Players' union is backing proposals for four substitutes

[fan_of_mulligan]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/32505749

I think a fourth substitute in Extra Time would be a good idea, but what does everyone else on here think ???

[CadburyMan]

Why is it a good idea? I'm open minded on the topic but would want you to convince me

[Kent_UckyFriedGills]

I quite like the rule of 3 substitutes,it makes it more exciting if a player for the opposition goes off injured after his Team have used all their subs.Also it would mean more time wasting as Teams would often use that extra sub deep into injury time.

[Garawa]

I don't see the point. We spent the best part of a century with none. Then we had subs but only in an emergency - that didn't work as players faked injury in order to bring on a replacement. Then we had 3 subs from 3, 3 subs from 5 even 3 subs from 7 I believe. If this goes ahead 4 subs and what next....rolling subs as many as you like??? How many matches have been played since the 3 sub rule was introduce and has there been a major problem with only having 3 in most of them??? No! Heck in 14 games this season we never even made all 3 substitutions and in 2 of those we only made the 1. Clearly not needed and would just lead to more time-wasting as you can always leave one until injury time.

[fan_of_mulligan]

Why is it a good idea? I'm open minded on the topic but would want you to convince me

Three Subs in Ninety Minutes, equals one sub every thirty minutes.

With a additional thirty minutes played in extra time, you keep the ratio of one sub every thirty minutes with a fourth substitute.

90 Mins = 3 subs - one sub for every thirty minutes.
120 Mins = 4 subs - one sub for every thirty minutes.

But I would only have the fourth substitute for when matches go into extra time, if you have used all your substitutes inside ninety minutes and pick up a unexpected injury, then you cannot use a fourth substitute.

[gillsfan1066]

Really don't care that much, kind of swinging towards not needing a 4th sub. The last five minutes of close games are taking 10 minutes to play ,the excitement at the end is beginning to get lost in the substitutions and fake injury's , so I think this will only make it a longer game with players standing around scratching their butts.

[CadburyMan]

So if "professional" athletes and professional managers/tactitions can't get it right in 90 minutes they need even more help. I can't agree that a fourth substitutes is a good idea; Its a bit like changing the rules on speeding because everyone does it

[fan_of_mulligan]

Really don't care that much, kind of swinging towards not needing a 4th sub. The last five minutes of close games are taking 10 minutes to play ,the excitement at the end is beginning to get lost in the substitutions and fake injury's , so I think this will only make it a longer game with players standing around scratching their butts.

I would only agree with a fourth substitute in extra time.

Your talking about the final ten minutes of matches which are being played in the usual ninety minutes, a fourth substitute in normal time isn't something I am agreeing with, but I do think a fourth substitute in extra time will open the game up a bit, both teams are practically playing for penalties in extra time anyway so a fourth substitute might breath life into the additional thirty minutes.

[gillsfan1066]

Ok so it's only for games which are going another 30 minutes ater 90, not regular games, in which case yes that makes sense to have a 4th sub.