| Five subs, Good or bad? 22:25 - Jul 11 with 5076 views | VancouverHoop |
Off the top It seems that it'll favour teams with talent in depth... ie. not QPR. OTOH it may give us a chance to see what some of our younger players can do in a first team environment.
I think a knock-on should, and maybe will, be the introduction of an official timer to track stoppages. There are too many as it is, and while adding two or three minutes at the refs discretion is maybe acceptable, five or six or more is courting controversy. |  | | |  |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 22:45 - Jul 11 with 3901 views | essextaxiboy |
Bad for me ,planning subs and changing tactics is part of a coahssc skill ...IMO |  | | |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 23:22 - Jul 11 with 3834 views | CliveWilsonSaid |
I'm not sure it makes a lot of difference. |  |
| |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 23:24 - Jul 11 with 3825 views | daveB |
you'll see it used for time wasting a lot but actually made a big difference during the covid season. We were able to take off the likes of Austin & Johansen every week and keep them fresh with the extra subs, it worked well for us.
I'm skeptical on it though as it does favour the bigger squads |  | | |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 00:30 - Jul 12 with 3784 views | Northernr |
Dire. |  | | |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 09:34 - Jul 12 with 3601 views | BrianMcCarthy |
Awful.
Favours big teams.
Allows for more manic high-press, more cynical fouling, spreading of cards.
I think that the game needs to return to a state where the eleven players use their heads and skills to win. This fights against that. |  |
| |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 09:46 - Jul 12 with 3563 views | Galileo |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 09:34 - Jul 12 by BrianMcCarthy |
Awful.
Favours big teams.
Allows for more manic high-press, more cynical fouling, spreading of cards.
I think that the game needs to return to a state where the eleven players use their heads and skills to win. This fights against that. |
Well said. | | | |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 10:00 - Jul 12 with 3517 views | stanistheman |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 09:46 - Jul 12 by Galileo |
Well said. |
As nearly always, it favours the bigger clubs with better quality squads and subs. Our bench could include the likes of Hamalainen, Kelman Owens etc compared to say the Norwich WBA Sheffield United and Watford benches which will most likely include some quality ex Premiership experienced players. | | | |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 10:19 - Jul 12 with 3459 views | PunteR |
5 subs if at least 2 players have gone off injured . At least you don't have a situation like we had with Wallace going in goal. Changing half the team for tactical reasons is overkill imo. Should be your best 11 v their best 11. Call me old fashioned..:) |  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 10:26 - Jul 12 with 3417 views | Lblock |
Very much against this.
The game has lost so much of its skill and drama, this is just tipping it again towards who has the highest paid athletes running further and faster.
I hear all the “big club” arguments and totally agree; BUT! look at Barnsley when this rule was in before. This clearly favours murder ball tactics and that’s what we’ll see.
What next? Endless subs? Quarters instead of halves? Time outs? Total bollox |  |
| Cherish and enjoy life.... this ain't no dress rehearsal |
| |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 10:30 - Jul 12 with 3404 views | DannyPaddox |
It’s like the Ship of Theseus - the metaphysical thought experiment of old Greece. If the ship of Theseus were kept in a harbour and every part on the ship were replaced one at a time, would it then be a new ship? The same with substitutions. One or two changes for each team is interesting and part of the game. Can the manager think on his feet? Will he keep things ticking over or change it up and can the team adapt to a new formation? But at around 5 substitutions I start to lose interest. And the interest decreases with each further substitution. It’s like this isn’t the same game of football I was watching an hour or so ago. |  | | |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 10:43 - Jul 12 with 3381 views | FrankRightguard |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 10:30 - Jul 12 by DannyPaddox |
It’s like the Ship of Theseus - the metaphysical thought experiment of old Greece. If the ship of Theseus were kept in a harbour and every part on the ship were replaced one at a time, would it then be a new ship? The same with substitutions. One or two changes for each team is interesting and part of the game. Can the manager think on his feet? Will he keep things ticking over or change it up and can the team adapt to a new formation? But at around 5 substitutions I start to lose interest. And the interest decreases with each further substitution. It’s like this isn’t the same game of football I was watching an hour or so ago. |
The ancient Trigger’s broom |  | | |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 10:57 - Jul 12 with 3360 views | ted_hendrix |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 10:26 - Jul 12 by Lblock |
Very much against this.
The game has lost so much of its skill and drama, this is just tipping it again towards who has the highest paid athletes running further and faster.
I hear all the “big club” arguments and totally agree; BUT! look at Barnsley when this rule was in before. This clearly favours murder ball tactics and that’s what we’ll see.
What next? Endless subs? Quarters instead of halves? Time outs? Total bollox |
Yes pretty much on the nail, change the rules by all means but change them for the better.
Sometimes you have a good product that works just about okay and acceptable and then lo and behold It gets bloody changed.
Not much worse than sitting in the ground in the 94th minute watching yet another long drawn out Substitution. |  |
| My Father had a profound influence on me, he was a lunatic. |
| |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 11:26 - Jul 12 with 3318 views | cyprusmel |
Five subs is going to create ample opportunity to waste time, three was bad enough, will it be six with the concussion nonsense. we have already seen first hand how that can work.
The powers that be seem intent on producing something other than the game most of us knew and grew up with.
The sensible rule change that most fans want to see is when the ball is out of play the clock stops so there is nothing to be gained by wasting time also ban the use of towels dotted around the perimeter.
Fans pay a lot of money not only for tickets to enter the ground but the ever increasing cost of food drink and transport, use the stop clock and give the fans value for the hard earned cash they shell out. | | | |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 12:57 - Jul 12 with 3221 views | francisbowles |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 11:26 - Jul 12 by cyprusmel |
Five subs is going to create ample opportunity to waste time, three was bad enough, will it be six with the concussion nonsense. we have already seen first hand how that can work.
The powers that be seem intent on producing something other than the game most of us knew and grew up with.
The sensible rule change that most fans want to see is when the ball is out of play the clock stops so there is nothing to be gained by wasting time also ban the use of towels dotted around the perimeter.
Fans pay a lot of money not only for tickets to enter the ground but the ever increasing cost of food drink and transport, use the stop clock and give the fans value for the hard earned cash they shell out. |
It's five subs from a seven player bench but only three interruptions to play per team permitted as at present. Half time doesn't count as an interruption.
So, there isn't much more chance to delay play, than at present.
I'm not sure whether the concussion thing is continuing. | | | |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 13:11 - Jul 12 with 3196 views | CliveWilsonSaid |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 12:57 - Jul 12 by francisbowles |
It's five subs from a seven player bench but only three interruptions to play per team permitted as at present. Half time doesn't count as an interruption.
So, there isn't much more chance to delay play, than at present.
I'm not sure whether the concussion thing is continuing. |
“I'm not sure whether the concussion thing is continuing”
I think we should knock it on the head myself. | |
| |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 13:31 - Jul 12 with 3125 views | switchingcode |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 09:34 - Jul 12 by BrianMcCarthy |
Awful.
Favours big teams.
Allows for more manic high-press, more cynical fouling, spreading of cards.
I think that the game needs to return to a state where the eleven players use their heads and skills to win. This fights against that. |
For those reasons I’m out | | | |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 13:50 - Jul 12 with 3100 views | Antti_Heinola |
Terrible. |  |
| |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 14:05 - Jul 12 with 3056 views | terryb |
"The sensible rule change that most fans want to see is when the ball is out of play the clock stops so there is nothing to be gained by wasting time also ban the use of towels dotted around the perimeter. "
This is from cyprusmel, but I didn't want to quote the whole post.
I disagree completely that most fans want to see the game stopped when the ball is out of play. Matches last long enough as it is & crowds will decrease if you are going to add on at least another 30 minutes. Indeed, I would expect it to take far longer for the ball to return to play.
A midweek 8.00pm kick off would stop many people watching all the game & being able to catch the last train home as well!
