Breaking News Subs reduced to five

[Cockle43]

Just seen a tweet fro the club that the Football League has just voted to reduce the number of substitutes from seven to five from the start of this season for all FL competitions ie JPT and League.

Typical, now we've got a decent squad and can name seven half decent subs they reduce the number; odds on the GK sub to be the first to go from most benches?

 

[Gt Yarmouth Shrimper]

Just seen a tweet fro the club that the Football League has just voted to reduce the number of substitutes from seven to five from the start of this season for all FL competitions ie JPT and League.

Typical, now we've got a decent squad and can name seven half decent subs they reduce the number; odds on the GK sub to be the first to go from most benches?

Good move in my opinion.
Can't see too many sub goalkeepers being dropped like that especially with the denying a goalscoring opportunity rule

 

[Jai]

Good to see my CM 0102 game is now bang up to date again on this rule, it was getting on my nerves

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Long overdue move.

They should never have been 7 subs in the first place. Absolutely ridiculous.

 

[Cockle43]

Must admit that I see it as one of the first positive signs that some of the rules are being tweaked to respond to the finance crisis that is football.

It means that squad sizes may slightly reduce but also relieves the pressure that can be exerted by the richer clubs being able to have a pool of seven top players sitting on the bench. Personally I would like to see it go to two subs with a bench of three, one of whom should be a keeper or something along those lines. I would also like to see a rule that subs cannot be used in the last few minutes of a match, be it from 85th, 88th or just in added time; nothing worse IMHO than a pulsating last few minutes with a team chasing the game and applying pressure being constantly interrupted by someone walking slowly to the line for a sub followed 30 seconds later by another.......

 

[Beefy]

Sensible decision. Seven subs was ridiculous.

 

[Stats]

Did teams actually have to name 7 subs previously or was it you can name up to 7?

 

[chapperzUK]

Did teams actually have to name 7 subs previously or was it you can name up to 7?

Name up to 7, I think it was a minimum of 4 as I believe we went to Leeds with only 4 when this rule was still in place.

 

[TravellingBlue]

Agree with Yorkshire Blue (there's a surprise!) but long, long overdue.

 

[BrettieAngell]

Did teams actually have to name 7 subs previously or was it you can name up to 7?

There's been a few occasions over the last couple of years we couldn't fill the bench.

Agreed with everyone else about time they did this.

 

[canveyshrimper]

7 subs was utterly ridiculous, this is a good and common sense move.

 

[Cockle43]

this is a good and common sense move.

That's what amazed me, the powers that be making such a sensible decision, they haven't exactly got a good track record.....

 

[Blue_Shrimper1959]

Good move, and potentially better for us to get some decent players on loan (if and when needed) as before teams in divisions above would fill their benches with youngsters who would benefit more by going out on loan!

 

[Mick]

Name up to 7, I think it was a minimum of 4 as I believe we went to Leeds with only 4 when this rule was still in place.

I don't think there is/was a minimum.

 

[Ayrshire Blue]

I never saw the point in changing to 7 in the first place when you could still only use 3.

 

[ibwiajwa]

Playing devil's advocate for a minute, I do feel that allowing up to 7 subs helped a club like ours with a good youth system to get those players closer to the action.

 

[Shrimper2thecore]

Tilly was right then

 

[Stats]

I cant see what the problem with this 7 subs thing was to be honest, after all it is up to 7, doesnt mean you have to name 7.

End of the day you can only use 3 of them anyway. At least the 7 rule gave opportunity to some youngsters to be named on the bench and be involved in a matchday.