09 Nov 2020 11:57:31
See klopp crying over the 3 sub rule, blaming TAA injury on it, get a grip klopp you would never of subbed 1 of your wing backs and best players and against city of all teams, I for 1 hope it stays at 3 but maybe if they had to change it then make it that you can bring on 3 senior players and 2 under 18's. nothing wrong with the current system they should be as fit as any other year, 5 subs was brought in to accommodate for the lay off in the lock down and players needing time to get back to full fitness, these bully's just want to bring on 5 superstars when a game is not going their way, it's in no way fair to anyone outside the top 6 or 7 teams.
{Ed001's Note - that's not what it is about at all, just ask Moyes who has also asked for it to be brought back in. As for not subbing Trent, he has done it a lot for Neco Williams when there were 5 subs, so you are wrong. It is nothing to do with being bullies, it is the same for every team, they cannot be as fit as they were because they had no pre-season. There is no midweek training to increase stamina as they are usually jetting around Europe for a match. So players are not getting fitter, quite the opposite as could be clearly seen in the second half yesterday. The game died because both sets of players ran themselves into the ground in the first half.}
09 Nov 2020 12:31:28
So he would of subbed TAA against city? Your having a laugh, jetting around Europe like every other year and are we the only team then that had a pre season? As far as I know everyone had pre season and there wasn’t exactly a long break for the summer like other years, I’m not a Liverpool fan so I don’t know who he had playing during the week but most big teams rotate the squad and with the crop of players he has to choose from there’s no reason he can’t do the same. do u not think my idea about 2 youth players coming on has some substance? At least it would be fair to the smaller teams who can’t bring on 5 big name players?
{Ed001's Note - of course he would have subbed Trent, the lad started the season injured and so is struggling now due to no rest. You had barely a pre-season, just like everyone else, the difference is you don't have any European football to worry about so can build fitness midweek.
The youth players idea is just nonsense. They just wouldn't get used if you do that. Pointless. The smaller clubs already would get the advantage of having fresh legs to bring on as they use energy and intensity to cover the gap in quality. That is why teams like Sheffield Utd are struggling, their players are just running out of steam. Being able to bring on those extra two subs would let them maintain their intensity for 90 mins.
The problem is that so many people only see one side of the argument and fail to understand how it also aids the smaller teams just as much.}
09 Nov 2020 13:34:09
Ok sure if he’s not fully fit he shouldn’t be starting, bring him on for last 30 mins or so till back fully fit, I get your point about pre season but we’re 7-8 games in at this point, pre season is a distant memory and only in place for teams to hit the ground running in the first few games, did TAA start mid week? If he did then that’s 3 games in a week for an unfit player that has got no rest, that’s klopps own fault if that’s the case it’s his job to protect his players, players get injured every year for different reasons it’s nothing to do with 3 or 5 subs it’s just 1 of those things, I disagree about the youth players, you say they wouldn’t get used? So clearly then it’s not about protecting the players it’s about having 2 extra top class players to bring on instead, let’s call it like it is here, the youth players in the big clubs are as good if not better than most bench players outside the top 10, it just looks like again the big clubs wanting special treatment, like the VVD injury, absolute uproar but not a thing about Wesley last year, we are well past pre season so at this point in time this year is no different in terms of fitness, European games and so on than any other year, TAA got injured cause he’s not fit to play 90 mins so why start him. on the Sheffield thing they are struggling cause they didn’t strengthen with quality to push on from last year typical second season syndrome, they can’t score goals cause they don’t have a good striker and teams are onto them after surprising teams last year, we made 1 sub last night and played with intensity throughout we just have better players than those at the bottom of the table. I take it your a Liverpool fan?
{Ed001's Note - that is not how it works with fitness. The players playing in Europe are literally only doing recovery work and not getting any real training. You think I am referring to Liverpool not using the youth players? I was talking about in general, Klopp has used Jones, Williams (both of them) and was happy to bring through Trent, so he would have no problem with it, but that is not going to change the whines from the small minded who think it is biased against them. They will just say it is easy for the big teams as they have a better academy to choose the players from, they would have a point as well, as it does favour the big teams. How can Burnley possibly hope to bring through quality from their academy when they only get to pick from the left overs?
