General Premier League Thread 2020-21 - Mod Notes in 1st post. [Updated 17/12/20]

citytillidie · 20-11-2020 11:50AM

Saving subs encase a player gets injured late on is also on the mind of the managers I say hence they have been unwilling to make that 3rd sub sooner.

rob316 · 20-11-2020 11:56AM

Its only November lads, the level of casualties will be even worse in January like.

8-10 · 20-11-2020 11:57AM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

I'm not going through every managers substitution stats.

You're also ignoring the EFL and most other European Leagues

This 'just get on with attitude' seems only to be aimed at City and Liverpool for some reason.

Richard Hillman · 20-11-2020 12:10PM

8-10 wrote: »

You're also ignoring the EFL and most other European Leagues

This 'just get on with attitude' seems only to be aimed at City and Liverpool for some reason.

I'm not an excel file scowering through of every club substitution stats :pac:

Richard Hillman · 20-11-2020 12:12PM

Arteta is moaning about it this morning (although Sky seem to be on an agenda in ramping it up).

Arsenal have been using their subs but they do have a player earning 350k a week not in the squad because he said some mean things about China.

Corholio · 20-11-2020 12:16PM

I was against the whole 5 sub thing and still am, but maybe a temporary period for them may be suitable. The thing I would hate to see is it implemented for a short time because of a current specific need and then clubs lobby for it to remain after this and then it becomes the norm. Barring this short term need there is absolutely no need for it to remain.

Fitz* · 20-11-2020 12:17PM

citytillidie wrote: »

Saving subs encase a player gets injured late on is also on the mind of the managers I say hence they have been unwilling to make that 3rd sub sooner.

I said the same earlier in the thread. People are piling in on Klopp & Pep because the only used x amount of subs in that one game. Klopp had already seen one player go off injured in that game, in addition to the many others in the squad. If he had made a 3rd sub on 70 mins, and someone else got injured, next thing it's 11 v 10 away to Man City fro 20 mins and he could end up losing the game.

For what it's worth, Klopp has used his maximum subs in 6 out of 8 PL games, 3 out of 3 CL games & 2 out of 2 cup games. He has made 43 out of a possible 45 subs this season.

Pep has used his maximum subs in 2 out of 8 PL games, 2 out of 3 CL games & 2 out of 2 cup games. He has made 33 out of a possible 45 subs this season, albeit with a larger squad so is able to rotate more.

It's seems like some are piling in on those managers because of one game and because they mange their club's rivals.

8-10 · 20-11-2020 12:34PM

Corholio wrote: »

I was against the whole 5 sub thing and still am, but maybe a temporary period for them may be suitable. The thing I would hate to see is it implemented for a short time because of a current specific need and then clubs lobby for it to remain after this and then it becomes the norm. Barring this short term need there is absolutely no need for it to remain.

And people seem to ignore that it was implemented last year because of the same need. If the need was there in July what's changed now other than even more games than at the time of the ones with 5 subs last season

Corholio · 20-11-2020 02:24PM

8-10 wrote: »

And people seem to ignore that it was implemented last year because of the same need. If the need was there in July what's changed now other than even more games than at the time of the ones with 5 subs last season

IMO the fear is that it will be lobbied for to use in the longer term when clubs will use the 'Oh look at all the competitions we have to play, poor us' routine to try to get it permanently implemented. No problem with a short term use personally.

joeguevara · 20-11-2020 02:38PM

Corholio wrote: »

IMO the fear is that it will be lobbied for to use in the longer term when clubs will use the 'Oh look at all the competitions we have to play, poor us' routine to try to get it permanently implemented. No problem with a short term use personally.

Football is a vastly different game than lets say the 1960s. The first substitute used in the English league was 1965. Internationally some world cup qualifiers allowed one substitute.

This was increased to two subs allowed in 1987. In 1994, it was increased to three as long as one was a goalie. 95, allowed any 3 subs.

As there is so much more travel, internationals, cups, etc, why not consider 5 subs to assist. Why hold 3 as sacrosanct, seeing as it was a similar review that allowed it.

Gbear · 20-11-2020 02:46PM

There's going to be a finite amount of subs that managers want to make in games anyway.

It'll be pretty seldom that you'll want to totally change your attack in the middle of a game, and it'll work in your favour even less often.

Most of the time it'll probably be used for enforced subs or to take players off in games where it's considered no longer to be a risk. That benefits teams with nothing to play for, whether they're leading or trailing.

Only allowing a maximum of 3 substitution breaks in play ensures that it wont be used to take the piss and break up the game (any more than it already does).

Agent Coulson · 20-11-2020 02:47PM

The back pass rule, Goal line Technology, VAR, The offside rule changes every couple of months now because of VAR the game changes and evolves so why not 5 subs.

