DH1986 Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 Just another example of the self preservation attitude and lack of sporting integrity that is deep rooted in Scottish Football. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Lithuania Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 Don’t have a problem with this. We’ll brush aside every team in the league, could probably do it with 0 subs too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Prentice Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 17 minutes ago, highlandjambo3 said: Anyone know if we voted on this? Everyone is assuming this is aimed at us but until we know how we voted (if we voted) we can't jump to that conclusion. Personally not fashed, three subs is plenty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sub4TiddlerMurray Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 ..on the plus side, any new grievance will be another motivator for the team and it'll add a few more buck from FOH donations Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambo-in-furness Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 3 hours ago, Mikey1874 said: And the Scottish Cup? We are allowed 3, the others 5 you dafty. 🤪 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 6 minutes ago, jambo-in-furness said: We are allowed 3, the others 5 you dafty. 🤪 Scottish Cup is under SFA and hasn't been mentioned yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beni Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 1 hour ago, Pasquale for King said: It was introduced for the sake of the players fitness and likelihood of being injured, like the drinks break. But only for leagues playing to a finish. Not sure why it’s been extended, probably to suit big clubs with huge squads to give more players games. https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/11985236/five-substitutions-per-team-permitted-by-ifab-to-help-aid-players-return But the EPL voted against it.https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11661/12043357/premier-league-clubs-vote-against-allowing-five-substitutes-in-2020-21-season Thanks for the links. It made more sense when they were finishing the leagues on a truncated timescale, but like the EPL have voted, going back to 3 subs for this season seems sensible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Boy Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 57 minutes ago, Last Laff said: To get stuff like the highest TV deal ever. To be a mouthpiece for all the clubs too. People can’t complain Doncaster is paid a ludicrous wage concerned about finances while being delighted the SFA or lower Scottish League clubs are not getting a penny just now. If they do, it’s hypocritical. He needs Peter Lawwell to negotiate the TV deal for him. It’s also his job to get a league sponsor. So the question remains, what is he doing for his pay? Quite why you are choosing to defend d the guy is beyond me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forkbeard Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 (edited) I'd be happy if it went back to one sub. Big squads kill football. Wealthy teams like chelsea just stockpile talented kids and players. The rule is same for all teams. Edited September 30, 2020 by Forkbeard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJGJ Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 Poor decision All the other divisions say 'yes' and ours says 'no'......makes you wonder once more about self interest and the back door attempts to do anything in the hope it will impact upon us Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pasquale for King Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 17 minutes ago, fancy a brew said: Thanks for the links. It made more sense when they were finishing the leagues on a truncated timescale, but like the EPL have voted, going back to 3 subs for this season seems sensible. I think if they had conducted a proper study into it, see if helped injuries or affected the game either way we would have a better idea. It seems weird to keep it at five, I suppose most teams haven’t had a proper pre season perhaps. Surely taking it up to four would’ve been a better compromise and review next summer with all the evidence. The Euros are mentioned in one of the articles, keeping stars fit for that would’ve been a consideration. My biggest disappointment is that it will limit the chances of youngsters getting some minutes when we are well ahead in games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazzas right boot Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 (edited) Professional..... My arse. IMO 3 is enough, but 5 seems to be the way forward in most professional leagues. I would say 3 subs is enough but if the gk is injured or sent off a swap is allowed, so 3 and a gk sub for me. Another shambles tho and further makes Scotland look tin pot. The voting structure is ultimately where it fails and will Continue do so. Edited September 30, 2020 by Smith's right boot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Last Laff Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 31 minutes ago, Beast Boy said: He needs Peter Lawwell to negotiate the TV deal for him. It’s also his job to get a league sponsor. So the question remains, what is he doing for his pay? Quite why you are choosing to defend d the guy is beyond me. **** knows mate I like defending the indefensible 🤣 it’s why I put up with my ex for years. You’re quite right tho, he gets paid for being an unofficial speaker of PL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rudy T Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 1 hour ago, Ford Prentice said: Everyone is assuming this is aimed at us but until we know how we voted (if we voted) we can't jump to that conclusion. Personally not fashed, three subs is plenty. Whats laughable is our national game is run in such a shambolic way. An actual rule change to the game itself and teams can't be arsed voting so they just let it go. You can be sure when they were offered 50k by James Anderson they didn't forget to hit send and they certainly got right on the vote to bin us from the league. But an actual footballing decision nah **** it just leave that one. Jokers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Natural Order Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 (edited) I don't care if it's 2, 3, 5 or 11 subs. We'll smash every tinpot piece of piss club regardless. Edited September 30, 2020 by The Natural Order Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Findlay Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 2 hours ago, Nookie Bear said: You don't see the oddity in 3 divisions having 5 subs and the other division only having 3 subs? Whether it's been done to try and disadvantage us is irrelevant but we now have different rules of the game between the divisions. It's farcical. I agree the rule should be the same for all 4 divisions. I couldnt give a toss whether its 3 or 5. Christ I'm old enough to remember when it was only 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Tolbooth Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 And to think, people actually want these clubs to survive, it's one dig after another, and to have a set of rules that is different for one league compared to the other three leagues, is absolutely laughable! No wonder we're seen as an absolute joke of a league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beni Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 20 minutes ago, John Findlay said: I agree the rule should be the same for all 4 divisions. I couldnt give a toss whether its 3 or 5. Christ I'm old enough to remember when it was only 1 That got me wondering when the change from 1 to 2 subs happened. I was surprised it was 1987, my memory would have put it a bit earlier than that. You should be happy that you're old enough to remember it, but not quite old enough to forget it. 😉 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rods Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 Common sense at our level pandering to the OF at Premier League level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Brightside Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 5 subs ruins the game as there are too many changes. Prefer 3 subs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ToqueJambo Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 I'm not sure whether to be angry about this or not. Think I'll go "not angry" and store it up for the next time we really get shafted which will no doubt be once the league starts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paolo Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 I actually think it is the correct decision. Half a team of subs is ludicrous. I do think it should be the same throughout the leagues at the very least. To have those variants is laughable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real Maroonblood Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 1 minute ago, Paolo said: I actually think it is the correct decision. Half a team of subs is ludicrous. I do think it should be the same throughout the leagues at the very least. To have those variants is laughable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Potter Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 6 hours ago, Clerry Jambo said: We really are a shambles when it comes to fitba in this country Thats being kind bud, we are the laughing stock of Europe, 5 hours ago, David Black said: Do we really need to have a GK on the bench in this league. How often does a GK have to go off injured, very rarely. Once is enough, better having than not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmaroon Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 So, the bigger pool of players for the Uglies isn't a factor or rather, that is exactly what THEY want. Not fair if it might benefit Hearts!!! The hypocrisy is blatant and, the SPFL and Doncaster yet again proving, as McLeish said the governing body is a definition of corruption. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmaroon Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 1 hour ago, John Findlay said: I agree the rule should be the same for all 4 divisions. I couldnt give a toss whether its 3 or 5. Christ I'm old enough to remember when it was only 1 Sorry John, I could pull you up for taking the Lord's name in vain but I'll just settle for, "You're old enough to remember NO substitutes." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Findlay Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 2 minutes ago, colinmaroon said: Sorry John, I could pull you up for taking the Lord's name in vain but I'll just settle for, "You're old enough to remember NO substitutes." My apology for blasphemen😉. 1965 December my first game. So you maybe correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Beni of Gorgie Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 Couldn't care less, but another example of how ****ed up football is in this country Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zico Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 I think this benefits us but it’s yet another example of Scottish football trying to out-tinpot itself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookieboy Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 2 hours ago, fancy a brew said: That got me wondering when the change from 1 to 2 subs happened. I was surprised it was 1987, my memory would have put it a bit earlier than that. You should be happy that you're old enough to remember it, but not quite old enough to forget it. 😉 surely before 1987 ? sure we had two long before that ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NLTFTh Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 Have none of these tinpot outfits went under yet....????? Hurry up... FTh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weakened Offender Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 Bit of an overreaction tbh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Findlay Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 31 minutes ago, cookieboy said: surely before 1987 ? sure we had two long before that ? 