It is all about protecting the players, but I wouldn't expect you to understand as you are making no attempt to see anyone else's side. This is polntless, you are not making any attempt to understand, you are obviously close minded and have made up your mind. Typical of the hard done by, who always think that everything is being done to benefit everyone else rather than your team, because that makes it easier than accepting your struggles as a team in the past are down to your club's poor management. Much easier to blame the league being biased.}
09 Nov 2020 14:07:33
Whacky I am with you all the way, and totally agree with you mate, the point you make about the 2 under 18s or 23s would go a long way for the encouragement of the younger players.
I feel the 5 subs would only benefit the bigger clubs as usual, another point I would like to make, my son in law is a real big Liverpool fan, and he is also against it.
09 Nov 2020 14:20:52
But I do understand where your coming from, you guys have the players and ye want to use them I totally get that but it’s still unfair on the lower poorer clubs who don’t have enough strength in depth, yes some of their players might benefit from 5 subs but their results won’t benefit when they have to bring on poorer players v the quality that Liverpool Chelsea city can bring on, European football has always being the same, teams that play in Europe have had to suffer a little after a midweek game, it’s not just me on my small mind it went to a vote and it didn’t pass so clearly the people at these clubs that know more than you and me don’t want it, so I done some research on your game mid week, TAA started, ye were winning 5-0 after 54 mins yet klopp left TAA on the pitch for 82 mins, a player u say hasn’t being fit, completely no need for him to play that long at 5-0 up if he’s carrying something or not 100% never mind the fact ye would have to play city a few days later, so my main point here is klopp trying to blame the system that he’s getting hard done by instead of looking at his own decision making, anyone other than a Liverpool fan can see he’s only using it as excuse to try force the whole 5 sub rule, and I’m in complete agreement about our struggles in the past being down to poor management a blind man could see that, Randy learner screwed us over big time, no villa fan blames the league or bias for our struggles. big picture another thing not voted in, big clubs wasn’t to control everything which in turn would allow them to change such rules at their own will, but that didn’t work so then it’s let’s create a super league and pressure them that way, if you support any team other than the super powers you would see it from our perspective, you want us to see it your way we want you to see it our way so the answer lays somewhere in between is my guess,
{Ed001's Note - so why keep bringing up the Wesley thing, for example?
As for the subs, we had 10 players on the pitch who are struggling in the 'red zone', he can't take them all off. It is the same for all the teams in Europe.
As for the vote, it was club chairman that voted, not managers, most of whom know f all about the game.
I understand what you are saying about the quality of subs, but that is not the point. The starting 11s are already showing the same imbalance in quality, but the weaker sides usually use energy and workrate to counterbalance it. Having two extra sets of fresh legs to bring on to maintain that energy is as much of an advantage as bringing on better players.
The problem is that you think I am looking at it from only a Liverpool perspective, when it is not me looking at it from one view only. That is you as a Villa fan saying let's just have two youth players as we have a good youth team. That would benefit Liverpool massively over the likes of Sheff Utd or Burnley, so why do you think I am against that if I am only looking at it from a Liverpool perspective? Liverpool's youth team is excellent at the moment, that would be fine for us. However, most of the smaller clubs, which Villa aren't, something you seem to forget, have to compete for scraps in the youth. Burnley have to compete with both Merseyside clubs, both Manchester clubs and numerous others to recruit. Their star youth product was a Man Utd reject iirc. Villa only have Birmingham in genuine competition and so get the pick, mostly. So it would benefit you, it would benefit Liverpool and Chelsea, but the likes of Sheffield United, Burnley etc would be far more disadvantaged than if they could just choose anyone off their bench.
