What's new

No subs after 90 mins

Krule

Carpe Diem
Jun 4, 2017
4,534
8,687
The Times has an article where it states there is a plan to ban substitutions during injury time. Admittedly the majority of them are to burn up vital seconds and by no means necessary so I can understand the logic....what does everyone else think....good idea or bad ??
 

EQP

EQP
Sep 1, 2013
7,991
29,764
What about legitimate injuries? Also, they might as well ban players from congregating at the corner flag to eat up time if they're concerned about time wasting.
 

Syn_13

Fly On, Little Wing
Jul 17, 2008
14,851
20,659
What they should be doing is making sure the refs actually enforce the extra time added for time wasting and subs during injury time. Too many times do you get 3 mins of injury time ending on the dot despite a sub being made during that period and wasting a good 30 seconds.
 

yankspurs

Enic Out
Aug 22, 2013
41,954
71,368
What they should be doing is making sure the refs actually enforce the extra time added for time wasting and subs during injury time. Too many times do you get 3 mins of injury time ending on the dot despite a sub being made during that period and wasting a good 30 seconds.
This happens a ton and they blow the whistle before the full 3 mins anyway even with a sub. Too many time they blow at 92:55 or 92:56. Granted, a few seconds is t going to do anything whatsoever but it just goes to show that they dont give the full stoppage time all the time to begin with, let alone adding time for a sub. The only times they ever add meaningful time to stoppage is in the case of an injury during stoppage.
 

Dougal

Staff
Jun 4, 2004
60,367
130,251
Ooh. I’ve just had an idea about what they can sell in the big new shop.



Josh Onomah.
 

cider spurs

Well-Known Member
Jul 5, 2016
9,401
23,734
No subs after 90 mins

Feck dat. Far too long to wait for a sandwich. Feck the sub of the day.

Maccy D happy meal innit. Word up, peace out.
 

cider spurs

Well-Known Member
Jul 5, 2016
9,401
23,734
Bad idea.

To weaken a teams chances through prevention of legitimate substitution through injury, in injury time, should not IMO be seen as a fair contest.

Could quite easily end up 11 v 10 and the extra man giving the upper hand to secure the win.

Nope, as per others. Let's just have the ref's properly enforcing, and adding the correct amount of extra minutes.
 

SlotBadger

({})?
Jul 24, 2013
13,912
43,626
What they should be doing is making sure the refs actually enforce the extra time added for time wasting and subs during injury time. Too many times do you get 3 mins of injury time ending on the dot despite a sub being made during that period and wasting a good 30 seconds.
See Roma vs Liverpool in the CL last season as a prime example. I'm still raging over the paltry addition of 3 minutes, in which there was a sub and a penalty, yet the ref blew for full-time as soon as Liverpool restarted play. ****!
 

jamesinashby

Well-Known Member
Jun 5, 2017
465
985
The Times has an article where it states there is a plan to ban substitutions during injury time. Admittedly the majority of them are to burn up vital seconds and by no means necessary so I can understand the logic....what does everyone else think....good idea or bad ??

Definitely not before time. It irks me to the extent I could throw a brick at the TV screen. Like shirt tugging and wrapping arms around the opponents. For me it is blatant cheating but clearly encouraged by all managers. It was meant to be stopped by making it a punishable offence but, for me, too many refs let it go too often.
 

JCRD

Well-Known Member
Aug 10, 2018
19,153
30,013
Shit rule

If youre winning in injury time, you have deserved the right to be tactical.
 

Saoirse

Well-Known Member
Aug 20, 2013
6,161
15,640
Why complicate things? We have the technology now where we don't need to estimate how much time has been wasted etc, we can stop the clock whenever play is stopped and make most time-wasting impossible. You'd be down to just trying to keep it in the corner which at least comes with some risk and requires some footballing ability.
 

huey975

New Member
Jul 30, 2005
9
1
I would like to see some sort of time limit on how long a player has to leave the field once there number is held up by the fourth official, maybe 30 seconds to leave the field of play
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Jul 24, 2005
30,536
46,630
I would like to see some sort of time limit on how long a player has to leave the field once there number is held up by the fourth official, maybe 30 seconds to leave the field of play

And just make them go off on the side of the pitch that's closest to them rather than walking slowly towards their replacement.
 

Spurs 1961

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
6,683
8,754
Why complicate things? We have the technology now where we don't need to estimate how much time has been wasted etc, we can stop the clock whenever play is stopped and make most time-wasting impossible. You'd be down to just trying to keep it in the corner which at least comes with some risk and requires some footballing ability.

Just that!
 

teok

Well-Known Member
Aug 11, 2011
10,867
33,715
It wouldn't be enforceable because players would pretend to be injured. If you want to stop time wasting just have physios come on the pitch while the game is playing on to treat players (if it's an obvious serious incident like a clash of heads or what ever the ref stops the play).

This would completely get of rid of tactical cramp etc.
 

'O Zio

Well-Known Member
Dec 27, 2014
7,405
13,785
I don't think you need to ban subs after 90 mins because it wouldn't work for all the reasons mentioned above. What needs to happen is the refs need to actually start applying added time correctly i.e. if the player takes 30 seconds to walk off then 30 seconds should be added to the game. By far the simplest way would be stopping the clock like in other sports. Research has shown that the ball is only in play for something like 60 mins during each match, so if you stop the clock you'd have to change it to 30 min halves otherwise games would be almost 1/3 as long but it would cut out so much nonsense from the game and have no real downside that I can see.
 

Japhet

Well-Known Member
Aug 30, 2010
19,272
57,627
I don't see what the problem is with Refs (or another official) stopping the clock when time is being wasted. The Ref sometimes points to his watch but I don't think the amount of time added is representative of the amount that usually gets wasted. Refs calling 'time out' works pretty well in Rugby so it can be done.
 

Sandros Shiny Head

Well-Known Member
Aug 20, 2013
4,794
8,765
Maybe have a rule that a player can only be subbed off late if they're injured, and to prove it's serious enough to go off miss the next competitive match. If you've pulled a muscle or worse you'll miss games anyway and if not then battle through the last 3 or so minutes
 
Top