Rule change in the Scottish cup

[Monts]

I noticed the SFA tweeted after today's draw that if a game goes to extra time, teams can use a 4th substitute.

Hadn't seen that mentioned anywhere.

Interesting rule, and a good one IMO.

[bubblesmorrison]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I noticed the SFA tweeted after today's draw that if a game goes to extra time, teams can use a 4th substitute.

Hadn't seen that mentioned anywhere.

Interesting rule, and a good one IMO.

Was this not tested in the Olympics this year or did I imagine that?

[The_Exile]

Rolling subs is the way forward IMO, would make the game much more tactically interesting if you could change the way your team is shaped any time you wanted, a changed I've wanted to see for as long as i can remember.

[hibbysam]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I noticed the SFA tweeted after today's draw that if a game goes to extra time, teams can use a 4th substitute.

Hadn't seen that mentioned anywhere.

Interesting rule, and a good one IMO.

I think it's a ***** rule, allowing managers to play their hand earlier knowing they will receive a "bonus sub" in ET.

[Smartie]

How about "the rules of association football apply to all players in a Scottish Cup tie, except David Gray who can do whatever the f*** he likes" as an alteration to the rules as a form of tribute to his contribution to the competition?

It's an amendment of an old rule that has applied to various players over the years, such as John Greig, Willie Miller and Richard Gough.

[greenteam]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think it's a ***** rule, allowing managers to play their hand earlier knowing they will receive a "bonus sub" in ET.

Help me out here? Does it mean after we have used 3 subs or just an added sub?

[Andy74]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think it's a ***** rule, allowing managers to play their hand earlier knowing they will receive a "bonus sub" in ET.

What's the negative in that?

[adhibs]

Extra time can be pretty dreary with fatigue kicking in. This change could make things a bit more exciting, soubds alright to me.

[Michael]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Help me out here? Does it mean after we have used 3 subs or just an added sub?

Up to 3 subs in 'normal time' and up to 4 in 'normal time' + 'extra time'.

[HoboHarry]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think it's a ***** rule, allowing managers to play their hand earlier knowing they will receive a "bonus sub" in ET.

Really can't think what you are on about here? It's the same for both managers and simply allows for an extra sub if an additional 30 minutes is required.....

[hibbysam]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Really can't think what you are on about here? It's the same for both managers and simply allows for an extra sub if an additional 30 minutes is required.....

The fact just now you have to weigh up whether or not to make a sub with 15 to go, in case it goes to ET and you get an injury/fatigue etc. Now you can just make the sub anyway knowing fine well if it goes the distance you will have an extra sub... If we go this way we would be as well just having unlimited subs. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the rule in the first place and this just gives those with the bigger squads an even greater advantage if it happens to go to ET.

[snooky]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

What's the negative in that?

I think it's the bit where he typed *****

[Spike Mandela]

The only rule change in the Scottish cup that matters is the one where the BBC, the Record, all other media outlets and sad Jambo ****ers can't mention the Hibs hoodoo, 114 years or 1902 anymore.

[Mibbes Aye]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Rolling subs is the way forward IMO, would make the game much more tactically interesting if you could change the way your team is shaped any time you wanted, a changed I've wanted to see for as long as i can remember.

Rolling subs is the rule in children's/youth football at least up until under-13s, I'm not sure what age fixed subs kicks in.

At pro level you would use it differently, as you suggest it would become a tactical tool. With age groups it's as much about giving people a runout and giving them gametime commensurate with their capacity.

I would be interested to see it trialled. Football doesn't have fixed positions in the way that rugby does, so making a change can mean a significant shift in tactics or strategy

[Monts]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The fact just now you have to weigh up whether or not to make a sub with 15 to go, in case it goes to ET and you get an injury/fatigue etc. Now you can just make the sub anyway knowing fine well if it goes the distance you will have an extra sub... If we go this way we would be as well just having unlimited subs. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the rule in the first place and this just gives those with the bigger squads an even greater advantage if it happens to go to ET.

