• Notice regarding image hosts and attachments. See here.

Should we switch to 7 substitutes?

DanH84

DanH84

DanH84

Soldato
Joined
5 Aug 2004
Posts
6,812
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/7081641.stm

Tottenham and Manchester United have urged the Premier League to allow teams to have more substitutes on the bench.

United boss Sir Alex Ferguson and Spurs coach Juande Ramos say there should be seven substitutes to choose from rather than present limit of five.

"Every club has players of squads of more than 16 players," said Ferguson.

"I didn't choose Darren Fletcher for the Arsenal game and that was a kick in a teeth for him and it didn't sit easy with me," added Ferguson.

Manchester City boss Sven-Goran Eriksson also favours a change in the Premier League's rules on substitutes, with managers allowed to bring on three players from a choice of five.

The Premier League said it was willing to look at the issue, but any change was unlikely to come into effect before the start of next season.

"If member clubs want to raise it then we'll look and discuss it as a league," a Premier League spokesman told BBC Sport.

"We've resisted the idea before because we feel it favours the bigger clubs who have bigger squads.

"If it was raised it would go to (our) summer conference, and if the clubs agreed it could be in place for the start of the 2008/2009 season."

Premier League voting rules require 14 out of the 20 clubs to back rule changes.

In Champions League matches as well as international fixtures coaches and managers are allowed to name seven subs and bring on three of them.
Click to expand...

personally i think i'm largely in favour of this one, you're still only allowed to use the 3 subs so it doesn't really detract from the tactical side of the game it just gives you a wider variety of options to draw upon. hopefully it would lead to us never seeing a subs bench without a keeper on it as well.

In the past i could see how it could be said to favour the larger clubs but these days pretty much every club playing in the premier league has a large enough squad to draw some benefit from being able to call on those extra substitution options. It works in Europe and i think it's something the PL should very much discuss with a view to bringing it in next season.
 
DanH84 said:
personally i think i'm largely in favour of this one, you're still only allowed to use the 3 subs so it doesn't really detract from the tactical side of the game it just gives you a wider variety of options to draw upon.
Click to expand...

Surely thats a tactical option right there? With the extra two subs you have an extra two people who could potentially make a different impact on the match. With 5 subs careful planning has to be done, choosing the wrong subs for the wrong game can potentially win or lose a team a match. 7 subs gives a team more options in more positions, so theres no real pressure on a manager to use his coaching skills when he finds himself in a pickle.

DanH84 said:
these days pretty much every club playing in the premier league has a large enough squad to draw some benefit from being able to call on those extra substitution options.
Click to expand...

Yes, but when you have teams such as Chelsea, Man Utd, Arsenal and Liverpool that can pull world class players off the bench youre only hampering smaller teams abilities to restrict them.

As for the every team has a large squad issue, its not about squad size but the players that are used. Blackburn this season have got on fine using only 18 players over the course of their 11 games so far this season.

Basically what im saying is that im against it. To add further substitues only increases the tactical options available to managers of the big teams. I feel it will only help to widen the gap between the teams in the epl.


Also, Ramos has been here what? 5 minutes so far this season? :p
 
Last edited:
I'd like to see seven subs with the condition that they are from the youth/reserve team similar to the UEFA home grown principle for European squads.
 
m0r94n said:
Surely thats a tactical option right there? With the extra two subs you have an extra two people who could potentially make a different impact on the match. With 5 subs careful planning has to be done, choosing the wrong subs for the wrong game can potentially win or lose a team a match. 7 subs gives a team more options in more positions, so theres no real pressure on a manager to use his coaching skills when he finds himself in a pickle.
Click to expand...

I'd say yes and no, it means utility players may be more useful on the bench rather than specialising and if there are injuries that usually isn't down to a managers coaching so sometimes it isn't really that much to do with correct or incorrect tactics. It would just give more options but then again the system has worked relatively fine since the EPLs inception.

m0r94n said:
As for the every team has a large squad issue, its not about squad size but the players that are used. Blackburn this season have got on fine using only 18 players over the course of their 11 games so far this season.
Click to expand...

I haven't been following the EPL this season but surely that has a lot to do with the luck of both not getting injuries and players retaining form? Having a big squad doesn't automatically make it easier to keep your players in form or uninjured, it does mean that you have more players to choose from to replace them and making a decision from a lot of options is frequently more difficult than making a decision from two options. :)
 
DanH84 said:
hopefully it would lead to us never seeing a subs bench without a keeper on it as well.
Click to expand...

Which is plenty good enough reason not to introduce it. There's nothing funnier than when a team have to put an outfield player in goal. :D
 
Can we please just leave the game alone...it's fine as it is. Yet another rule to change to favour the big 4 clubs is not required.

Football exists outside of the top of the premier league.

I don't think teams in league 2 with a squad of 18 players will be clamouring for this???:mad:
 
VonClinkerhofen said:
Can we please just leave the game alone...it's fine as it is. Yet another rule to change to favour the big 4 clubs is not required.

Football exists outside of the top of the premier league.

I don't think teams in league 2 with a squad of 18 players will be clamouring for this???:mad:
Click to expand...


Why not?:confused:
 
The only justification I can see really for this is to bring it in line with internationals/european matches.

Despite being relatively young, I've already seen the number of subs allowed in football creep up:

2 subs from 2
2 subs from 3, one must be a keeper
3 subs from 3 (?)
3 subs from 5

How long before it ends up like the world cup, where you have your entire squad on the bench? How long before we end up with American-style rolling subs?
 
HangTime said:
The only justification I can see really for this is to bring it in line with internationals/european matches.

Despite being relatively young, I've already seen the number of subs allowed in football creep up:

2 subs from 2
2 subs from 3, one must be a keeper
3 subs from 3 (?)
3 subs from 5

How long before it ends up like the world cup, where you have your entire squad on the bench? How long before we end up with American-style rolling subs?
Click to expand...

If the these "investers" have anything to do with it them we will have teams of 50, 4 1/4 intervals than half time to make more money from tv rights.

More adverts = more money = more breaks :rolleyes:
 
HangTime said:
How long before it ends up like the world cup, where you have your entire squad on the bench? How long before we end up with American-style rolling subs?
Click to expand...


yeah or how long before we end up playing the game in quarters like the yanks to fit more ad breaks in. never going to happen.


haha, someone actually said it. never going to happen.
 
Because a keeper shouldn't could as an outfield player. A keeper will only ever be changed for injury (certainly in 99% of cases), so when you have so few players on a bench, it's unfair for that to be the case. You should have the option of 5-outfield players and a keeper if injured. It gives you more range on your bench without sacrificing someone for the goalkeeper.
 
I agree about having an extra bench spot for the goalie, but taking away the possibility of a team having to put an outfield player in goal is madness :p
 
Yeh. Knowing that the cat will never get another outing between the sticks is something I don't want to imagine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom