Time for seven substitutes?

[James]

I don't think the English rules of allowing five substitutes is good for the modern game. It is time we followed other countries and footballing bodies in allowing seven substitutes to sit on the bench.

 

The modern game has more teams playing more matches, which increases the number of players that the larger clubs will sign to bepart of their squads. However, with just 16 places up for grabs, some decent players are left out altogether, which is no good for the player, the player's country if they are an international, and the harmony within the team itself.

 

These days, substitutions aren't just about bringing in fresh legs, backing-up an injury, or piling on the attackers/defenders in losing/winning situations, it is about having the options to make instant tweaks to the team set-up to help that team control the pace of the game.

 

Also, with so many limited places, the youngsters aren't going to get many chances. With more places, there is opportunity for youngsters to be brought in with the possibility of getting time on the pitch if the game situations are favourable. Right now, youngsters generally only get chances in injury crises. Injury crises will have less effect if the youngsters got a bit of first-team practice before hand. Bobby Robson certainly took theopportunity to give the youngsters a chance in settled European games.

[Keefaz]

It's been time for 7 subs for for ages.

[James]

It's been time for 7 subs for for ages.

 

You are right, and it is something so simple and uncontroversial, I don't understand why it hasn't happenned, which is why I started this thread.

[Shak]

It's been time for 7 subs for for ages.

 

 

There's not one good reason to keep it at 5 subs only.

[Dokko]

Fuking hell this is weird, i was thinking of posting this about 30mins ago, but remember i post this same question up every start of the season so didn't bother.

 

Freaky.

 

 

[James]

Perhaps any suggestion by the Premiership would be vetoed by shit managers and chairman who feel that it is giving clubs that bothered to build a squad an advantage *cough*Roeder and Shepherd*cough*

[Dokko]

I suggested last time the 2 extra players could have stipulations that help the development of youth. So the two new spaces on the bench have to be academy players and under 21.

 

 

[Colos Short and Curlies]

3 subs was better

[James]

At the World Cup, weren't all 12 non starting squad members substitutes?

 

Somewhere around 10 substitutes (3 per outfield position) is the way forward in my opinion, with stipulations that you have to have 4 players in the 21 who are under a certain age and under a certain number of top flight appearances.

[Guest alex]

At the World Cup, weren't all 12 non starting squad members substitutes?

 

Somewhere around 10 substitutes (3 per outfield position) is the way forward in my opinion, with stipulations that you have to have 4 players in the 21 who are under a certain age and under a certain number of top flight appearances.

I think the French said you had to have 2 under 21 French players in the match squad to help bring young talent through after they failed to qualify for successive World Cups ('90 and '94). It's a good idea.

[Mike]

With all the talk of the dearth of talented English youth, you think that this would be the easiest part of the solution.

[Guest Vigge]

It is the same thing as u fellas driving on the wrong side of the road. Conservative blokes and so on. Please note that this is a joke  . I am Swedish myself.

[Optimistic Nut]

All of the top leagues have 7 subs, heck, even the SPL does. Plus I think they have the rule where a squad has to include a certain number of under 21s. Stupid that we haven't. Keeps more players happy as well as players on the fringes have at least a better chance of being in the first 18.

[olliemort]

only a matter of time!its stupid that it has happened already,hell even the spl is doing it!

[ohmelads]

Struggling to think of a reason against this.

 

As you point out, it'd be very handy to be able to put someone like Andy Carroll or Paul Huntington on the bench in case we unexpectedly hammer a team 4-0 and can find place for them in the last 15 or 20 minutes. With 5 subs, we wouldn't risk putting them on the bench (short of an injury crisis), and as a result they get no minutes on the pitch. I'm sure Chopra would have got more appearances for us if there had been 7 subs available for every match.

[Ashley17]

I quite liked the idea from Rick Parry that a 4th sub could be used in extra time, he suggested it after the FA cup final when there was about 6 players moving freely.

[stozo]

Great for big clubs. Not so great for smaller clubs such as Derby who would struggle to fill a 7 person bench with any quality. Would also just lead to the superclubs like Liverpool, Chelsea and Man U buying even more talent so they could have a bench full of talent.

 

Would only want it if their was a rule stating you had to have atleast 2 English players under 21 on the bench.