I'd rather managers actually went out to win it, rather than try and play it safe just in case there's an injury in extra time.

[Eyrie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The fact just now you have to weigh up whether or not to make a sub with 15 to go, in case it goes to ET and you get an injury/fatigue etc. Now you can just make the sub anyway knowing fine well if it goes the distance you will have an extra sub... If we go this way we would be as well just having unlimited subs. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the rule in the first place and this just gives those with the bigger squads an even greater advantage if it happens to go to ET.

Did you feel the same when they changed from permitting two subs to three?

[McD]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The fact just now you have to weigh up whether or not to make a sub with 15 to go, in case it goes to ET and you get an injury/fatigue etc. Now you can just make the sub anyway knowing fine well if it goes the distance you will have an extra sub... If we go this way we would be as well just having unlimited subs. There was absolutely nothing wrong with the rule in the first place and this just gives those with the bigger squads an even greater advantage if it happens to go to ET.

Surely squad size doesn't matter, as both teams will have named the same number of starters and substitutes?

[hibbysam]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Surely squad size doesn't matter, as both teams will have named the same number of starters and substitutes?

Shouldn't have said squad size, should have said one side with a starting XI plus one or two decent back ups (a lower league side) against a top side who have 7 subs all capable of starting, giving them an additional option to come off the bench gives them a huge advantage.

[Just Jimmy]

***** rule. As with the league cup its just rearranging deck chairs on the titanic. Fix the bigger problems in our game first. Nonsense.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[lord bunberry]

It will be used as a tactic to waste time.

[Man Down Under]

I think it will make the game better to watch. Sure it's less of a gamble for the managers to use all their subs before full time, but it's better than watching 2 knackered teams make mistakes before inevitable penalties.

Sent from my SM-J200Y using Tapatalk

[scoopyboy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Shouldn't have said squad size, should have said one side with a starting XI plus one or two decent back ups (a lower league side) against a top side who have 7 subs all capable of starting, giving them an additional option to come off the bench gives them a huge advantage.

Would you interpretation not mean though Sam that the higher league team were trying to hold out for extra time against a lower league team?

Dangerous strategy that?

[hibbysam]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Would you interpretation not mean though Sam that the higher league team were trying to hold out for extra time against a lower league team?

Dangerous strategy that?

Not really, Scoop. 10 minutes to go and they have used 2 subs. They can chuck fresh legs on in the hope they win the game, now knowing fine well that should it go to ET that they can then bring yet another sub on in ET. It's a no lose situation for the higher ranked side with more resources, where the smaller side will be at an even bigger disadvantage.

[Hibee87]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not really, Scoop. 10 minutes to go and they have used 2 subs. They can chuck fresh legs on in the hope they win the game, now knowing fine well that should it go to ET that they can then bring yet another sub on in ET. It's a no lose situation for the higher ranked side with more resources, where the smaller side will be at an even bigger disadvantage.

You could say the same about the bigger teams 3 subs during the game as well then........

[Jack Hackett]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Surely squad size doesn't matter, as both teams will have named the same number of starters and substitutes?

With you on that point, unless of course you wear a magic hat and send all your players out on loan and cannae use them when the going gets tough...which is totally unfair 'cos he would have won a big cup and got into Europe if only.....

[Eyrie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

With you on that point, unless of course you wear a magic hat and send all your players out on loan and cannae use them when the going gets tough...which is totally unfair 'cos he would have won a big cup and got into Europe if only.....

... he had a magic wand.

[McD]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not really, Scoop. 10 minutes to go and they have used 2 subs. They can chuck fresh legs on in the hope they win the game, now knowing fine well that should it go to ET that they can then bring yet another sub on in ET. It's a no lose situation for the higher ranked side with more resources, where the smaller side will be at an even bigger disadvantage.

I see what you're saying, not sure it's wholly valid (no offence intended). Taking your point, since the higher ranked side have better resources and therefore better players, should they be made to exclude some of their best players from the match, so that there's less advantage? I'm not being flippant, just thinking through your point, and extrapolating it further.