Five Subs

[usav]

So it looks like this will get voted in tomorrow.  Any objections here?   

There are some games this season I would have happily subbed the entire team off, so I'm ok with it.  I see Sean Dyche's point and understand somewhat, but with the amount of games the top players are playing something had to give and this is just a small part of that, IMO.

[Lastfootstamper]

I'll accept the player welfare argument if it's also written into the rules that no player is allowed to play more than a prescribed number of consecutive games.

[eamonn]

Thought this was a new Five Guys-Subway joint-venture.

[algy]

So it looks like this will get voted in tomorrow.  Any objections here?   

Same feeling as the season we came up.  More subs favours teams with larger, and deeper, squads.

I think we'll benefit from it as a club, but it stinks of pulling the drawbridge up on Championship sides.  I'm quite against it.

[Woofles The Wonder Dog]

I still think this will allow the top teams to overwhelm lesser ones. The bench for Man City is depressingly awesome, for example. If we progressed in a similar fashion I’d be all for it.

And yes I am a hypocrite.

[cdbearsfan]

Another excuse for Man City to stockpile players. Shite rule, get it to fuck.

[paul_e]

I'm for it but I'd like some restrictions to ensure the extra spaces are used to bring youn players through. I'd also like to see limits on how many games players are allowed to play in.

[Brazilian Villain]

I'm for it but I'd like some restrictions to ensure the extra spaces are used to bring youn players through.

I understand the arguments against it but I've come around to it albeit with the above proviso.

[cdbearsfan]

I'm for it but I'd like some restrictions to ensure the extra spaces are used to bring youn players through. I'd also like to see limits on how many games players are allowed to play in.

The first plan would stifle development by making players stay for the odd five minutes here and then rather then going on loan where they can play all the time while the second sentence sounds like an utterly dreadful idea. Another one which would help the Man Citys of this world. You know that if teams had to rest players in certain games the likes of Burnley and Watford would all choose Man City/Liverpool, etc, making those matches even more unbalanced.

If they want to play fewer games, get rid of the Champions League Group Stage.

[Smithy]

I'd accept teams using five subs, but only if two of them have to be homegrown.

[German James]

Absolute nonsense transparently designed to give an advantage to the richest teams. It enables teams, already able to stockpile the best players, to promise new recruits game time. There is no other conceivable reason for it.

[Steve67]

Ok, so, to balance things up, why not tell every club that they MUST all use all five subs, every game.  No?  That's because the whole thing is balanced for the larger, money grabbing teams and the FA will no doubts cave in, because they have no bollocks. 

[cdbearsfan]

Or just leave it as it is. Players are fitter than ever before, have a better diet and access to better medical and physiological treatment than ever before and play fewer matches than they have for decades. They don't need any more rest. It's another power grab by the elite and if you tolerate this, the cups will be next.

[mrfuse]

I'm fine with it as it is.

I'm not even sure it will actually benefit teams as when more subs are used in friendlies it never improves the games.

[Gareth]

I’m fine with it so long as it is decided upon before the transfer window opens….integrity (not a word PL are familiar with the definition of) should dictate that rules like this have to be in place to allow all teams to plan appropriately