Given that the will he won't he mini saga starring ALF/Mellor is taking up a large chunk of our board, along with the lack of player recruitment etc, here is something bizarre, a post on a completely different subject. Substitutes to be precise.
Given that the Football League has deemed it both necessary and wise to reduce the number of players on the bench from 7 to 5 for the forthcoming season, what are your thoughts on this riveting subject.
Personally I can't see the sense in it at all. I know there are the purists amongst us who will say 'I remember when there was just one sub', and when I started watching Wednesday it was just the two. That said, I think this is an error by the League.
There will be a lot of young lads who would otherwise have had a chance to play due to the fact that they were on the bench, but now that is not the case.
It can't be because the League are looking to protect English or British players as the lower leagues are awash with them.
In the ever more challenging environment of league football I would have thought it would have made sense to ensure that managers had the most amount of players at their disposal. That is obviously not the case.
UP THE OWLS!!!!
This one slipped under the radar.....
posted on 2/8/11
The reasoning I heard from the FA around this is to "make things fairer for smaller clubs with a smaller squad and help them to compete."
Sounded like madness to me. Are some clubs in the football league really struggling to maintain a first team squad of 18? Even if they are what is the harm of bringing in a reserve or youth team player, get them some match day experience even if they don't play. Maybe even get them a chance to impress and get some match action!
This seems like a retrograde step in terms of developing young talent and in terms of allowing managers options. I don't see it adding much value in terms of leveling squad depth playing fields either (though perhaps with salary caps coming in that might make more different.)
posted on 2/8/11
Didn't the managers vote on it though!?
posted on 2/8/11
Well the Ginger Mourinho has just been on SSN and said he's all for it. I would have thought with the amount of players we have the opposite would have been true
Up the owls!!!!
posted on 2/8/11
18 is all about we could confidently put out at the moment anyway!! Maybe this is one way we could keep JOC away from the team, with 7 subs he is more likely to make the bench!!
posted on 2/8/11
You're right i_monster, so I must be missing something!
What's your take?
posted on 2/8/11
Not sure tbh.
As you say, you;d have thought it'd benefit everyone for more people to be involved on a matchday & inparticular being able to get a sub GK on the bench aswell as plenty of outfield players but there's obviously something the managers don't/didn't like about it.
Maybe they just thought it was unneccessary in terms of kitting up 7 extra players 4 of which would just run up & down the touchline a bit, although what difference only havign 2 do that is, I don't know!
posted on 2/8/11
Surely the kit's not one use only and they'd need a shirt for something. I can't imagine 2 extra seats on the coach is breaking the bank either. As you say though, there must be some reason it was voted through.
All I know for certain is that it will annoy me when I'm playing football manager in the future.
posted on 2/8/11
the important things, eh!!
posted on 2/8/11
Either way according to Megson this suits his style and tactics right? Quality not quantity, though it is a mystery to me as well as to the real benefits of this.
posted on 2/8/11
Oh god, it annoys me when you have to do Johnstone Paints and you only have five subs.
Anyway, this is a stupid idea and hopefully seven subs will be back next season. It was the seven subs that allowed Dale Jennings to be let loose.