Fromvert · 20-11-2020 02:47PM

joeguevara wrote: »

Football is a vastly different game than lets say the 1960s. The first substitute used in the English league was 1965. Internationally some world cup qualifiers allowed one substitute.

This was increased to two subs allowed in 1987. In 1994, it was increased to three as long as one was a goalie. 95, allowed any 3 subs.

As there is so much more travel, internationals, cups, etc, why not consider 5 subs to assist. Why hold 3 as sacrosanct, seeing as it was a similar review that allowed it.

Because a large chunk of sports fans hate change. Every change that ever happened has been ruining the game for some.

Mushy · 20-11-2020 02:53PM

Instead of 5 subs, maybe larger squads (bar teams who would just hog players and not rotate)

Pauliedragon · 20-11-2020 03:25PM

The thing with players burning out is much more than just this season. You've got the congested season, Euros, new season, WC 2022 in the desert, new season. Obviously all players wont be invlolved in all tournaments but for a lot of them it will be hectic.
Edit. I forgot WC 2022 has been moved to our Winter so they might get a break that Summer. Still mad schedule for god knows how long.

Mushy · 20-11-2020 03:29PM

Pauliedragon wrote: »

The thing with players burning out is much more than just this season. You've got the congested season, Euros, new season, WC 2022 in the desert, new season. Obviously all players wont be invlolved in all tournaments but for a lot of them it will be hectic.

It's a joke that everything is getting squeezed in. Dont blame players for feeling like they're being taken advantage of

yourdeadwright · 20-11-2020 03:35PM

3 internationals games in a go is an absolute shambles ,

Personally I don't think they should bother with international's when there is no fans, I under stand league games with the money involved but internationals are aload of b*****

Rock77 · 20-11-2020 03:40PM

In my opinion this debate was going ok for a while and now it’s a disaster.

There is certainly an argument for the 5 sub rule when the season is condensed and there are more games than usual to play in a shorter period of time.

However there is absolutely no way the 5 sub rule should be considered when things are ‘back to normal’

It suits the bigger clubs

Gives more opportunities for managers to attempt silly time wasting in the closing minutes.

There was nothing wrong with the 3 sub rule before COVID, so why change it after COVID?

Rock77 · 20-11-2020 03:43PM

yourdeadwright wrote: »

3 internationals games in a go is an absolute shambles ,

Personally I don't think they should bother with international's when there is no fans, I under stand league games with the money involved but internationals are aload of b*****

Ireland squad, new manager lots of new young players.. no games to play?? They wouldn’t do too well when the qualifiers come around (and yes I do realise they probably won’t do too well anyway!)

ArmaniJeanss · 20-11-2020 04:16PM

yourdeadwright wrote: »

Personally I don't think they should bother with international's when there is no fans, I under stand league games with the money involved but internationals are aload of b*****

I've mentioned in a few threads that there was a similar money situation in internationals as well.
For instance TV companies had handed over money 18 months ago for this renewal of the Nations League. UEFA had then distributed it to the individual associations. If these games were cancelled there'd be a huge refund due, money that no-one could afford to return (indeed many will already have spent it as soon as they got it).
That's just TV money, added to that most of the associations also make decent small money from pitchside ads and jersey sponsors, again paid in advance and refundable if the matches don't take place.

Gbear · 20-11-2020 04:18PM

yourdeadwright wrote: »

3 internationals games in a go is an absolute shambles ,

Personally I don't think they should bother with international's when there is no fans, I under stand league games with the money involved but internationals are aload of b*****

The FAs are all skint as well. They need the money just as much as everyone else.

Agent Coulson · 20-11-2020 04:38PM

I see Willian decided to jet off to Dubai to party it up for the international break while everyone else was in lockdown.

He needed at bit of that Dubai Salt Bae while there.

Corholio · 20-11-2020 04:40PM

joeguevara wrote: »

Football is a vastly different game than lets say the 1960s. The first substitute used in the English league was 1965. Internationally some world cup qualifiers allowed one substitute.

This was increased to two subs allowed in 1987. In 1994, it was increased to three as long as one was a goalie. 95, allowed any 3 subs.

As there is so much more travel, internationals, cups, etc, why not consider 5 subs to assist. Why hold 3 as sacrosanct, seeing as it was a similar review that allowed it.

Because it's a cheap and lazy solution to fixture congestion and despite what claims are played down, it can only benefit the bigger clubs more. It's not that 3 subs is 'sacrosanct' but before Covid I didn't hear much pressing or any at all for 5 subs, now that some clubs have a taste of it it's like 'You know, this would be handy for us in the long run'.

