| The five subs thing 13:24 - Aug 6 with 4702 views | Northernr |
Prem vote to reject it and return to three. Chelsea etc voted for, of course.
Hopefully EFL do the same. |  | | |  |
| The five subs thing on 13:45 - Aug 6 with 2467 views | LongsufferingR |
.....and no water breaks please!!!!!! |  | | |
| The five subs thing on 13:47 - Aug 6 with 2467 views | Galileo |
Agree with both the above |  | | |
| The five subs thing on 13:53 - Aug 6 with 2444 views | Dorse |
| The five subs thing on 13:45 - Aug 6 by LongsufferingR |
.....and no water breaks please!!!!!! |
Although fag breaks are still allowed. |  |
| 'What do we want? We don't know! When do we want it? Now!' |
| |
| The five subs thing on 13:54 - Aug 6 with 2431 views | Esox_Lucius |
Nipping to the bookies at half time for the results? |  |
| The grass is always greener. |
| |
| The five subs thing on 13:55 - Aug 6 with 2422 views | LongsufferingR |
| The five subs thing on 13:53 - Aug 6 by Dorse |
Although fag breaks are still allowed. |
I don't mind that as long as the game continues while the smokers are having a natter round the back of the programme kiosk, and they dispose of the butts properly afterwards. | | | |
| The five subs thing on 14:02 - Aug 6 with 2385 views | Dorse |
| The five subs thing on 13:55 - Aug 6 by LongsufferingR |
I don't mind that as long as the game continues while the smokers are having a natter round the back of the programme kiosk, and they dispose of the butts properly afterwards. |
Fags? Butts? It's like you're trying to get me in trouble... | |
| 'What do we want? We don't know! When do we want it? Now!' |
| |
| The five subs thing on 14:04 - Aug 6 with 2369 views | LongsufferingR |
| The five subs thing on 14:02 - Aug 6 by Dorse |
Fags? Butts? It's like you're trying to get me in trouble... |
Trial for this to take place at Craven Cottage I hear. | | | |
| The five subs thing on 14:06 - Aug 6 with 2339 views | timcocking |
Hopefully indeed. And to think, football was, to all intents and purposes, played 11 vs 11 without any substitutes for bloody decades. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| The five subs thing on 14:22 - Aug 6 with 2314 views | bosh67 |
3 subs is plenty. 5 turns it into a friendly in my mind. Understood it for the end of the season but not next. |  |
| |
| The five subs thing on 14:32 - Aug 6 with 2280 views | Antti_Heinola |
Good decision.
Obvs Chelsea would vote for it, as gives an advantage to the bigger sides with bigger squads - although I'm sure it was dressed up as something about blah blah players safety blah blah.
Now let's get back down to 5 subs on the bench too. |  |
| |
| The five subs thing on 14:46 - Aug 6 with 2233 views | Northernr |
| The five subs thing on 14:32 - Aug 6 by Antti_Heinola |
Good decision.
Obvs Chelsea would vote for it, as gives an advantage to the bigger sides with bigger squads - although I'm sure it was dressed up as something about blah blah players safety blah blah.
Now let's get back down to 5 subs on the bench too. |
I thought it was fair enough at the start, hauling everybody back on three weeks notice from a 4 months lockdown. But there's zero reason to continue it, or these bloody water breaks with no water into next season. | | | |
| The five subs thing on 15:05 - Aug 6 with 2162 views | Watford_Ranger |
What happened to the rule about leaving the field at the closest point rather than trudging off slowly to the halfway line even when there are no fans? Did I imagine it? | | | |
| The five subs thing on 15:15 - Aug 6 with 2128 views | loftboy |
| The five subs thing on 14:32 - Aug 6 by Antti_Heinola |
Good decision.
Obvs Chelsea would vote for it, as gives an advantage to the bigger sides with bigger squads - although I'm sure it was dressed up as something about blah blah players safety blah blah.
Now let's get back down to 5 subs on the bench too. |
Don’t they all have the same size squad? 25 |  |
| |
| The five subs thing on 15:17 - Aug 6 with 2123 views | rsonist |
We'll see how the injuries go as to its necessity. Ultimately it's a medical/safety issue and I don't agree with it being subject to competitive politics - for or against.
Fact is when it disturbs the entertainment and we lose a few matches it's "blah blah players safety blah blah" and a pitchfork mob berating the club for setting an unambitious tone cos they're all on the unprofessional beach or whatever, and then when we win a few again it's hat's off to MW speaking louder than most about player safety and gov guidelines. |  | | |
| The five subs thing on 15:25 - Aug 6 with 2102 views | rsonist |
Also is there anything that prevents a proactive coach at a small club with a good youth system from using the extra scope to their advantage? Why is the sinister whispering cabal of bloated billionaire squads of internationals seen as the only possible beneficiary? | | | |
| The five subs thing on 15:34 - Aug 6 with 2073 views | DWQPR |
I never got the water breaks in the first place. There is always a natural break in play where you always see players gravitate towards the touchline and thrown water bottles. Keeper always kept his water bottle in the back of the net so that an opposing forward could empty it at a corner. All too much especially given that the season does generally cover the month of August. | |
| |
| The five subs thing on 15:41 - Aug 6 with 2052 views | Northernr |
| The five subs thing on 15:34 - Aug 6 by DWQPR |
I never got the water breaks in the first place. There is always a natural break in play where you always see players gravitate towards the touchline and thrown water bottles. Keeper always kept his water bottle in the back of the net so that an opposing forward could empty it at a corner. All too much especially given that the season does generally cover the month of August. |
They'll tell you that as well as player welfare/fitness etc it was to give them a chance to clean the goalposts and corner flags as part of the Covid protocol.
