7 players on the bench for eL?

[sullanefc]

What do we always have to copy England?

Well, we have been copying england by having 5 subs all along. The move to 7 subs would be copying the rest of the football world.

Would only make sense if required 2-3 players to be U21.

Well, they do that in Scotland dont they, 7 subs but 3 or 4 have to be youth players.

I think that's a good idea. 2-3 players in your squad must be youth players.

[ramsfan]

if we have seven subs , the physio will probably have to kit out to make up the numbers

and it has taken us a year and a bit to build a stand, god knows how long it will take to add another couple of seats to the dug out, in the mean time it will be cosy in there

[Buile Shuibhne]

Didn’t see it myself, but apparently there was a report in one of yesterday morning’s tabloids about a separate controversy at the St Pats Vs Sligo match on Friday?

Apparently Pats had seven subs on the teamsheet / bench.

One of the Pats backroom staff – Mick Byrne? – said he had spoken to the ref about it between 6.00pm and 6.30pm, but Mr Buttimer denys this saying he didn’t arrive at the ground until 6.40pm?

Anyone know anything about this ?


AFAIK the English Premiership have voted to allow 3 from 7 subs, starting from their 2008-2009 season, but the eL is still 3 from 5 ???????

[TheBoss]

Shows the 4 unused subs here for Pats

http://www.sligorovers.com/content/view/493/1/

[Dodge]

Think the report was in the sun.

We definitely had 7 subs on bench 9interestingly none warmed up at ht).

Story goes that there were 7 spaces on team sheet handed to club so Mick Byrne asked Buttimer are we allowed 7 subs now (apparently clubs weren't informed about the change from 3 to 5 a couple of years ago) and Buttimer said yes. Buttimer was definitely in the ground before 6.30 as a wll known forum member was speaking to him.

Buttimer didn't mention anythign to the club when they submitted the sheet. Too busy trying to get kits to clash I presume.

[neutrino]

If 7 subs are allowed (which i dont think they are) then surely other teams would have named 7 subs on their teamsheets.

Having named 7 is a technicality and cant see the implications. Not like it impacted the game - be different if a sub too many was let on or something - shouldnt think much will come of it.

[seand]

But Pats did have an advantage in having 7 subs on the bench. They had more options, they could have cover more positions. It will be interesting to see how this one pans out. Presumably there's nothing in the rule book about naming more players than you're allowed, so it might be hard to punish them. Either way this could run and run.

Still it's comforting to know that we are paying for FOUR officials at every match who evidently don't even bother looking at the teamsheet.

[neutrino]

But Pats did have an advantage in having 7 subs on the bench. They had more options, they could have cover more positions. It will be interesting to see how this one pans out.

hmm i see. In this case give sligo rovers the points

[noby]

Presumably there's nothing in the rule book about naming more players than you're allowed

Pretty pointless rule book so. Every team would have their whole squad on the bench if that's the case.

[seand]

Pretty pointless rule book so. Every team would have their whole squad on the bench if that's the case.

True. Actually, there has to be something, somewhere in the rules that states how many subs are allowed. Assuming it is still 5 it's going to be hard for Pats to 'prove' that Buttimer told them otherwise.

[Redie]

This is unbelievable. The filling out of a match card and the naming of subs is a fundamental element of pre-match procedures, at any level be it Youths, Junior or Senior football and I would be certain that the rule book is crystal clear with regards to how many subs can be named. There is an obvious advantage in having 7 subs to call on as opposed to 5, what's going on? Actually last season we were fined for having a suspended player who travelled with the team watching the game from the dug-out and I think it may have been against St. Pats'

[redtildead]

I know it makes no difference to result but it is still something that should be looked at.

Anyone would spot something wrong by looking at a teamsheet and seeing one team had 5 and one had 7 subs.

[Redie]

Got this on the FIFA Web-Site from the latest edition of 'The Laws of the Game'.

Up to a maximum of three substitutes may be used in any match played in an official competition organised under the auspices of FIFA, the confederations or the member associations.

The rules of the competition must state how many substitutes may be nominated, from three up to a maximum of seven.

[forza rovers]

This is unbelievable. The filling out of a match card and the naming of subs is a fundamental element of pre-match procedures, at any level be it Youths, Junior or Senior football and I would be certain that the rule book is crystal clear with regards to how many subs can be named. There is an obvious advantage in having 7 subs to call on as opposed to 5, what's going on? Actually last season we were fined for having a suspended player who travelled with the team watching the game from the dug-out and I think it may have been against St. Pats'

against cork last season brian cash was on the bench when he wasnt supposed to be he ended up getting fined and suppend another game

[ramsfan]

surely the fourth official must have seen whats going on and i aggree if they had 7 and should have only had 5 they were gaining a significant advantage from it

[Ambaiste!]

If I were a conspiracy theorist, I'd say Buttimer's going out of his way to get Pats in trouble! Hard to imagine that they would just stick two extra subs on the bench without confiming that this was ok with the officials. I disagree with people saying it's insignificant and that it doesn't affect the result, especially as Pat's did use three of their subs.

I can see the FAI fining / docking points from Pat's just to get Buttimer out of jail, but in reality the man is a joke of a ref. I can understand the jersey fiasco in a way (i.e if he'd gotten a handball wrong over the sleeves) but I can't understand how he could have been so fussy about the jerseys and then miss the fact that Pat's had two extra players listed on their team sheet! He and all the officials involved should be disciplined over this.

[Ambaiste!]

against cork last season brian cash was on the bench when he wasnt supposed to be he ended up gatting

Supernaggin up the jumper was it?! A must for those chilly Friday nights!

[Buile Shuibhne]

I've a copy of the teamsheet for Shels Vs Dundalk last Friday, filled out on the official League form.

There are seven rows available under the 'Reserves' section.

Shels & Dundalk listed five subs each with both leaving the last 2 rows blank

[Ambaiste!]

I've a copy of the teamsheet for Shels Vs Dundalk last Friday, filled out on the official League form.

There are seven rows available under the 'Reserves' section.

Shels & Dundalk listed five subs each with both leaving the last 2 rows blank

I remember when the rule changed in the English League people were wondering if we would follow suit, but no announcement was made as far as I can remember. And seeing as Pat's were the only team to go for the seven (and at the last minute too it appears), it seems that the clubs weren't informed of any change either

[TonyD]

Don't see how Pats can get into trouble for this when the ref passed the team sheet. Surely it's up to the officials to ensure that everything is in order ?

It's just not credible to think that any club would just decide "ah sure we'll stick a couple of extra subs on the sheet and see what happens" Especially Pats, given past history. If it comes down to who is telling porkies, I'd believe Mick Byrne over Buttimer any day. Is it possible that an FAI referee didn't actually know how many subs are permitted this year, and is now lying to cover his rear end ? Perish the thought.