POLL: New Five Subs Rule - Love or Loathe?

[jdrobbo]

One entry per user.

[claretburns]

I would say now we seem to have a bench with a variety of options it will come in handy more this season than in the Prem, more games to get through and more options if we're 1-0 down going into last 20 mins or so.

[1989_claret]

Not a massive fan. Would rather it still be three however, five probably suits us better in the Championship than it would Prem as we should be the A side in most games.

If it was up to me to change it to anything it would be three standard subs plus you can use an additional goalkeeper sub if injured and keep the concussion sub.

[claretandy]

If you're going to have 5 subs, then you need more than 7 on the bench.

[Bosscat]

Am on the fence but now we have more talent () on the bench it may help us more so am sort of warming as the season goes on

1989's last paragraph nailed it with a great idea

[jdrobbo]

I could perhaps do the same poll three or four times throughout the season.

[Spiral]

Warming to it, but only because we have the squad depth to make actual use of it. Would hate it if we had the squad we had last year.

Quick question though, is a half time sub considered one of the three sub breaks?

[Tricky Trevor]

Agree with most above. In principal I hate it but with our squad and the league we are in it will be a plus.

[Tricky Trevor]

Quick question though, is a half time sub considered one of the three sub breaks?

No. You are allowed 3 stoppages of play as I understand it.

[Devils_Advocate]

I could perhaps do the same poll three or four times throughout the season.

Could you do it once a month please?

[MACCA]

Think I'll like it this year as I think it gives us an advantage, will probably dislike it when/if we go back up and it works against us

[chekhov]

Could you do it once a month please?

Do you have an authentic bone in your body? Or are you actually like this in real life. Some of your posts really are pathetic, I’ll include the one above.

[Zom Zom]

It’s not for me. If I could tweak it, I’d have the regular three changes plus two for serious injury or concussion. Seeing teams make five changes has a very pre-season friendly feel about it.

Edit to acknowledge the same views from an earlier post. Apologies.

[Devils_Advocate]

Do you have an authentic bone in your body? Or are you actually like this in real life. Some of your posts really are pathetic, I’ll include the one above.

You mean this messageboard isn't real life!!

[RMutt]

I would imagine subs were introduced to replace injured players?
The more subs you can make the more likely it becomes tactical, which I don’t really like.
Wealthy clubs with a top class bench have an advantage. With more players on the bench as some are suggesting that advantage becomes even greater, for example they could put five defenders on to close out a game. Two or three is about right.

[NewClaret]

Warming to it.

Would’ve voted loath it in the Prem though, due to my Burnley bias

Change of heart is for the obvious reason that we now have a strong bench full of potential game changers. We also have a squad of players who will all want game time, not to mention 46 games back to back, so it works much more in our favour now.

Realistically though, all professional football teams should have 18 players competing closely for the first team. Our issue historically has been lack of investment in first team calibre players, meaning it picked itself and it was hard to imagine a player coming off the bench and strengthening the team. But that was our issue really.

[jdrobbo]

Bump

[warksclaret]

Under SD-hating
Under VK-loving

[jdrobbo]

Bump

[ngsobob]

I'd just like to know who the subs are. No longer included on the screens.

[Granny WeatherWax]

I like as, as long as we don’t make subs for the sake of it.

[claretonthecoast1882]

It will suit us in the division due to having one of the better squads.

I do feel games lose some urgency when a number of subs are made at the same time by both sides.

Overall I would prefer going back to 3

[quoonbeatz]

Should never be more than 3 for 2 reason:

it favours the big clubs who stockpile players. That has a number of knock on effects.

as above, it slows the game. 5 subs is half an outfield team. Might as well make every game a friendly.

[daveisaclaret]

I'm totally not bothered. I think there's the potential for it to be anti-competition in the Premier League but it certainly isn't happening so far.

Had a look through the weekend's Championship fixtures and about 2 teams had made a 4th substitution before the 80th minute and I don't think anyone had made a 5th earlier than 88 minutes.

If you're so good that you can sometimes be winning so comfortably that you can make all 5 changes to your team early enough to benefit from resting players, it may be a benefit to you. Otherwise I think even teams with deep benches like us will realise that making so many changes can as often be a detriment to the cohesion of the team as it can be a devastating tactical change.

For the records, our subs so far have been timed as below:
70, 74
45, 82
45, 62, 63, 75, 90+1
66, 66, 83
61, 71, 72, 90
66, 77, 77, 90, 90

So we've basically benefitted to the tune of 15 minutes of Vitinho at Watford and made a few changes in injury time. Hard to see it becoming a big deal to me.

[jdrobbo]

Bump

[tiger76]

Our strong bench could well prove the difference in the final shake-up, and it's certainly paid dividends for us in the last couple of games.

Also if we're carrying a bigger squad this 5 sub rule will allow VK to give everyone minutes and keep them all involved.

[Pearcey]

Wasn’t a fan when it didn’t favour us but now with the look of our bench plus the extra 8 games I think it’s a great idea.

[Goody1975]

Our strong bench could well prove the difference in the final shake-up, and it's certainly paid dividends for us in the last couple of games.

Also if we're carrying a bigger squad this 5 sub rule will allow VK to give everyone minutes and keep them all involved.

The size of the squad will allow us to make changes to the first XI but it will come into play later on in the season when other teams have limited bench options due to injuries/suspensions and hopefully we don't.

[martin_p]

I’d prefer it to go back to one to be honest. Obviously it’s working well for us at the moment as we have a big squad with lots of options but it’s another rule designed to help the bigger clubs with the bigger spending power. Moving back to one sub would in my opinion level the playing field somewhat.

[CrosspoolClarets]

Ticked loathed because great for us but smaller clubs don't get a look in. Just another way that the bigger squads dominate and the division is almost certain to be the three that came down and one or two others. The rest need a chance, like we did in the PL.

[jedi_master]

It gives us a massive advantage due to the quality of the bench we can put out in comparison to the rest of this league.

[Jakubs Tash]

Why is the PL 9 subs and the football league 7? Not sure I understand the logic behind that.

[Roosterbooster]

Great for Burnley atm
But bad for football in general

I'd be very happy going back to 2 subs (or 3 if you need a concussion sub or a keeper is injured) with 3 on the bench

The fact you can sub literally half of your outfield players is ridiculous

[claretandy]

It gives us a massive advantage due to the quality of the bench we can put out in comparison to the rest of this league.

It should be at least 9 subs though, when everyone is fit we are going to have to leave some really good players out of the squad.

[Jambo]

Probably should have thought about that before we signed 81 new players, tbf...!