Man City boss Pep Guardiola leads calls to allow five substitutes again

tentan

Full Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2013
Messages
2,706
Manchester City boss Pep Guardiola says the Premier League should allow five substitutes per match again because of a rise in muscle injuries this season.
Guardiola said there has been "47% more muscular injuries" this year compared with the same stage last season.
Premier League clubs voted against continuing to permit five substitutions for the 2020-21 season in August.
The rule was brought in when the 2019-20 season restarted after lockdown in June to protect player welfare.
When asked if the Premier League should revert to allowing five substitutions instead of three, Guardiola said: "They should 100%."
City have been affected by injuries to several players this season, including Sergio Aguero, Gabriel Jesus, Benjamin Mendy and Nathan Ake.
"It is not about one club," added Guardiola.
"In the Premier League players have 47% more muscular injuries than the previous season, due to no preparation for most of the teams and the amount of games.
"All the leagues - Germany, Spain, everywhere - allow five substitutions to protect the players, not to protect one team.
"Hopefully they can reconsider and do what the rest of the world does because we have to adjust to the pandemic situation."



link




I agree with him. I would actually bump it up to 6 subs - the amount of games they play in so little time is madness. Other top leagues have allowed 5 subs, it's always English football that make it difficult for themselves.
 

ColorsOfRainbow

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Apr 16, 2019
Messages
6
Manchester City boss Pep Guardiola says the Premier League should allow five substitutes per match again because of a rise in muscle injuries this season.
Guardiola said there has been "47% more muscular injuries" this year compared with the same stage last season.
Premier League clubs voted against continuing to permit five substitutions for the 2020-21 season in August.
The rule was brought in when the 2019-20 season restarted after lockdown in June to protect player welfare.
When asked if the Premier League should revert to allowing five substitutions instead of three, Guardiola said: "They should 100%."
City have been affected by injuries to several players this season, including Sergio Aguero, Gabriel Jesus, Benjamin Mendy and Nathan Ake.
"It is not about one club," added Guardiola.
"In the Premier League players have 47% more muscular injuries than the previous season, due to no preparation for most of the teams and the amount of games.
"All the leagues - Germany, Spain, everywhere - allow five substitutions to protect the players, not to protect one team.
"Hopefully they can reconsider and do what the rest of the world does because we have to adjust to the pandemic situation."



link




I agree with him. I would actually bump it up to 6 subs - the amount of games they play in so little time is madness. Other top leagues have allowed 5 subs, it's always English football that make it difficult for themselves.
I wonder why it was gone against in the premier league where there are more matches to be played within a short period than other leagues
 

Berbaclass

Full Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
17,720
Location
Cooper Station
Manchester City boss Pep Guardiola says the Premier League should allow five substitutes per match again because of a rise in muscle injuries this season.
Guardiola said there has been "47% more muscular injuries" this year compared with the same stage last season.
Premier League clubs voted against continuing to permit five substitutions for the 2020-21 season in August.
The rule was brought in when the 2019-20 season restarted after lockdown in June to protect player welfare.
When asked if the Premier League should revert to allowing five substitutions instead of three, Guardiola said: "They should 100%."
City have been affected by injuries to several players this season, including Sergio Aguero, Gabriel Jesus, Benjamin Mendy and Nathan Ake.
"It is not about one club," added Guardiola.
"In the Premier League players have 47% more muscular injuries than the previous season, due to no preparation for most of the teams and the amount of games.
"All the leagues - Germany, Spain, everywhere - allow five substitutions to protect the players, not to protect one team.
"Hopefully they can reconsider and do what the rest of the world does because we have to adjust to the pandemic situation."



link




I agree with him. I would actually bump it up to 6 subs - the amount of games they play in so little time is madness. Other top leagues have allowed 5 subs, it's always English football that make it difficult for themselves.
I agree too. The fact that the Champions League and Europa are so concentrated this season is asking for trouble.
 

Footy van de Geek

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 27, 2020
Messages
437
I think it’s an unfair advantage to the bigger clubs with better squads. More game changers to come off the bench.

They could maybe allow one extra substitution, but only from the 75th minute or something like that.
 

Berbaclass

Full Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2010
Messages
17,720
Location
Cooper Station
I think it’s an unfair advantage to the bigger clubs with better squads. More game changers to come off the bench.

