BCSPL Rule - Substitutions

[What' all this then?]

How is not playing a player development? Especially when there are 18 players on a squad? How do they learn in game situations? How about reinforcing positive play? How do you give the players time who are coming back from injury?
It sounds like the y-league sub rule was a lot more reasonable for kids. Or should we just go to the international 3 subs per game, since they are going to be professionals anyway. Or in the girls case, play on the national team.

 

[Captain Shamrock]

I have been interestingly reading this forum for some time and have not heard many voices of support for this policy.

I would like to know what the substitution policy detractors feel is gained or learned from the cycling of players that happened in the Metro League? I have been involved in games as a coach where 20+ substitutions have happened, and some players have been subbed in and out 2 times during the game. How is this beneficial to any players development?

My personal opinion is that this teaches players that whether they play poorly or exceptionally; it doesnt really matter as it is not re-inforced with their play-time.

As opposed to playing 5 minutes in a game which is already 6 - 1? Or playing 15 minutes at the end of a 7 - 0 game? That's great for a player's development.

"Hey Jimmy, we're down 5 - 0 so it doesn't really matter any more so get out there and show what you're made of. Oh, thanks for the $2500. Cheers."

 

[What' all this then?]

I agree that we don't need to see subs every time the ball is out of touch. But we have to give kids a chance to play or what is the point of carrying more than say 5 subs? I guess they plan on a lot of injuries or need the cash or both.

 

[revolutionary]

WATT - Who ever said anything about not playing a player? This debate is about limiting the amount of player transactions on the field on a given day.

CS - If a player consistently is recieving 5 minutes over a 90 minute game he clearly would not fit into the 30% threshold as 5/90 is roughly 6%. Even in U14 where the games are only 60 minutes that equates to roughly 8%. Based over a 90 minute match, each player will recieve 30 minutes, and they will get that in one run as opposed to the 'Metro' way where that player could recieve the same 30 minutes in two 15 minute shifts. I fail to see how this is contrary to development. I would further ask you the quality of the coach if his team is consistently losing by multiple goals and he is sticking with his same team. Isnt the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?

Oh and you still did not answer the question (you only highlighted it). How does 15 - 20 subs per game benefit development?

 

[nocents]

Agreed that the subbing for some metro teams is a joke. More akin to hockey line changes than soccer. Boggles the mind really. Still, the BCSPL rule goes too far the other way. Keeping a paying customer (aka player) on the bench until the last 10 minutes just in cases there is an injury is not acceptable. And what about injuries? Players are going to play injured or the team plays with 10. Is that what we want to see for our 13 or 14 year olds?

 

[revolutionary]

If that player played 90 minutes the previous week and 70 the following week is it still unacceptable?

Should we also allow substitutions after a red-card because it isn't fair that a team plays with 10 players? Playing with 10 players is part of the game, and at what age should it be introduced to them? 13-14 seems reasonable to me? I will concede that it is unequivocally unacceptable for a coach to ask a player to play with an injury because the coach cant afford to play a man down.

 

[nocents]

Revolutionary: Yes. No. 15 or 16. Your last question is more of a statement than a question. You seem very bitter and frankly a bit of an ass.

The SYL Rule:

"A team may have no more than 18 eligible players for games from the official club roster that shall be printed from the
league website. A player may be substituted once in the first half. Once the player has been substituted, the player may
not re-enter the game until the second half. Once a player is substituted in the second half, they may not re-enter the
game during the rest of the regulation play. The total number of substitutions per half shall not exceed seven which shall
not be altered for injury."

For youth players, I prefer this variation of the rule.

 

[Stuck in Bridge Traffic]

The SYL Rule:

"A team may have no more than 18 eligible players for games from the official club roster that shall be printed from the
league website. A player may be substituted once in the first half. Once the player has been substituted, the player may
not re-enter the game until the second half. Once a player is substituted in the second half, they may not re-enter the
game during the rest of the regulation play. The total number of substitutions per half shall not exceed seven which shall
not be altered for injury."

I would be happy with this or a variation of it, maybe 5 subs per half in match time and 2 at halftime. I want the coaches to be able to pull a kid who gets off to a bad start, settle the kid down, provide some quiet off field advice, and then put the kid back in to test the mettle... in the same game while the lesson is fresh in the head and being tested against the same opponent, not next weeks game. Build the confidence, don't tear it down.

I too have seen certain Metro coaches (*cough* cmf) abuse the unlimited sub rule and use it to slow down the game and try to run out time in regular season and cup games. The refs should control this but too often they have not or could not or were unwilling to add extra time.

Why not use this SYL rule during the regular season for developing players and have a stricter interpretation for cup play?

Right now, having spoken with 2/3's of the parents on our team - all are against the current substitution rule, some cite the SYL rule as being acceptable, and some (ie. the ones whose kids are fringe starters) are afraid to speak out as they are worried there will be a coach/club response against their children resulting in reduced playing time for daring to challenge this.