Also I think 5 subs would give the football authorities more leeway and excuse to jam even more congestion in without actually figuring it out a different way.

joeguevara · 20-11-2020 04:59PM

Corholio wrote: »

Because it's a cheap and lazy solution to fixture congestion and despite what claims are played down, it can only benefit the bigger clubs more. It's not that 3 subs is 'sacrosanct' but before Covid I didn't hear much pressing or any at all for 5 subs, now that some clubs have a taste of it it's like 'You know, this would be handy for us in the long run'.

Also I think 5 subs would give the football authorities more leeway and excuse to jam even more congestion in without actually figuring it out a different way.

Its not entirely correct. For example in 2018, amendments were made in CL matches which increased the amount of subs that you could choose from from 7 to 12 and allowed a team an additional substitute in a knockout match that goes into extra time. It was allow for more flexibility and facilitate squad matches.

https://www.balls.ie/football/uefa-substitutes-champions-league-385932

I thought it was an interesting comparison that World Rugby are considering reducing the number of substitutes to improve player welfare. It made sense that a replacement of lets say a prop, who will scrum against a battered and bruised one could lead to injury etc. I never thought of a speedy winger being brought on in a football match and a tired defender twists their knee as they are trying to turn. Not really a big deal but I wonder has it ever been considered. https://www.independent.ie/sport/rugby/international-rugby/world-rugby-consider-move-to-reduce-number-of-substitutes-39379939.html

A big club would reasopnably be assumed to have better panel than a less big or financially sound one. But it can also be argued that the starting 11 of a smaller club may not be as physically fit as a club that can purchase better players. Getting new feet on may save a smaller club.

At present its necessary with so many injuries occurring. I think its not just about the season being squeezed in, but players losing out a considerable portion of actual training in the lockdown.

But football adapts. Who would have considered only 1 sub. Or 2. Perhaps it would be a control that no player can be brought on for a tactical swap after x minute unless there was a dismissal or an injury. Probably be difficult to control as feigning one is relatively easy.

If everyone can do it and it reduces injuries then it is a positive. In my opinion.

Richard Hillman · 20-11-2020 05:20PM

Corholio wrote: »

IMO the fear is that it will be lobbied for to use in the longer term when clubs will use the 'Oh look at all the competitions we have to play, poor us' routine to try to get it permanently implemented. No problem with a short term use personally.

This is my whole gripe with it. There were never any assurances that it will be temporary. If IFAB said they will 100% return it back to 3 next season then I would be fine with it.

Theres also talk of a concussion sub. Imagine 6 subs in a game. 7 if it goes to extra time :pac:

20-11-2020 05:28PM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

This is my whole gripe with it. There were never any assurances that it will be temporary. If IFAB said they will 100% return it back to 3 next season then I would be fine with it.

Theres also talk of a concussion sub. Imagine 6 subs in a game. 7 if it goes to extra time :pac:

Yeah, imagine players getting to not play the rest of the game after their brain smashes the side of their skull, game's gone...

8-10 · 20-11-2020 05:54PM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

This is my whole gripe with it. There were never any assurances that it will be temporary. If IFAB said they will 100% return it back to 3 next season then I would be fine with it.

They can't really give that guarantee when the pandemic has no set end date. What if this season gets cut short again or delayed until summer and we end up with the same schedule?

Nobody knows 100% where we'll be this time next year

c.p.w.g.w · 20-11-2020 06:29PM

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Arteta is moaning about it this morning (although Sky seem to be on an agenda in ramping it up).

Arsenal have been using their subs but they do have a player earning 350k a week not in the squad because he said some mean things about China.

Yeah he spoke out against China's treatment of wyger Muslims(whats happening is akin to what the Nazi's did, except for the mass gassing)

Potential Underachiever · 20-11-2020 06:44PM

Rock77 wrote: »

In my opinion this debate was going ok for a while and now it’s a disaster.

There is certainly an argument for the 5 sub rule when the season is condensed and there are more games than usual to play in a shorter period of time.

However there is absolutely no way the 5 sub rule should be considered when things are ‘back to normal’

It suits the bigger clubs

Gives more opportunities for managers to attempt silly time wasting in the closing minutes.

There was nothing wrong with the 3 sub rule before COVID, so why change it after COVID?

Last season you could only make the 5 subs in 3 allocated slots just like before, so the time wasting thing does not hold any water.

Agent Coulson · 20-11-2020 09:16PM

Duncan Castles (pinch of salt) reporting on Pep's new contract that he will get a €10m bonus for winning the champions league and if he sees out the two years of the contract he will get a bonus of one years salary.

Not a bad deal three years salary for two years work.

He can also break the contract after the first year if he wants.

There is also an option that Pep moves to New York and takes over New York City FC when if wants once he finishes at Man City.

General Premier League Thread 2020-21 - Mod Notes in 1st post. [Updated 17/12/20]

Comments