They could maybe allow one extra substitution, but only from the 75th minute or something like that.
They already have the advantage of having better players in any case.
 

GoranIvanisevic

under surveillance
Joined
Apr 12, 2008
Messages
1,911
Location
Hopefully somewhere nice
Just set it to 4, tired of stupid decisions holding back british sport in general in comparison to everywhere else.
 

Paul_Scholes18

Full Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
9,078
I think it’s an unfair advantage to the bigger clubs with better squads. More game changers to come off the bench.

They could maybe allow one extra substitution, but only from the 75th minute or something like that.
You could argue the opposite too. The bigger clubs already have better players so to counter it you can use more tactical subs to close down the game or attack them.
Tired legs could effect all squads though.
 

Eli Zee

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Feb 20, 2017
Messages
516
I think it’s an unfair advantage to the bigger clubs with better squads. More game changers to come off the bench.

They could maybe allow one extra substitution, but only from the 75th minute or something like that.
What about when the team in 19th is playing the team in 20th? Having 3 subs is unfair because the best clubs have more depth too... might as well make it 0 subs with that mind set

I do agree that it would suck when there's 5 fresh players better than any of your starters coming on the field... but I also see the benefits outweigh that for a season with games every 3-4 days
 

Snow

Somewhere down the lane, a licky boom boom down
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
32,094
Location
Lousy Smarch weather
5 substitutions doesn't make sense. England is the land of shitty VAR. It's where the fixtures are most congested with no Christmas break. Teams playing in Europe get no consideration for scheduling. Why should they get 5 subs? Let other countries play with 5 subs at least a year more during Covid before FA need to start considering it.
 

JakeC

nightclub John Terry
Joined
Jun 17, 2011
Messages
27,290
Yeah, it would suit us down to the ground, as much as we don't have any real game changers (Cavani could be) our depth is impressive, but it wouldn't be fair on the smaller teams. 4 is fair enough.
 

Paul_Scholes18

Full Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
9,078
Yeah, it would suit us down to the ground, as much as we don't have any real game changers (Cavani could be) our depth is impressive, but it wouldn't be fair on the smaller teams. 4 is fair enough.
I feel it would be fair if they did it before the season started.
Now squads might be built for not having so many subs.
Although it is great for youth players to have 5 subs though.
 

Adam-Utd

Part of first caf team to complete Destiny raid
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
27,575
I think it’s an unfair advantage to the bigger clubs with better squads. More game changers to come off the bench.

They could maybe allow one extra substitution, but only from the 75th minute or something like that.
The big clubs also have to play european matches, their players are resting and playing 1 game a week while the European clubs are having to travel there, play a match then back again, then play again on the weekend.

Honestly 2 extra subs won't make THAT much difference as usually they're a good player on the pitch already.
 

Bubz27

No I won’t change your tag line
Joined
Aug 17, 2009
Messages
17,228
The big clubs have an advantage is surely negated by the fact big clubs (and Arsenal) play more games in Europe?

Maybe 5 subs but the extra 2 have to be homegrown, or something like that? Use it as an opportunity to develop the English game as a whole.
 

Paul_Scholes18

Full Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
9,078
The big clubs have an advantage is surely negated by the fact big clubs (and Arsenal) play more games in Europe?

Maybe 5 subs but the extra 2 have to be homegrown, or something like that? Use it as an opportunity to develop the English game as a whole.
Yeah it could benefit many different teams. Those that play the same formation and use the same players all the time might not benefit.
Like Wolves.
It would help City, us, Arsenal, Chelsea the most I think.
 

Footy van de Geek

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 27, 2020
Messages
437
The big clubs also have to play european matches, their players are resting and playing 1 game a week while the European clubs are having to travel there, play a match then back again, then play again on the weekend.

Honestly 2 extra subs won't make THAT much difference as usually they're a good player on the pitch already.
The clubs who play in Europe are supposed to have squads capable of playing 3 times every 8 days.

This rule change would definitely help City the most. When everyone is fit, they can swap Gabriel Jesus for Agüero, Ferran Torres for Mahrez, Foden for Bernardo Silva (or vice versa), and Cancelo for Walker or even Fernandinho for Rodri.