 

[Captain Shamrock]

WATT - Who ever said anything about not playing a player? This debate is about limiting the amount of player transactions on the field on a given day.

CS - If a player consistently is recieving 5 minutes over a 90 minute game he clearly would not fit into the 30% threshold as 5/90 is roughly 6%. Even in U14 where the games are only 60 minutes that equates to roughly 8%. Based over a 90 minute match, each player will recieve 30 minutes, and they will get that in one run as opposed to the 'Metro' way where that player could recieve the same 30 minutes in two 15 minute shifts. I fail to see how this is contrary to development. I would further ask you the quality of the coach if his team is consistently losing by multiple goals and he is sticking with his same team. Isnt the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results?

Oh and you still did not answer the question (you only highlighted it). How does 15 - 20 subs per game benefit development?

It allows the players to play different positions and for the coaches to use different tactics throughout a match. Most coaches don't have a clue for this so it is a lot easier to have their subs made before the game starts.

"Okay, Jimmy is going in at the half for Larry. Johnny is going in for Blotto at the 75 minute mark. Done. I'm a great coach."


How about this one, Revolutionary. Little Ballbaby is having an absolute stinker of a game..and it is evident he was out the night before. After 15-20 minutes, it is SO obvious he is struggling. Take the kid out, have a word with him and find out what is going on. Normally Ballbaby, is a better player than that. So with the 5 sub rule, you would be inclined to leave that kid in the game until the half........Very few coaches have enough balls to make subs before half-time, even if a guy is having a minger. I see it every week when I ref. You could say....leave him out there and see if he snaps out of it........but by looking at the possibility of him going back in after a few words from the coach might be all he needed to snap out of it and play his 'normal' game. Little Ballbaby has been told what he needs to correct and he went back in and did it.......progress/development.

Hopefully that answers the development question. If not, then I have nothing else at this moment.

 

[Captain Shamrock]

If that player played 90 minutes the previous week and 70 the following week is it still unacceptable?

Should we also allow substitutions after a red-card because it isn't fair that a team plays with 10 players? Playing with 10 players is part of the game, and at what age should it be introduced to them? 13-14 seems reasonable to me? I will concede that it is unequivocally unacceptable for a coach to ask a player to play with an injury because the coach cant afford to play a man down.

Now you're being silly.....bad example. If a team is reduced to 10 players, then they learn to play with 10 players. It's time for a different formation tactic from the coach and the kids will quickly learn to kick the ball over the fence to kill time....Throw the ball so it doesn't come into play.....take 30 seconds on every goal kick until warned........

 

[Captain Shamrock]

BTW, can anyone tell me what is wrong with unlimited subs at half-time? It isn't slowing the game down is it?

 

[TulioMaravilha]

I'm lazy, will just copy my post from somewhere else:

"I know that the sub rule is a hot topic with parents but frankly I don’t know what the fuss is all about (especially from fellow coaches). It may take a while for players, parents and coaches to get used to it but I don’t think the rule per se is detrimental to player development.

The problem IMHO is more of a “cultural shock”, as the “old” rule has been there for a long time and all other popular North American sports (football, basketball, hockey) allow for unlimited substitutions. On the other hand, everywhere I know outside of N.Am. (granted I can only talk about Brazil, Portugal and Spain, others countries I’d have to research) once you move to 11-a-side you are constrained to limited (most often 5) subs, no re-entry. Unlimited subs are the norm only in 7-a-side (U13 and down).
Obviously, I can’t talk for the (BCSPL) Technical Committee but maybe they are trying to align the league rules with the best practices from the soccer world at large?"

 

[bettermirror]

I like your post Tulio but the last question re: that would be - are those countries Pay-To-Play?

 

[TulioMaravilha]

You're right , mostly they are not.

I say mostly because the model is "slightly" different there. Instead of concentrating talent in a few teams with (hopefully) the same level of play the leagues are generally a free for all (20+ teams is not uncommon) and where the top teams more likely than not are the youth divisions of the big professional clubs. It's really not that different from what you see in the EPL, La Liga or the Brasileirao. North American audiences seem to demand an equal playing field in their sports and there are rules (drafts, revenue sharing, closed leagues) to try to accomplish that. In other places, people care less about that and will cheer their colours even if the team gets toasted by the big guys year after year.

But that discussion belongs in another thread. Going back to what I was saying, along with the top teams that give their (well-trained, heavily scouted) players a free ride, you may very well have in regional leagues parent-funded soccer academies, amateur clubs and school teams. And, since the league is the same, they will play by the same rules, right? Once you go up the ladder, you end up seeing only professional clubs in the mix playing each other (in a special division) with the other clubs staying behind in the lower tiers. The rules however are still the same for everyone.

Frankly, the models are too different to compare.