Substituted players should be able to be resubbed in

[Ajr]

(Obviously using one of the 3/5 substitute max)

I see no reason why they can not be put back in? Most teams wouldn't do this unless injury at the end of a game depletes all of the strikers for example, and one of them had already been subbed off.

 

[Judas]

Why though?

 

[duffer]

Just like my nan always used to say: "a great tennis player does not make a great football lawmaker".

 

[Ajr]

Why though?

Why not? Surely if someone is subbed out after being part of the game, they are no longer in the game sitting on the subs bench. Why should they be different than any other member of the squad that hasnt been in the game yet?

 

[championo]

Football has some of the stupid rules in sports, on par with tennis. A world cup final spectacle can be ruin in the first 15 mins with a red card. Why? We have to change this rule. A red card should be a forced substitution.

 

[jeff_goldblum]

Why not? Surely if someone is subbed out after being part of the game, they are no longer in the game sitting on the subs bench. Why should they be different than any other member of the squad that hasnt been in the game yet?

It would be chaotic and the meta-gaming of tactical substitutions would be truly excruciating to watch.

Imagine your opponent makes a tactical sub and you react to it with your own tactical sub. Then they just reverse the sub, forcing you to do likewise. Repeat ad nauseum until you're both out of subs.

Managers making big tactical calls in-game is one of the best things about football and this would ruin it.

 

[DWelbz19]

On one hand, it sounds pointless. Substitutions are typically made for tactical or injury reasons. Resubbing on McTominay who came off for Paul Pogba initially because we want to take control of a game doesn't really sound like it has any benefit at all.

On the other hand, it just sounds very unfair to the sides with stronger players. Subbing off Bruno for a quick 5 minute breather, only to bring on say, Edinson Cavani, and then chucking him back in to cause havoc in the final third?

Or, in the initial example, Pogba makes his mark and we start leading the game. McTominay is then subbed back in to see out the game? Like @jeff_goldblum says above; it sounds a bit too chaotic and awful to watch. Football already has way too much of the 90 minutes spent outside of actual open play. We don't need even more of that.

 

[Sandikan]

Football has some of the stupid rules in sports, on par with tennis. A world cup final spectacle can be ruin in the first 15 mins with a red card. Why? We have to change this rule. A red card should be a forced substitution.

That's ludicrous.
It would mean you can just get players taking big risks, knowing it wouldn't leave the team with 10.
Pulling players down when clean in on goal, but still outside the box, no massive risk in going in dangerously in challenges etc.

 

[Sandikan]

(Obviously using one of the 3/5 substitute max)

I see no reason why they can not be put back in? Most teams wouldn't do this unless injury at the end of a game depletes all of the strikers for example, and one of them had already been subbed off.

What would the benefit be?

You have 3 subs, or 5 in Europe. If you can't manage your team in that setting it's your own hard luck.

 

[K Stand Knut]

Football has some of the stupid rules in sports, on par with tennis. A world cup final spectacle can be ruin in the first 15 mins with a red card. Why? We have to change this rule. A red card should be a forced substitution.

This cannot be a serious suggestion!!!!

Please, tell me it’s not

 

[GBBQ]

The one scenario I can see that would justify it is that if you have decided to rest Bruno at 2-0 and brought on VDB for game time.
VDB gets injured at 2-1 and now you only have a few defenders and a sub keeper available to bring on. You don’t want to get overly defensive as it will invite the equaliser. Bruno is fit and available so would keep the shape of the team.

 

[jeff_goldblum]

The one scenario I can see that would justify it is that if you have decided to rest Bruno at 2-0 and brought on VDB for game time.
VDB gets injured at 2-1 and now you only have a few defenders and a sub keeper available to bring on. You don’t want to get overly defensive as it will invite the equaliser. Bruno is fit and available so would keep the shape of the team.

I guess the issue there is that managers would have their players feign injury. That's always been the issue with allowing extra subs for injuries.

 

[fps]

I agree but it would need to count as a second sub. I doubt it would happen much as a player warming down then having to go back on would be asking for injury.

