Substitutes

3 subs from 5, but the opposition manager gets to pick the player coming on

Quoted from Madeleymariner

I would take it back to just 1 sub allowed (but from about 5 on bench) to be used in case of an injury  but then I'm getting old and think a lot of modern football rules are ridiculous

Nice to see you on here, Paul.

Quoted from diehardmariner

Nice to see you on here, Paul.

Gave you a green cross for that

Subs are part of the modern game.  There's something magical about seeing a sub coming on and changing the game, equally so as soul destroying as seeing an opposition sub coming on and snatching the game away from you.

I like the use of subs.  I'd hate to see them removed from the game, but the motives for these increases will be down to income generation.  It'll only be a matter of time before we have allocated subs windows (conveniently sponsored by SkyBet).  

At our level, in fact any level, 3 from 5 should be plentiful.  Even if you've got a goalkeeper on your bench, that's 4 subs covering 10 positions with many of those duplicate positions (centre back, central midfield, striker etc.).

Why have 5 subs? Why not 4 or 6? Might as well make it any player can be subbed once during the match. Makes more sense to me.

Personally I'd prefer 2 or 3 with additional subs allowed for head injuries.

Should be 3 youth graduates on the bench and in order to use substitute 4 and 5, one of your first 3 subs has to be a youth graduate.

Around the time of 'Project Restart' and the introduction of extra subs, there was a piece I read (can't remember where from) that suggested the use of any additional subs should be linked to the player metrics recorded on the day.  

For example with all the monitoring of the players during the game, once a player stays in the red zone for too long, i.e. when they're copulated, their risk of injury and, god forbid, worse was increased dramatically.  Therefore once a player meets a certain threshold, was it the duty of the game to protect them and have an automatic sub for them, one that doesn't count against more tactical changes?

I'm not sure I agreed with the point but it was thought provoking.  My immediate thought was that you can therefore absolutely flog your players with very high level play in the first 45 minutes and then replace them with 10 fresh players to do the same.  That would absolutely play in the hands of the squads of larger quality. Whilst not wanting any player to run the risk of harm, you remove that simple pleasure of seeing a player with fresh legs running at a guy who's absolutely knackered.  Equally so I enjoy seeing the game becoming a war of attrition on heavy pitches.

Far from a perfect system but definitely something I wouldn't be too surprised to see come into play in some guise at some point.

Awe fck it, divide the game into 9 x 10 minute sections, play World Cup doubles with a single pair from each side out on the pitch at any one time. Tag in and tag out when the players are knackered.
Cumulative scoring.

I'd like to see rolling subs like ice hockey but them I'm odd.

That would totally blow Hursts mind  

Quoted from Swansea_Mariner

I'd like to see rolling subs like ice hockey but them I'm odd.

That would totally blow Hursts mind  

Plenty of players roll around these days without being subs.