United’s best sub options are probably Cavani, vdB, Matić, Telles/Shaw and Mata. Not quite the level of City, so feck that. :lol:

I do think extra subs change the dynamics of the game. Just like how no fans and water breaks did during the restart last season. It’s a slightly different sport now. Maybe an * needs to placed beside the Covidball era when we eventually return to normal. Ha.
 

Jericho

New Member
Newbie
Joined
May 14, 2012
Messages
245
While we're at it I think you should be allowed sub back on a player you subbed off.
 

Phil

Full Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2003
Messages
10,477
Reverting to 3 subs during these times was really stupid so I fully agree with Pep, for once.
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
16,032
If Pep doesn’t want his squad getting burned out he should use some of the players he’s spent a billion pound on. Or those young players they’re famous for producing.
 

Monkey bus

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Dec 27, 2015
Messages
72
Having every club with players out through muscle strains makes for a crap premier league season all round whether you’re Fulham or Man Utd. Add Covid into the mix and we’ll soon start seeing some pretty depleted squads. At least allowing more subs can reduce the injury risk.

if the Euros go ahead next year, and the EPL hasn’t allowed for more subs, we’ll see how the England team matches up to those Countries that have.
 

AltiUn

likes playing with swords after fantasies
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
14,036
I think it’s an unfair advantage to the bigger clubs with better squads. More game changers to come off the bench.

They could maybe allow one extra substitution, but only from the 75th minute or something like that.
We already have the better players. Perhaps we should start games at a 1-0 disadvantage to even the playing field? It's whiny line of thinking by the usual woe-is-me clubs, no other league had any issue with it, Cadiz used the 5 substitue rule to beat Real Madrid not long ago.

Our squad's are equipped to deal with more games but not at this pace, with no pre-season as clustered together as they are going to be. Not to mention the idiotic extended international breaks (there's already been potential for 9 extra games), top 6 squad's are littered with internationals who'll be playing ridiculous amounts of football over the next two years, there's going to be some very high profile injuries to players with some potential career enders due to the strain their bodies will be under. There's been a 42% increase in muscle injuries so far this season, that number will continue to swell. It doesn't even account for how many players we're going to lose over the course of the season due to COVID.

After the restart Brighton, Norwich and Bournemouth were amongst the highest for used substitutes so it's not like clubs in the bottom half weren't allowed to use it. The other clubs to utilise it most were Chelsea and Arsenal. Pretending it gives City a magical huge advantage, when it obviously doesn't, is a poor reason to be against it, in my opinion.
If Pep doesn’t want his squad getting burned out he should use some of the players he’s spent a billion pound on. Or those young players they’re famous for producing.
Solskjaer, Klopp, Bruce and Lampard all think it was a stupid idea too. Considering 4 of them were top level footballers they know the strain this sort of schedule will have on players.
 

Marcus

Full Member
Joined
Oct 3, 1999
Messages
4,078
Just set it to 4, tired of stupid decisions holding back british sport in general in comparison to everywhere else.
English clubs will suffer from fatigue and people will wonder why teams from other leagues look fresher in the latter stages. Less number of games to play and now this uneven playing field.
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
16,032
We already have the better players. Perhaps we should start games at a 1-0 disadvantage to even the playing field? It's whiny line of thinking by the usual woe-is-me clubs, no other league had any issue with it, Cadiz used the 5 substitue rule to beat Real Madrid not long ago.

Our squad's are equipped to deal with more games but not at this pace, with no pre-season as clustered together as they are going to be. Not to mention the idiotic extended international breaks (there's already been potential for 9 extra games), top 6 squad's are littered with internationals who'll be playing ridiculous amounts of football over the next two years, there's going to be some very high profile injuries to players with some potential career enders due to the strain their bodies will be under. There's been a 42% increase in muscle injuries so far this season, that number will continue to swell. It doesn't even account for how many players we're going to lose over the course of the season due to COVID.

After the restart Brighton, Norwich and Bournemouth were amongst the highest for used substitutes so it's not like clubs in the bottom half weren't allowed to use it. The other clubs to utilise it most were Chelsea and Arsenal. Pretending it gives City a magical huge advantage, when it obviously doesn't, is a poor reason to be against it, in my opinion.

Solskjaer, Klopp, Bruce and Lampard all think it was a stupid idea too. Considering 4 of them were top level footballers they know the strain this sort of schedule will have on players.
They also have the most to gain from it. They have big squads, use them.
 

AltiUn

likes playing with swords after fantasies
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
14,036
They also have the most to gain from it. They have big squads, use them.
Great rebuttal. They have been doing. We've used nearly every match fit player at our disposal so far this season.

I'll be curious to see if the sentiment changes if we lose half our first team to injuries.
 

Web of Bissaka

Full Member
Joined
Feb 20, 2017
Messages
7,964
Location
Losing to Comeback Winning!
Of course he would. Anything to get advantages. Smaller teams doesn't seem to have tooo much problem with 3 subs though this season.

That said, I quite like the 5 subs, just need to be made quick each time. The game is already slow as it is.
 

Bebestation

Full Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2019
Messages
2,648
Supports
An adult TV Channel
They should do 3 subs and 2 extra allowed if homegrown/made at the club.

They can increase the sub amount aswell.

Think it's a good balance and it benefits the clubs that help grow their youngsters.
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
16,032
Great rebuttal. They have been doing. We've used nearly every match fit player at our disposal so far this season.

I'll be curious to see if the sentiment changes if we lose half our first team to injuries.
It’s not an argument that requires an essay to rebut. That’s the game. Why should teams that can afford to stockpile players be given an even greater advantage? It’s up to the managers to manage their squads. Nobody forced Guardiola to use Sterling and De Bruyne in the league cup.
 

AltiUn

likes playing with swords after fantasies
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
14,036
It’s not an argument that requires an essay to rebut. That’s the game. Why should teams that can afford to stockpile players be given an even greater advantage? It’s up to the managers to manage their squads. Nobody forced Guardiola to use Sterling and De Bruyne in the league cup.
As other's have said, that advantage is completely negated by the additional 25+ games a season our players will be forced to endure, club managers have no control over how much their players are played during the inflated international fixtures. We won't have a full pre-season to work and maintain fitness again until 2022, there's the Euros followed by a World Cup, it's insanity to write off that level of physical strain because of a small advantage might be gained by having a few extra substitutes. There's only so much managing your squad is going to do when your players are going to be playing the amount of games they are going to be doing at the rate they are.
 

Footy van de Geek

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 27, 2020
Messages
437
We already have the better players. Perhaps we should start games at a 1-0 disadvantage to even the playing field? It's whiny line of thinking by the usual woe-is-me clubs, no other league had any issue with it, Cadiz used the 5 substitue rule to beat Real Madrid not long ago.

Our squad's are equipped to deal with more games but not at this pace, with no pre-season as clustered together as they are going to be. Not to mention the idiotic extended international breaks (there's already been potential for 9 extra games), top 6 squad's are littered with internationals who'll be playing ridiculous amounts of football over the next two years, there's going to be some very high profile injuries to players with some potential career enders due to the strain their bodies will be under. There's been a 42% increase in muscle injuries so far this season, that number will continue to swell. It doesn't even account for how many players we're going to lose over the course of the season due to COVID.

After the restart Brighton, Norwich and Bournemouth were amongst the highest for used substitutes so it's not like clubs in the bottom half weren't allowed to use it. The other clubs to utilise it most were Chelsea and Arsenal. Pretending it gives City a magical huge advantage, when it obviously doesn't, is a poor reason to be against it, in my opinion.

Solskjaer, Klopp, Bruce and Lampard all think it was a stupid idea too. Considering 4 of them were top level footballers they know the strain this sort of schedule will have on players.
Now you’re just being petulant.

More PEDS required then. Problem solved. ;)

International Football should have been scrapped during this pandemic. And probably The CL & EL too imo. It’s hard enough to manage the testing of and limiting the risk to 500 odd players, managers, backroom staff and officials to who take part in The PL each gameweek. Allowing them to travel to all corners of the globe increases the chance of more squads being infected. I’ve accepted that I probably won’t be allowed to attend any Euro 2020 games next Summer.

Using more subs of less quality. There is no doubt that Pep being able to bring on extra top class players is more valuable than a relegation threatened club bringing on more journeymen or average PL players. Freshen things, sure. But no real increase in quality. In fact, the players they are replacing are likely to be better than them than like for like at the top clubs. And not just Pep, Ole, Lampard and Klopp will all benefit too.