 

[rcoobc]

(Obviously using one of the 3/5 substitute max)

I see no reason why they can not be put back in? Most teams wouldn't do this unless injury at the end of a game depletes all of the strikers for example, and one of them had already been subbed off.

Yeah I'd agree with that.

Peace

 

[rcoobc]

I agree but it would need to count as a second sub. I doubt it would happen much as a player warming down then having to go back on would be asking for injury.

Yeah think he saying it's within the 3/5

So sub Carrick for Fletcher.
Fletch gets injured.
Sub Fletcher for Carrick

2 subs

 

[RashyForPM]

Football has some of the stupid rules in sports, on par with tennis. A world cup final spectacle can be ruin in the first 15 mins with a red card. Why? We have to change this rule. A red card should be a forced substitution.

I thought this thread took the cake but you’ve just topped it How about not smashing someone 15 minutes into the biggest game of your life, or any game for that matter?

 

[Steve Bruce]

Let's North Americanise our sport. With rolling subs, an offence & defence lineups coming on and off. Sinbins, cheerleaders & Mariah carey effing up the British national anthem on fa cup final day.

How about instead of mucking about with our rules further, why not reset the rule book by 20 years. The game didn't need a lot of these bs changes since then.

 

[11101]

Players would be much more likely to get injured coming back on. Just take a player from the rest of the squad instead. Sorry, it's a stupid idea.

 

[Gopher Brown]

(Obviously using one of the 3/5 substitute max)

I see no reason why they can not be put back in? Most teams wouldn't do this unless injury at the end of a game depletes all of the strikers for example, and one of them had already been subbed off.

Because using substitutes is part of the tactical plan of the team.

 

[Web of Bissaka]

Football has some of the stupid rules in sports, on par with tennis. A world cup final spectacle can be ruin in the first 15 mins with a red card. Why? We have to change this rule. A red card should be a forced substitution.

Perfect way to use up literally all our bench players. Love it.

And of course to get key opposing players injured, with little repercussions.

 

[wolvored]

The only scenario this ought to be considered is if you have made your 3 or 5 subs and after that your player gets fouled and cant carry on. You should be able to make the numbers back up to 11, as you are then being penalised for the other sides indiscretion. The fact you have used your subs up means you cant bring a fresh player on, but you could bring a subbed player back on.

 

[Ajr]

Players would be much more likely to get injured coming back on. Just take a player from the rest of the squad instead. Sorry, it's a stupid idea.

Why though? they are already going to be warm from their first stint in the game compared to a substitute that has not been used yet

 

[championo]

I thought this thread took the cake but you’ve just topped it How about not smashing someone 15 minutes into the biggest game of your life, or any game for that matter?

I know it is too much for you to think of the alternative, but there are other measures we can implement for this. Accidents happens, if someone goes their way and intentionally injured a player, it will be obvious as well.
All American's sports have measures against the situation I am describing. We can probably have a 15mins duration where the player is disqualified but then someone can take his place after 15mins. Think about it a bit, not asking you to accept it but why can't we do it?

 

[championo]

This cannot be a serious suggestion!!!!

Please, tell me it’s not

Very serious suggestion. We can implement 15mins penalty where it will be 10vs 11, player gets disqualified, but a sub comes in for him after 15mins.

 

[championo]

That's ludicrous.
It would mean you can just get players taking big risks, knowing it wouldn't leave the team with 10.
Pulling players down when clean in on goal, but still outside the box, no massive risk in going in dangerously in challenges etc.

That player is still disqualified with the same penalties for two games. Implement a time penalty. I really dislike watching a game where we have 10 or 9 vs 11 for a long period of the game, especially in the first half.

 

[championo]

Perfect way to use up literally all our bench players. Love it.

And of course to get key opposing players injured, with little repercussions.

Never said there will not be repercussions, increase the time they can't play in a game, penalize the team, 15mins or even 20 mins where they will be a man down. Restore parity with one of the allowed subs.
You are just ruling it out because this is what you are used to, and can't think of other way.
You are also saying that there are professional football players who frequently plan on injuring opposition players and it can be one grand scheme by teams to do this. Even if this is the case, we have a system in place that can discover this and set up harsh rules against such things, just like we have rule for cheating in the game.