My only concern with 5 subs is that the flow of a team could deteriorate considerably. | | | |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 14:05 - Jul 12 with 3056 views | Nushnool |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 10:19 - Jul 12 by PunteR |
5 subs if at least 2 players have gone off injured . At least you don't have a situation like we had with Wallace going in goal. Changing half the team for tactical reasons is overkill imo. Should be your best 11 v their best 11. Call me old fashioned..:) |
Seeing an outfield player put on the goalie jersey and look so out of place and uncomfortable doing things like taking a goal kick is one of the best things in football. They should reduce the number subs back down to just one for this reason alone. |  | | |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 14:54 - Jul 12 with 2977 views | PinnerPaul |
Thing is, yes you can blame the 'rules' but have a look at the Womens Euros - England trying to score right up until about the 85th minute, our subs running off the pitch or leaving it at the nearest point, no mucking about with GKs, no 'standing on the ball' at free kicks etc etc etc - it IS possible to play top class sport without the dark arts and without changing any laws, IF the players/clubs wanted to. | | | |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 15:00 - Jul 12 with 2954 views | daveB |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 14:54 - Jul 12 by PinnerPaul |
Thing is, yes you can blame the 'rules' but have a look at the Womens Euros - England trying to score right up until about the 85th minute, our subs running off the pitch or leaving it at the nearest point, no mucking about with GKs, no 'standing on the ball' at free kicks etc etc etc - it IS possible to play top class sport without the dark arts and without changing any laws, IF the players/clubs wanted to. |
They were 8-0 up at the time so no need for wasting time, see the difference when you get to the knockouts if England are 1-0, I doubt we'll be rushing anything | | | |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 15:02 - Jul 12 with 2952 views | Northernr |
I wonder how much money, how many players, how big a competitive advantage Klopp and Pep are going to need to have before they stop fcking moaning? | | | |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 16:41 - Jul 12 with 2875 views | VancouverHoop |
I watched the England v Hungary match from 1953 in it's entirety the other day. Several things stood out (aside from England looking totally gobsmacked by how Hungary played.)
Mainly, how fast the game was played. I don't mean player speed, I mean keeping the game moving. No arseing around setting up the ball just right at free kicks, no discussions with team-mates either about who's going to take it. Nor the ref moving the wall back half an inch. Same with injuries. At one point Stan Mortensen took a knock. He lay on the ground for about thirty seconds, but the ref didn't stop the game. So two Hungarian defenders picked him up and, literally, dumped on the other side of their goal line. No one on the pitch did, or said, anything. Neither did Wolstenholme who was commentating.
Having said that I recall matches that were basically ruined as a contest because one team had to play a significant period of time one short, or with some poor bugger limping up and down the touchline. Five subs is overkill though. It makes it a coach's rather than a players' game when you can effectively change half the players during a match. | | | |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 18:25 - Jul 12 with 2830 views | denhamhoop2 |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 14:54 - Jul 12 by PinnerPaul |
Thing is, yes you can blame the 'rules' but have a look at the Womens Euros - England trying to score right up until about the 85th minute, our subs running off the pitch or leaving it at the nearest point, no mucking about with GKs, no 'standing on the ball' at free kicks etc etc etc - it IS possible to play top class sport without the dark arts and without changing any laws, IF the players/clubs wanted to. |
Have a look at Ellen White's tumble for the penalty and calling womens football top class sport is pushing it a lot when one of the superstars of the womens game can actually get a game in the Vanarama League and look good get back to me | | | |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 09:42 - Jul 13 with 2694 views | francisbowles |
| Five subs, Good or bad? on 16:41 - Jul 12 by VancouverHoop |
I watched the England v Hungary match from 1953 in it's entirety the other day. Several things stood out (aside from England looking totally gobsmacked by how Hungary played.)
Mainly, how fast the game was played. I don't mean player speed, I mean keeping the game moving. No arseing around setting up the ball just right at free kicks, no discussions with team-mates either about who's going to take it. Nor the ref moving the wall back half an inch. Same with injuries. At one point Stan Mortensen took a knock. He lay on the ground for about thirty seconds, but the ref didn't stop the game. So two Hungarian defenders picked him up and, literally, dumped on the other side of their goal line. No one on the pitch did, or said, anything. Neither did Wolstenholme who was commentating.
Having said that I recall matches that were basically ruined as a contest because one team had to play a significant period of time one short, or with some poor bugger limping up and down the touchline. Five subs is overkill though. It makes it a coach's rather than a players' game when you can effectively change half the players during a match. |
That seems a bit random VH, watching a 69 year old match in it's entirety. Was it planned or did it just appear in front of you? Rainy day on the west coast? | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