I'd love to hear somebody make a case for needing to disinfect the cross bar every 23 minutes. | | | |
| The five subs thing on 15:45 - Aug 6 with 2039 views | Myke |
| The five subs thing on 15:15 - Aug 6 by loftboy |
Don’t they all have the same size squad? 25 |
Technically yes Loftboy, but in reality it gave a significant advantage to the big clubs. This was for two reasons
(1) Better quality players on the bench. Even average prem clubs would have three players on the bench that could change a game for them and obvs they were available to them all season. But, the Man City's, Liverpool's et al had a full bench of game changers, so bringing on 5 gave them a double advantage of (a) improving (or certainly not disimproving) the team and (B) ensuring they had fresh players for the next game 3 days later by only having to play for 60/70 mins before they were replaced
(2) Several of the smaller clubs had players out of contract who were reluctant to play, or if the club wanted to move them on, were reluctant to play them, for fear of injury jeopardising that. Throw in a few injuries to first teamers and suddenly you are trying to fill the bench with inexperienced kids, or as in Burnley's case, being unable to fill the bench at all.
So on one end of the scale you had Kevin de Bruyne coming on for a nice stretch of legs for the last 30 mins, in prep for starting the next game,with his team already 4-0 up, while at the other end you had Johnny Unknown playing for an hour for Burnley due to three injuries in the first 30 mins -Hardly a level playing field.
Water breaks would actually be ok if they were just that - instead of a three minute pep talk from the manager. I understand the necessity behind the concept, they can't all drink out of the same bottle anymore that is thrown onto the pitch. But the ref needs to regulate it. If he booked every player who wasn't back on the pitch 60 seconds after he blew for the break , he wouldn't be long putting an end to the nonsense. | | | |
| The five subs thing on 16:08 - Aug 6 with 1998 views | BrianMcCarthy |
| The five subs thing on 14:32 - Aug 6 by Antti_Heinola |
Good decision.
Obvs Chelsea would vote for it, as gives an advantage to the bigger sides with bigger squads - although I'm sure it was dressed up as something about blah blah players safety blah blah.
Now let's get back down to 5 subs on the bench too. |
'Frank' is going to stick with playing the young lads, y'know... [Post edited 6 Aug 2020 16:09]
|  |
| |
| The five subs thing on 16:49 - Aug 6 with 1929 views | LazyFan |
| The five subs thing on 13:45 - Aug 6 by LongsufferingR |
.....and no water breaks please!!!!!! |
This.
Otherwise, the Yanks will demand the live TV show puts out adverts in these breaks. Now you may think that if you're at the ground then that's the remote viewer's problem. But this misses the point that the game won't restart until the ever-increasing in length ad break finishes. So, it will affect the in-person experience too.
In other words, ban the breaks. |  |
| |
| The five subs thing on 17:08 - Aug 6 with 1904 views | Antti_Heinola |
| The five subs thing on 15:15 - Aug 6 by loftboy |
Don’t they all have the same size squad? 25 |
It's not about numbers it's about depth of quality. | |
| |
| The five subs thing on 17:15 - Aug 6 with 1885 views | Antti_Heinola |
| The five subs thing on 15:25 - Aug 6 by rsonist |
Also is there anything that prevents a proactive coach at a small club with a good youth system from using the extra scope to their advantage? Why is the sinister whispering cabal of bloated billionaire squads of internationals seen as the only possible beneficiary? |
In one sense you're right - might allow a good coach to give some youngsters more 'minutes' anfd develop them a little beter/quicker than he might have before.
In another sense, this is about ahem, 'winning football matches'. What extra subs does is allow a bigger side like, say, City, huge 'second chances' in games that are going badly. We're losing to Palace, but it's ok, we've got 5 players who would walk into every other side in the division bar the top couple we can throw on - while Hodgson looks round and sees connor Wickham.
It's 11 v 11. Allowing two subs in the 80s and then 3 was fine. More than that is a mockery of the game imo. It just allows the teeniest of level playing fields between the very richest clubs and the rest. | |
| |
| The five subs thing on 18:00 - Aug 6 with 1817 views | francisbowles |
| The five subs thing on 17:15 - Aug 6 by Antti_Heinola |
In one sense you're right - might allow a good coach to give some youngsters more 'minutes' anfd develop them a little beter/quicker than he might have before.
In another sense, this is about ahem, 'winning football matches'. What extra subs does is allow a bigger side like, say, City, huge 'second chances' in games that are going badly. We're losing to Palace, but it's ok, we've got 5 players who would walk into every other side in the division bar the top couple we can throw on - while Hodgson looks round and sees connor Wickham.
It's 11 v 11. Allowing two subs in the 80s and then 3 was fine. More than that is a mockery of the game imo. It just allows the teeniest of level playing fields between the very richest clubs and the rest. |
Spot on, Antti. | | | |
| The five subs thing on 18:09 - Aug 6 with 1795 views | BlackCrowe |
god i hate Chelsea. made me smile that they're probably losing Willian to Arsenal. |  |
| |
| The five subs thing on 18:16 - Aug 6 with 1779 views | PunteR |
What about rush keepers? Should this be introduced into the professional game.? |  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