[Alberto2005]

Don't think it's essential tbh.

[Leazes1986]

I've thought this for a while. We would have struggled with it last season like.

[Decky]

Say in a cup game, should a team be allowed a 4th sub in the 30 minutes of injury time?

[Ashley17]

I quite liked the idea from Rick Parry that a 4th sub could be used in extra time, he suggested it after the FA cup final when there was about 6 players moving freely.

 

I think so

[James]

Great for big clubs. Not so great for smaller clubs such as Derby who would struggle to fill a 7 person bench with any quality. Would also just lead to the superclubs like Liverpool, Chelsea and Man U buying even more talent so they could have a bench full of talent.

 

Would only want it if their was a rule stating you had to have atleast 2 English players under 21 on the bench.

 

It's a teams own fault for being shit. In fact, for poorer teams it could be an incentive to develop better youngsters, plus it would allow these fringe players to improve their game by getting more matches.

 

What wouldn't change is that only 14 players can be used, but in an injury crisis, these smaller clubs , having given more time to fringe players off the bench, will be able to use players with greater experience.

[Alberto2005]

Great for big clubs. Not so great for smaller clubs such as Derby who would struggle to fill a 7 person bench with any quality. Would also just lead to the superclubs like Liverpool, Chelsea and Man U buying even more talent so they could have a bench full of talent.

 

Would only want it if their was a rule stating you had to have atleast 2 English players under 21 on the bench.

 

It's a teams own fault for being s***. In fact, for poorer teams it could be an incentive to develop better youngsters, plus it would allow these fringe players to improve their game by getting more matches.

 

What wouldn't change is that only 14 players can be used, but in an injury crisis, these smaller clubs , having given more time to fringe players off the bench, will be able to use players with greater experience.

You keep talking about how fringe players and younger players will get a chance, but if the rule still stands at 3 players max coming on why should that change the managers views of bringing on a younger player or a fringe player for that matter?

[James]

Great for big clubs. Not so great for smaller clubs such as Derby who would struggle to fill a 7 person bench with any quality. Would also just lead to the superclubs like Liverpool, Chelsea and Man U buying even more talent so they could have a bench full of talent.

 

Would only want it if their was a rule stating you had to have atleast 2 English players under 21 on the bench.

 

It's a teams own fault for being s***. In fact, for poorer teams it could be an incentive to develop better youngsters, plus it would allow these fringe players to improve their game by getting more matches.

 

What wouldn't change is that only 14 players can be used, but in an injury crisis, these smaller clubs , having given more time to fringe players off the bench, will be able to use players with greater experience.

You keep talking about how fringe players and younger players will get a chance, but if the rule still stands at 3 players max coming on why should that change the managers views of bringing on a younger player or a fringe player for that matter?

 

Because only a top club can afford to not have fringers or youngsters off the bench, and later on in the game, a manager can make a more accurate observation as to whether a youngster should get a go without it being bad if his inexperience leads toa cock-up.

 

A manager couldn't take those liberties when they must pick 5 subs a day before with no indication regarding the outcome of the match.

[stozo]

Great for big clubs. Not so great for smaller clubs such as Derby who would struggle to fill a 7 person bench with any quality. Would also just lead to the superclubs like Liverpool, Chelsea and Man U buying even more talent so they could have a bench full of talent.

 

Would only want it if their was a rule stating you had to have atleast 2 English players under 21 on the bench.

 

It's a teams own fault for being shit. In fact, for poorer teams it could be an incentive to develop better youngsters, plus it would allow these fringe players to improve their game by getting more matches.

 

What wouldn't change is that only 14 players can be used, but in an injury crisis, these smaller clubs , having given more time to fringe players off the bench, will be able to use players with greater experience.

Not being funny but this isn't FM. Teams try hard anyway to develop young talent but in the end your either good enough or your not. Also just by giving fringe players actual game experience won't make them better players, you either have the talent or you don't, we've seen that with Bramble and a few others, played consistantly but haven't improved.

 

Also I doubt teams like Derby will be bringing on kids when they are up against it until the final whistle most weeks. This will just give further advantage to big clubs who will be able to bring on thier kids when 4-0 up but would be useless for teams like Derby who will rarely have the sort of cushion to bring on kids.