already it will just further eliminate any real chance of smaller teams rising up the premiership. It could also increase the chances of decent players from smaller teams moving to the bigger ones as there will be more chances to play. All in all it just widens the chasm that already exists between the likes of City, United and Pool and the Brightons of this world.

That said if there is one manager at a lesser club able to take advantage it is Graham Potter, he tinkers with our team so much anyway it plays into his hands a bit, I also think we're building a stronger squad than a lot of the teams around us.

 

[Web of Bissaka]

I like it.. only if manager sensibly use it for youth.

I think they should put a simple rule there - 1 or 2 out of the 5 subs can only be made for homegrown players.

 

[baskinginthesun]

Not sure why. Were they being pressured to make this permanent by the leagues?

This would only really work if 2 of the 5 subs you make have to be academy products or have come from the U-23s or something. That way deep pocketed clubs aren't bringing on 5 world class subs.

 

[edcunited1878]

It's a temporary extension. Very short to no "off-season" with most leagues going into the new 20/21 season within weeks. Then potentially African Cup of Nations and Euro 2021.

 

[red4ever 79]

Ridiculous decision. What's next water breaks will continue at intervals of 22mins. Game is going in the wrong direction

 

[Withnail]

It's a temporary extension. Very short to no "off-season" with most leagues going into the new 20/21 season within weeks. Then potentially African Cup of Nations and Euro 2021.

I don't particularly like the idea but yeah the Euros is a huge problem.

Anyone involved will be playing right through till it finishes, provided they aren't all injured by then.

 

[Peyroteo]

I don't think players would be able to handle another season right after this and then an international tournament next summer. If it's only for an extra season I think it's fine.

 

[Santoryo]

Would be unfair to smaller teams.

 

[Havak]

My instant thought was no, but the more I think about it the more I like it.

If we can have 9-11 players on the bench like international tournaments, it makes the whole squad feel more involved. Every team in the league can put together 25 players including some from the academy getting their chances. I like the idea of a rule where at least one of the players substituted on has to be a homegrown player. Also, lets say teams are allowed to name a starting XI and XI substitutes, that should have to include a certain amount of home grown players too. Eg. I believe a 25-player squad still needs a minimum of eight home grown players. I'd suggest that if you're naming a 22-player match day squad, seven of them would have to be home grown or something like that.

A lot of the teams with less squad depth will not like this, but I think this is actually a way to give more younger players a chance to get on the pitch.

 

[Ludens the Red]

Terrible idea, an idea that will clearly benefit certain clubs above others. If you thought top clubs stockpiled talent imagine how much more they’ll do it with this. It never ceases to amaze me how much the powers that be in football love to think up ideas to shit on the smaller clubs. The resentment towards the elite clubs will just grow too.

 

[youngrell]

I think it makes sense for player welfare but do feel it hands too much of an advantage to richer teams.

Wonder if it will affect the summer transfer window with more buying.

On the water break note, isn’t that because it’s summer and nothing to do with the disjointed season?

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

Horrible decision.

as much as it’s helped during the restart, it is ridiculous when a team can change 1/2 the outfield in one go.

 

[Rafaeldagold]

I knew they’d keep these ‘temporary Changes’. This isn’t great news for the league as the bigger teams can just bring on more quality to change a game if the first 11 aren’t quite doing it- you’ll see less surprising results which is what makes the Prem a bit unique.

Why are they continuing with it? I’m sure the drinks break will be staying next with added adverts in that period next season

 

[Pretzels81]

Finally. 3 subs only is one of the silliest and most outdated rules of football, especially when an elite player will play at least 70 games per season (friendlies, league, cups, europe, NT).

And anyway, most players won't be truly fit for the remainder of 2020 because of the new "covid19 lifestyle". Necessary.

 

[anant]

It would definitely benefit clubs like City and to a certain extent even clubs like us, Chelsea and Pool. Instead of players conserving energy 5 of your attackers can just play pressing game against opposition ofr 60 minutes, and then get subbed off only to be replaced by another set of quality players. Now these fresh players would b playing against already tired defences, which would further reduce chances of an upset.

