Will five playable subs make much difference?

We recently heard that FIFA was agreeable to allow five substitutions per game to help with the completion of the leagues that remain dormant. The Premier League always has seven subs in the bench but only three can be used in a match. So will it make much of a difference if Project Restart goes ahead? I have visions of the days when Sven-Göran Eriksson used to make 10 subs at half-time.

Will five subs really make a difference to matches?

On the face of it, the initial reaction may seem quite calm and unbothered about the option for more subs. We haven't heard as much criticism as we have over playing at neutral grounds, but I do see an advantage to some clubs with the new declaration of five usable subs. It will be another advantage to the bigger clubs that have more expansive squads and more experienced players. They will be able to get more of their millions on the pitch, whereas smaller teams, like dare I say Bournemouth, won't have the same kind of player depth in their squads.

Advertisement

Eddie Had a Dream -now just 9.99!

Looking at Bournemouth's squad and the possible players that would fill the seven places on the bench it might also be a bonus in that the Cherries have quite an attacking squad. Eddie Howe could have the likes of Harry Wilson (if he can continue his loan from Liverpool), Junior Stanislas, Sam Surridge, Dominic Solanke, Arnaut Danjuma and Lewis Cook among their bench options for attacking players, as well as a keeper and defender. But it is more likely that Howe would pick at least two and possibly three defenders on the bench  - Diego Rico, Chris Mepham and Simon Francis.

Advertisement

I think we will only know if it is good thing to increase the number of subs if a team uses the option well and starts making the changes work on the pitch. We don't know if players will find it hard going because they haven't played for weeks, and I don't see it really a measure that I can see will protect the players from the virus, even though it has been described as a player welfare measure. You are just replacing one player with another, so a risk has been taken by the player coming off and the one going on. It's just going to be five subs being exposed to the game instead of three. If anything you are risking more players to contact. But the option is there, and AFCB have to make sure that they know how best to work it when the games start again.

Advertisement

Coastal Garden Buildings

In other news, the Premier League met yesterday and proposed that the league should be finished on 'sporting merit' in an effort to rule out a 'null and void' season and any objections to the neutral ground proposal for 'Project Restart'.

Previous post on Cherry Chimes - The Championship would be worse for AFCB than for the fans

Play or be relegated threat to bottom three

I wondered how long it would take to arguments to really get going, rather than polite suggestions from the Premier League. It appears a number of clubs, Aston Villa, Norwich and Brighton, for example, have been less than keen on playing the remaining matches of this season at neutral venues, which I think is understandable as teams in the bottom half have found points hard to come by. Home advantage is a big help with familiarity of stadiums. But the Daily Mail reports that the Premier League has said if the bottom clubs vote against their dream 'Project Restart' they'll relegate the bottom three with a vote by the other clubs.

Home advantage means everything for bottom clubs.

It's getting childish and petty. The Premier League is stamping its feet and is lobbying the government to get them onside, so it can make its money and get worldwide coverage of the remaining games as a big spectacle, raising the profile of the league even higher. It doesn't care about the fans not being able to attend the games. It doesn't care which teams are relegated, as all the big clubs are well and truly safe. It just wants to see Liverpool gain the title that they deserve and tie up all the loose ends, on relegation and European places, so that their precious league is able to be completed.

Advertisement

Eddie Had a Dream -now just 9.99!

I'd like to be a fly on the wall for the meeting next year to see how AFCB respond. I imagine they will be quite timid and go along with whatever is agreed as good little boys, but there may be more of a protest from the likes of Watford, Brighton and West Ham who are currently above the bottom three and I still think that can scupper the 'Project Restart'. West Ham have constantly taken a stance of 'null and void' as proposed by Karren Brady and I haven't heard any different noises coming from the London stadium since. Brighton's Chairman has been quite vocal about wanting to play at the Amex for Brighton's home games and Watford are going to be fighting tooth and nail to stay up, after getting out of the bottom three.

Advertisement

Coastal Garden Buildings

In the end it may come down to the club's medical staff making the final decision on 'Project Restart'. If the medics say it's really not on for the players safety, what will the Premier League do? I get the impression that they will follow the example set by France, end the season and take the positions as they stand now, which would mean relegation by a goal difference of one for the Cherries.

Advertisement

Previous post on Cherry Chimes - Gosling is set on AFCB for rest of career