I dont understand your point
Today’s Football 2020/21 Season
- Thread starter Nymzee
- Start date
- Status
I dont understand your point
My point is, managers can use 3 subs to protect players, but don't, becasue they dont want to risk paying with 10 for 10 minutes. Thats the manager, not the substitute rules putting people at risk.
There's a difference between writing them off and making an objective decision based on probability. They may survive another year, but I sincerely doubt it.
Sorry got ya now. I see your point, but again I go back to managers not making subs because they feel they need to hold them. It's damaging the quality of matches and ultimately done with player fatigue and injury in mind.
We would have far better football if managers were bringing on subs to change matches, not just as fatigue relief, there is a need for both. 5 subs helps that and 71 of 72 leagues agree, I think its a shame the PL is being so stubborn and will end up costing one of the ten their place in the league when they can barely field a team.
(punch line = they do have a point - 1 point)
While I accept the injury aspect, for this is a choice rather than a requirement or at least it is at the moment.
I like how managers have needed to be astute with their substitutions as it's a part of game management: who to bring on and when with limited choice.
The five sub rule will aide players, there is no doubt about that, but the flip side is that it will also significantly benefit teams with greater strength in depth.
Excluding your goalkeeper, the better teams will be able to swap 50% of their starting XI each and every game with similar or like for like talent.
Teams like Burnley, who could make changes, would not be able to do so and would suffer against the likes of the RS. That's the point against Klopp's jibes.
The other leagues aren't as rich as the PL are they, so perhaps that's part of the issue.
tsubaki
Player Valuation: £90m
TBF I think we’d have better football (certainly international football) if club managers were more willing to use more of their squads more regularly - you’d have more youth players coming through because there would be more opportunities to play. That the RS have had to do that this season (with Jones et al playing far more than they would have because of injuries) is something that will probably benefit them in the seasons to come.
Also with more subs all that will happen is (as someone said before with the Springboks) you’d have players playing much harder for a shorter period of time because they’d know they’d be replaced at half time / sixty minutes. It could easily result in more soft tissue injuries, not less.
5 subs is dumb. Playing with a half of a completely different outfield at some point.
Klopp and Guardiola haven't even been using their 3 recently. Its a nonsense argument. Rotate your starting 11 if you have genuine issues about fatigue and injuries.
For me - if you are agreeing it will aide players, that should be the end of the discussion. this is a mickey mouse asterix laden season and players should be given all the help the can to get through it.
I think the 5 subs will benefit everyteam & I would propose the stronger the squad the less the benefit; as Liverpool have shown, they can absorb significant injuries and compete, the smaller the squad, the more they will benefit from this kind of protection aid. Someone is going to end up not being able to field a competitive team this season & that wont be Man City, Liverpool or Chelsea. I just hope it's not us
For me - if you are agreeing it will aide players, that should be the end of the discussion. this is a mickey mouse asterix laden season and players should be given all the help the can to get through it.
I think the 5 subs will benefit everyteam & I would propose the stronger the squad the less the benefit; as Liverpool have shown, they can absorb significant injuries and compete, the smaller the squad, the more they will benefit from this kind of protection aid. Someone is going to end up not being able to field a competitive team this season & that wont be Man City, Liverpool or Chelsea. I just hope it's not us
That's the managers choice though. Raising from 3 to 5 wont make any difference.
The 2nd point is fine, but unrelated to player welfare. Which is the essence of the argument really. Managers want to have more influence on the game. That's fair enough, but clubs with greater resources benefit.
As for the 71 leagues stuff, just a couple of points.
1) How many of those leagues have 5-6 teams who have wages bill's hundreds of millions more than the rest of the league?
2) How many have a TV deal the size of the EPLs which would be damaged by continual changes in game?
If you can answer those, you will get your answer as to why the PL has a different view.
I'm not being horrible here mate, but a couple of weeks ago you were stating it would definitely come in. It didnt 4 weeks ago and hasnt now.
You were also talking about 4 or 5 teams winning 10 from 12. So far since then:
Liverpool have slipped up twice, Leicester 3 times, City 3 times, Spurs twice and Chelsea twice. That is just in the last 3 or 4 games. This is clearly a bit of a blindspot for you.
I dont necessarily think it will benefit the top 6, but what it will do is make 2nd halves of games very tiresome as a spectacle, with continual chopping and changing.
It would probably benefit Everton, with a flexible manager who likes to change systems in game. There is a bigger picture though.
You have already stated though, there is no evidence that resting a player prevents injury. You've also said theres no way we can anticipate when an injury will come. If that's your perspective, the 1,3,5, 10, 20 subs per game makes no difference whatsoever.
- Status