12 subs for Champions league

comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 2 hours, 3 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 43 minutes ago
Ridiculous. Football used to be, and still should be 11 v 11. Is it to much to ask so called superfit athletes to play 90 minutes of football.

I would like to see how good modern managers would be if they could only play 11 players in any given match.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Builders used to use asbestos, should still use it now. Is it too much to ask that mechanically strong asbestos is still used in buildings.

I would like to see how good modern builders would be if they could only use asbestos.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Moronic comparison. It would only be comparable if playing with a limited number of substitutions meant players were killed by exhaustion or something. If something kills you then of course you have to change. Not sure a tweaked muscle injury causes death but I'll have to look it up to confirm.

Those that are okay with the increase in available substitutes aren't interested in fair play. All this does is act as a massive safety net for the big teams. Say, for instance, we're beating City or Liverpool at half time. It could be completely undone in the second half because the bigger teams have the greater squad depth to be able to turn a game on its head. Absolute joke of a decision. The same applies to smaller teams facing us. That's unfair too. It's not just the gripe of a Spurs fan. It affects everyone lower than the oil rich elite.

Here's a novel idea - if your players are exhausted and looking like they're about to risk a muscle injury, maybe don't play them and make that decision before a ball is kicked. If managers are so interested in the protection of players they can control the amount of minutes they play.

Imagine this in the FA Cup. A non-league side is about to pull off a major shock. The manager looks to his bench and changes half his outfield side completely. They turn the game around and the bigger team goes through. It's deeply unfair.

comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 2 hours, 3 minutes ago
comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 1 hour, 43 minutes ago
Ridiculous. Football used to be, and still should be 11 v 11. Is it to much to ask so called superfit athletes to play 90 minutes of football.

I would like to see how good modern managers would be if they could only play 11 players in any given match.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Builders used to use asbestos, should still use it now. Is it too much to ask that mechanically strong asbestos is still used in buildings.

I would like to see how good modern builders would be if they could only use asbestos.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Moronic comparison. It would only be comparable if playing with a limited number of substitutions meant players were killed by exhaustion or something. If something kills you then of course you have to change. Not sure a tweaked muscle injury causes death but I'll have to look it up to confirm.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes that would be the only way to make it comparable, if you're an imbecile.

One might be able to use a bit of intelligence to see the point without having it spoon-fed to them.

The point being made is that just because it was that way in the past, when data wasn't available, doesn't mean you should keep doing it, when the data available tells you otherwise.

Reminds me how the company I work for operated, with the dinosaurs in management at the time. I wanted to change things, make things more modern, which would cut costs and maximise productivity and I kept being met with 'oh but it's always been done this way'. I showed them specific data proving my way would work better and they just couldn't get past the fact they've always done it that way. I was just beginning to give up when my director called me in about complaints that I was trying to change things .

He said that he hoped I wasn't thinking of leaving and I was the exact type of person they were trying to recruit, who would challenge the 'it's always been done that way' management. I'm now part of that management and most of the 'it's always been done that way' crowd were moved on.

Times change as we learn more. Sticking to what has always been done doesn't work.

comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 3 hours, 44 minutes ago
What about Donley? Anybody seen him play for the youth teams? Apparently he's swaying towards representing England, rather than Northern Ireland. Will he be good enough?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Looks a great prospect and scored nearly a goal a game for our 18s last season.

Parrot & Gil are almost certainly not going to be here.

comment by MK (U9129)
posted 1 hour, 50 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneRed's (U1721)
posted 3 hours, 44 minutes ago
What about Donley? Anybody seen him play for the youth teams? Apparently he's swaying towards representing England, rather than Northern Ireland. Will he be good enough?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Looks a great prospect and scored nearly a goal a game for our 18s last season.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Interesting. I want him to be good but not quite good enough for England. Will mean he picks Northern Ireland

comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 4 hours, 32 minutes ago
Those that are okay with the increase in available substitutes aren't interested in fair play. All this does is act as a massive safety net for the big teams. Say, for instance, we're beating City or Liverpool at half time. It could be completely undone in the second half because the bigger teams have the greater squad depth to be able to turn a game on its head. Absolute joke of a decision. The same applies to smaller teams facing us. That's unfair too. It's not just the gripe of a Spurs fan. It affects everyone lower than the oil rich elite.

Here's a novel idea - if your players are exhausted and looking like they're about to risk a muscle injury, maybe don't play them and make that decision before a ball is kicked. If managers are so interested in the protection of players they can control the amount of minutes they play.

Imagine this in the FA Cup. A non-league side is about to pull off a major shock. The manager looks to his bench and changes half his outfield side completely. They turn the game around and the bigger team goes through. It's deeply unfair.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Absolutely unfair. Financially doped clubs like Man City can now have a dozen £50 million plus players sitting on the bench, whilst lesser clubs will make up their bench with YTS players. It's a total nonsense.

comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 4 hours, 41 minutes ago
Those that are okay with the increase in available substitutes aren't interested in fair play. All this does is act as a massive safety net for the big teams. Say, for instance, we're beating City or Liverpool at half time. It could be completely undone in the second half because the bigger teams have the greater squad depth to be able to turn a game on its head. Absolute joke of a decision. The same applies to smaller teams facing us. That's unfair too. It's not just the gripe of a Spurs fan. It affects everyone lower than the oil rich elite.

Here's a novel idea - if your players are exhausted and looking like they're about to risk a muscle injury, maybe don't play them and make that decision before a ball is kicked. If managers are so interested in the protection of players they can control the amount of minutes they play.

Imagine this in the FA Cup. A non-league side is about to pull off a major shock. The manager looks to his bench and changes half his outfield side completely. They turn the game around and the bigger team goes through. It's deeply unfair.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Conversely we might see 361 and 730 formations by minnows.

comment by sandy, golden boot winner fa cup 1901 (U20567)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by fridgeboy (U1053)
posted 4 hours, 32 minutes ago
Those that are okay with the increase in available substitutes aren't interested in fair play. All this does is act as a massive safety net for the big teams. Say, for instance, we're beating City or Liverpool at half time. It could be completely undone in the second half because the bigger teams have the greater squad depth to be able to turn a game on its head. Absolute joke of a decision. The same applies to smaller teams facing us. That's unfair too. It's not just the gripe of a Spurs fan. It affects everyone lower than the oil rich elite.

Here's a novel idea - if your players are exhausted and looking like they're about to risk a muscle injury, maybe don't play them and make that decision before a ball is kicked. If managers are so interested in the protection of players they can control the amount of minutes they play.

Imagine this in the FA Cup. A non-league side is about to pull off a major shock. The manager looks to his bench and changes half his outfield side completely. They turn the game around and the bigger team goes through. It's deeply unfair.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Absolutely unfair. Financially doped clubs like Man City can now have a dozen £50 million plus players sitting on the bench, whilst lesser clubs will make up their bench with YTS players. It's a total nonsense.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I hope it backfires. In other sports..too many subs can be disruptive

comment by MK (U9129)
posted 2 hours, 55 minutes ago
Parrot & Gil are almost certainly not going to be here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I hope Conte gives everyone a decent look. Sarr could be a surprise package as could Gil and Parrott in the right positions.