If Football needs this many rule changes to continue, then maybe it shouldn’t be going ahead at all. But money talks. Too much at stake. Like I said, an *: needs to be put on the Covidball era. This would add a whole new tactical element to the sport. They’ll probably end up keeping it too, as this virus will be around for awhile yet. You are in favour, I’m not. Fair enough.
 

AltiUn

likes playing with swords after fantasies
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
14,036
Now you’re just being petulant.

More PEDS required then. Problem solved. ;)

International Football should have been scrapped during this pandemic. And probably The CL & EL too imo. It’s hard enough to manage the testing of and limiting the risk to 500 odd players, managers, backroom staff and officials to who take part in The PL each gameweek. Allowing them to travel to all corners of the globe increases the chance of more squads being infected. I’ve accepted that I probably won’t be allowed to attend any Euro 2020 games next Summer.

Using more subs of less quality. There is no doubt that Pep being able to bring on extra top class players is more valuable than a relegation threatened club bringing on more journeymen or average PL players. Freshen things, sure. But no real increase in quality. In fact, the players they are replacing are likely to be better than them than like for like at the top clubs. And not just Pep, Ole, Lampard and Klopp will all benefit too.

If Football needs this many rule changes to continue, then maybe it shouldn’t be going ahead at all. But money talks. Too much at stake. Like I said, an *: needs to be put on the Covidball era. This would add a whole new tactical element to the sport. They’ll probably end up keeping it too, as this virus will be around for awhile yet. You are in favour, I’m not. Fair enough.
Well yeah I agree, internationals and CL and EL probably should've been scrapped, along with the league cup too. But unfortunately it hasn't which is why I think any small change we can make to aid in the players' health and well-being should be done. I've said my piece, we'll agree to disagree on this one then.
 

RashyForPM

Full Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2020
Messages
1,478
5 substitutions doesn't make sense. England is the land of shitty VAR. It's where the fixtures are most congested with no Christmas break. Teams playing in Europe get no consideration for scheduling. Why should they get 5 subs? Let other countries play with 5 subs at least a year more during Covid before FA need to start considering it.
I agree with your post bar the VAR part. England was the latest top footballing nation to introduce VAR. You’re saying that because tbf, English referees have implemented it awfully.
 

acnumber9

Full Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Messages
16,032
As other's have said, that advantage is completely negated by the additional 25+ games a season our players will be forced to endure, club managers have no control over how much their players are played during the inflated international fixtures. We won't have a full pre-season to work and maintain fitness again until 2022, there's the Euros followed by a World Cup, it's insanity to write off that level of physical strain because of a small advantage might be gained by having a few extra substitutes. There's only so much managing your squad is going to do when your players are going to be playing the amount of games they are going to be doing at the rate they are.
And those extra games could be negated by not running your players into the ground. City didn’t need to use their top players in a league cup game. It’s within their control to choose who to play and when. Oh no, they might have to play Bernardo Silva rather than Mahrez this week. How will they cope?
 

Red00012

Full Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2018
Messages
4,336
While I agree with Pep and it would suit us if you look at our squad when all are fully fit , I’m wondering would he still say it if he was in charge of the likes of Burnley, Fulham , West Brom etc
 

AltiUn

likes playing with swords after fantasies
Joined
Apr 29, 2014
Messages
14,036
And those extra games could be negated by not running your players into the ground. City didn’t need to use their top players in a league cup game. It’s within their control to choose who to play and when. Oh no, they might have to play Bernardo Silva rather than Mahrez this week. How will they cope?
It's not City I give a damn about, I could not care less about them. I'm not going to change your mind on this and you won't change mine so I'll leave this discussion here.
 

sullydnl

Ross Kemp's caf ID
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
22,573
They're asking far too much of players as is. The fixture congestion is actually insane.

If there is clear evidence that extra subs would help players stay fit then they should do it. It doesn't make sense to allow the game's best players to get injured more regularly just to preserve fairness between the big and small teams that doesn't exist anyway.
 

Snow

Somewhere down the lane, a licky boom boom down
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
32,094
Location
Lousy Smarch weather
I agree with your post bar the VAR part. England was the latest top footballing nation to introduce VAR. You’re saying that because tbf, English referees have implemented it awfully.
I mean the whole post was sarcastic to show how England is worse in most ways regarding giving players or teams a break.