1987 is correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1971fozzy Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 I couldn’t care tbh but the reasons for those rats voting against 5 subs is obvious. They wouldn’t want us to have 5 of our squad on the bench given our resources. They’d be putting a YTS type on it (if at all) whereas we would be putting a a Moore / Cochrane / MacDonald etc on it. sooner we get out of this the better Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilmuir Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 3 hours ago, The Old Tolbooth said: And to think, people actually want these clubs to survive, it's one dig after another, and to have a set of rules that is different for one league compared to the other three leagues, is absolutely laughable! No wonder we're seen as an absolute joke of a league. Laughable indeed and we are a joke of a league. But nothing will change unless someone significant puts their head above the parapet and calls it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 4 hours ago, Forkbeard said: I'd be happy if it went back to one sub. Big squads kill football. Wealthy teams like chelsea just stockpile talented kids and players. The rule is same for all teams. I think a lot of substitutions are unnecessary and unhelpful. Managers do it a lot out of habit. It's good when you see no subs made though it's rare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psychedelicropcircle Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 The tramps don’t have five bodies to bench! **** em. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hungry hippo Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 39 minutes ago, 1971fozzy said: I couldn’t care tbh but the reasons for those rats voting against 5 subs is obvious. They wouldn’t want us to have 5 of our squad on the bench given our resources. They’d be putting a YTS type on it (if at all) whereas we would be putting a a Moore / Cochrane / MacDonald etc on it. sooner we get out of this the better We'll still have 7 on the bench. It's just that we can only bring 3 of them on which seems fair enough. Very weird that the rules differ across Scottish leagues though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lone Striker Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 8 hours ago, andydog said: Personally, I think it should only be 3 subs. Clearly 5 subs gives yet another advantage to bigger clubs, in particular rangers and celtic. Most championship clubs will be running with very small squads this year so they'd get little benefit of the extra two subs and clearly ourselves and Dundee would, hardly surprising they voted against it. Not a great look for the spfl to have such inconsistency though. Tend to agree. Which club(s) proposed the 5 sub thing anyway ? Christ .... it was only 1 sub for about 20 years !!! And how can these 2 sentences sit side by side - A SPFL spokesman said "it is important that the clubs in each division decide issues such as this for themselves" given it is a members' organisation. ergo..... members make the decision The SPFL board had already approved the use of up to five substitutes in League Cup and Challenge Cup ties. ergo .....the SPFL board make the decision Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lone Striker Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 2 hours ago, The Real Maroonblood said: Was it the Scotland v Israel match recently where there were 12 subs on the bench for each team ? Ludicrous.... more on the bench than on the pitch !! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey1874 Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Lone Striker said: Was it the Scotland v Israel match recently where there were 12 subs on the bench for each team ? Ludicrous.... more on the bench than on the pitch !! Internationals changed it to the full squad or the top 11 subs. So 2 goalkeepers on the bench. Edited September 30, 2020 by Mikey1874 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1971fozzy Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 37 minutes ago, Hungry hippo said: We'll still have 7 on the bench. It's just that we can only bring 3 of them on which seems fair enough. Very weird that the rules differ across Scottish leagues though. ahh. Cheers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambo-in-furness Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 Does anyone know which way/if Hearts voted? Perhaps we should find out our clubs stance on this before we lambast all and sundry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lone Striker Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 1 minute ago, jambo-in-furness said: Does anyone know which way/if Hearts voted? Perhaps we should find out our clubs stance on this before we lambast all and sundry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beni Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 2 hours ago, cookieboy said: surely before 1987 ? sure we had two long before that ? 1 hour ago, John Findlay said: 1987 is correct. Wikipedia says 87, but I'm thinking that was England. I've found the article below which says it was 73 in Scotland. http://www.scottishleague.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=4744 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Boy Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 Five subs when we are back in the Premiership might help us not get players sent off v Celtic and Rangers. Need to make sure we have a strong bench. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 Like others I think it might well be to our advantage. But this is plain crazy. In a league structure there might be some rationale for the top league to be different from the others or the top two to be different from.the others. But the second tier being different from the top and bottom.two? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
22games nro Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 10 hours ago, sandyk said: It just makes me want us to pummel every frigging club in the division even more No mercy, no letting up Destroy them This !! Obviously we go out to win the games but we should go out to absolutely hammer these twats, never thought I’d say this but I’ll be smiling every time one of them goes out of business . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomaso Posted September 30, 2020 Share Posted September 30, 2020 6 hours ago, Forkbeard said: I'd be happy if it went back to one sub. Big squads kill football. Wealthy teams like chelsea just stockpile talented kids and players. The rule is same for all teams. It’s not. It will not favour Hearts who have bigger squad of players compared to other Championship clubs - and right now I only care about Hearts! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.