The Super League stuff is utterly irrelevant to this and nothing to do with it. Sadly that is down to idiot owners who don't understand the sport and only interested in money. It is simply not related to this problem of the lack of any chance for players to train properly at the moment. This is not a normal season, the shortened break meant that players were coming back still jaded. Then there was a shortened pre-season, which meant no players actually got fully fit. Then we have game after game, with lots of travelling thrown in, meaning the players are not able to train for fitness at all, just play and then do recovery work. That is why the injury count in the Premier League is the highest ever seen across the board. Every club is suffering.}
09 Nov 2020 14:49:39
Me personally I'm all for 5 subs but they could change it slightly by allowing 2 players if injured to be substituted. I mean we have another international break with 1 of the games being pointless the games this season IMO are geared up more for clubs that are not in Europe than those that are let's face it if we was in Europe I'm sure we would be calling for this but that's just my opinion but a good topic of debate.
{Ed001's Note - personally I hate 5 subs, it ruins the game, but the players need it, especially those that have had cv. Even now, weeks after he has come back, Mane is still not at the same level he was before it. We just need to give them all a bit of a chance for this season then dump it when things go back to normal. Otherwise the 5 subs each makes games end up feeling like those pointless friendlies.}
09 Nov 2020 15:00:37
Maybe there could be a compromise for now and make it 4 subs allowed. Failing that what about for each game if both clubs agree to 5 subs before the game then so be it, 5 subs it is then, if one club doesn’t agree to it then it stays at 3 for that particular game. This way you would probably find more and more clubs agreeing to 5 subs, as they see the advantages of it over the course of a season.
{Ed001's Note - decent compromise that.}
09 Nov 2020 15:03:58
I only used the Wesley thing to point out that the bigger clubs get a bit more consideration than the lower guys, we will have to agree to disagree on a few points lol, I do enjoy a good debate👌 I guess my main point is that TAA didn’t get injured cause of 3 sub rule, he shouldn’t of played 82 mins mid week if not fully fit, he could of came off after 60 mins 5 nil up, so I’m saying klopp is wrong to blame that Imo, I know you guys have a great academy and I’d love to see youth getting more of a chance, also it’s great to see the home grown players doing well this year, bamford, ings, Ollie, jack, Kane all banging in the goals, more on the list I’m sure just those come to mind. of all the teams I think Chelsea benefit most from 5 subs,
{Ed001's Note - Klopp had to take off others. There were other players who were more tired, like I said. Liverpool would have made more changes but they have injuries which limits Klopp's options in other positions, meaning they have to take priority when subs are made. 5 subs won't stop there being injuries anyway, it will just reduce them. You can only mitigate risk by reducing fatigue, not completely avoid it. But you give Klopp Matip or VVD fully fit mid-week and he can then risk taking off TAA early as there is an experienced centre-back next to Williams, rather than a 17 year old, who is also Williams. Atalanta are one of the top scoring teams in the game, you do not want to give them any sniff of hope with that much time left.}
09 Nov 2020 15:33:00
He only made 2 subs in total though, we are never fully going to agree lol, I like mark idea of the clubs agreeing on number of subs before each game I think that would suit lots of games, here’s an example for you, take our game last night we were on top of arsenal for most of the game, arsenal being a bigger team realistically, you will have games where the smaller teams will catch out the big guys and grab a win but if a team can swap 5 of their 10 outfield players it will often turn a game on its head and take the chance of a win off the smaller team, subs change games and 5 is better than 3, the small team needs a bit of luck against the big team usually, I think from that aspect it will help big team more than small team, I see your point about there being big gulf in class in the first 11’s as it stands but the drop off on the bench player lvls is huge for small teams including ourselves, as I said I like marks idea, and maybe look back at the stats come seasons end and if statistically more games had 5 subs then maybe put it to vote again and see if minds have being changed.
{Ed001's Note - I know he made 2 subs, because managers are now holding them back in case of another injury. Last thing you want against Citeh is to be down to 10 men.
More subs is not better, it usually breaks up the game, alters the flow as the teams have to adjust, which gives the smaller teams more chance to see out a result. It is very rare that you ever see a team benefit from changing half a team, you only have to look how rotation is causing so many freak results this season. Half a team changed means disjointed performances, changing half a team mid-game makes it even worse. In just about every other country bar the UK they are using the 5 subs and it was the smaller clubs that wanted it. The problem is that we are still, as usual, bar a couple of managers, 20 years behind the continent in our approach to the game. We still have pundits, coaches and media sneering at sports science and stats-based recruitment and not willing to embrace change or to look at how to make it work for them.}