Additionally, it would be interesting to see how this impacts club's transfer planning. Had the 3 substitute rule stayed, I'm certain that we would have bought a DM as we can't afford to use a sub every game on replacing him. However, with this rule, doing so is easily feasible as he can definitely play 120 minutes a week

 

[Uniquim]

I don't like it either. With 5 subs you can substitute half the starting lineup if you want to. Also gives an advantage to the bigger teams who have a deeper squad. Would rather we went back to three subs for next season. That covers potential injuries, and allows for some tactical subs as well.

 

[Gio]

The last thing the game needs is to further entrench the gulf in resources between the elite and the rest. It’s a crazy move in an environment where top teams cruise to 90-100 points a season and where the same team wins the league so widely every year. On the rare occasion a smaller team outfoxes or outplays a bigger one? No problem because half the team can be changed to rectify the natural order.

It was always inevitable that once the change had been introduced the big clubs would lobby to have it made permanent. Shame the IFAB has no integrity to withstand the lobbying.

 

[Pep's Suit]

Great decision! Would keep five subs permanently!

 

[Smores]

It's a fecking joke of a decision. Totally screws half the teams in the league and we'll see far less surprise results.

 

[Pretzels81]

Some terrible posts here. Smaller clubs will suffer? A crap squad without depth is crap with three, four or five subs. Irrelevant. Most smaller clubs have a mediocre Starting XI to begin with.

Also, I didn't know Man Utd was concerned about smaller clubs. Utd's concern is to win the PL as soon as possible.

 

[Skills]

It's here to stay

 

[Pep's Suit]

I don't think players would be able to handle another season right after this and then an international tournament next summer. If it's only for an extra season I think it's fine.

Exactly. This summer is a mess with three biggest leagues + CL/EL still playing and next season probably starting very soon once this one's done.

 

[Judas]

I hope not, because if this happens I doubt it'll ever leave and it'll remain forever. I just don't think its fair.

 

[SirAnderson]

It's definitely not fair. What is the justification because there is more justification to exclude it that to include it surely!

 

[11101]

Smart decision.

I mean in a world where:
- La Liga has been won by somebody other than Barcelona/Real just once in the last 15 years
- PSG have won 7 of the last 8 Ligue 1 seasons
- Bayern has won 8 Bundesligas in a row
- Juve has won 9 Serie A titles in a row, and would probably have won a lot more if they hadn't been caught cheating

It's clear the big teams definitely need a helping hand.

I genuinely don't know how you could watch some of those leagues. It will be even worse if the big clubs can now for all intents and purposes maintain two separate teams to play different tactics.

 

[Red_Aaron]

The idea that this protects players is fine but actually the opposite is likely to happen for smaller teams who will run their starting 11 into the ground, defenders in particular who may well end up facing 5 fresh attacking players for the last half hour would be under tremendous strain. There's no way coaches would risk disrupting a defensive set up by subbing in 5 defenders to counter it.

Making 2 of the 5 U21 may help stop big teams exploiting the larger squads but even then elite clubs have been hoovering up the best teenagers for years

 

[ClaytonBlackmoorLeftPeg]

Some terrible posts here. Smaller clubs will suffer? A crap squad without depth is crap with three, four or five subs. Irrelevant. Most smaller clubs have a mediocre Starting XI to begin with.

Also, I didn't know Man Utd was concerned about smaller clubs. Utd's concern is to win the PL as soon as possible.

what a poor post.

football fans with perspective look at the bigger picture, not just what is good for my club right now.

the reason why the PL is so exciting and the best league in the world (yes subjective), is because it’s so competitive. The last thing we need is for only 2-3 clubs to be able to win the league.

Utd have the most money, and the most fans, but we don’t want the league to be like Germany, France or Italy when the same team has won it 7-8 years in row.

It’s also why TV money is shared out, rather than negotiated individually.