 

[Bojan11]

What am I reading? Players who get red cards should be substituted?

 

[championo]

What am I reading? Players who get red cards should be substituted?

Yes, but not the traditional substitution you are thinking about. Do you like watching 10vs 11 for 70% of the game? I don't and I am offering some alternatives that I think can be entertained.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Shades of the old "American model" suggestion that has surfaced from time to time over the years - at one point favoured by Pelé if I'm not mistaken (just one of his brilliant ideas - he also wanted to scrap the offside rule, or something like that).

To be clear, the idea would be to allow constant player changes over the 90 - subbing players on and off as in basketball or ice hockey.

 

[el3mel]

Sure why not, turn it into basketball too as we're into it.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

Yes, but not the traditional substitution you are thinking about. Do you like watching 10vs 11 for 70% of the game? I don't and I am offering some alternatives that I think can be entertained.

The "sin bin" concept? That's what you're talking about?

 

[championo]

The "sin bin" concept? That's what you're talking about?

A bit more punishing than that, the red carded player, will not get back in the game or the next, but after the equivalent "sin bin" time period, we can bring someone else on, will count as a sub to restore it to 11vs 11. Thoughts? I know it is way out there, but want to understand the why not part.

 

[11101]

Why though? they are already going to be warm from their first stint in the game compared to a substitute that has not been used yet

Ever go for run and stop for a bit before trying to start again, only to find everything is stiff? You can't restart exercise once you've cooled down. Everything starts to tighten up.

 

[Chesterlestreet]

I know it is way out there, but want to understand the why not part.

I'm against it on principle - mainly because I have decided to truly embrace my status as an old fart.

But I would also like to hear arguments pro and con on this subject.

 

[championo]

I'm against it on principle - mainly because I have decided to truly embrace my status as an old fart.

But I would also like to hear arguments pro and con on this subject.

I know I usually turn games, when I don't have a rooting interest and a red card is shown in the first half. If the team playing with 10 men manages to win, the game itself loses its appeal to me.
I remember the Rooney red card vs Portugal. That was a good game until the red card. It spoiled the spectacle for me, I really didn't support either side, just wanted to be entertain and I was denied that by Rooney but to a larger extent, football rules that is too punishing for the team and neutral fans.
I don't care for any American model, but the NHL has the power play concept akin to "sin bin" you mentioned but because people may abuse this, the punishment off the field should be draconian enough to deter players from doing stupid things. I think anything between 15mins to 25 mins period where the offending team plays a man down and later one of the subs comes in to replace the red carded player is more than fair for the neutral fan.

 

[K Stand Knut]

Very serious suggestion. We can implement 15mins penalty where it will be 10vs 11, player gets disqualified, but a sub comes in for him after 15mins.

Then it’s a stupid suggestion.

you’d have red card offences committed all over the first half knowing that there will be little/no punishment.

 

[calodo2003]

Just no.

What would be next? Mulligans on the PGA Tour?

 

[Theafonis]

Football has some of the stupid rules in sports, on par with tennis. A world cup final spectacle can be ruin in the first 15 mins with a red card. Why? We have to change this rule. A red card should be a forced substitution.

But, but...tradition

 

[Theafonis]

It would be chaotic and the meta-gaming of tactical substitutions would be truly excruciating to watch.

Imagine your opponent makes a tactical sub and you react to it with your own tactical sub. Then they just reverse the sub, forcing you to do likewise. Repeat ad nauseum until you're both out of subs.

Managers making big tactical calls in-game is one of the best things about football and this would ruin it.

I think thats fine. Sort of like the NBA or Hockey. The substitutions process is too much of a spectacle I always felt with cameras moving around and getting shots of the bench/ref/manager, just make the sub and get on with the game.

 

[calodo2003]

Yes, but not the traditional substitution you are thinking about. Do you like watching 10vs 11 for 70% of the game? I don't and I am offering some alternatives that I think can be entertained.

Is such a scenario an epidemic in professional football? What’s the percentage of games like this? 1%? 2%? I honestly have no idea but it certainly is low.

I think the tactical changes by the tea. With ten men are fascinating &, if they win, it’s an even more interesting game.