Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

General non league chat, match reports, photos etc

Farnham have tweeted the league AGM has approved a proposal to allow sides to use up to five substitutes next season.

They are happy, as one of the wealthier step four sides it helps them. I'm opposed though. There's far too many lads who should be getting good time at step 5/6/7 wasting their careers getting a few minutes here or there. This will exacerbate it.

I can understand it when players are earning a lot. Once you drop down to the basically petrol money sides, it seems a real waste to me.
 
Farnham have tweeted the league AGM has approved a proposal to allow sides to use up to five substitutes next season.
It just means more interruptions to the game, and more stoppage time to be added at the end of the second half as teams holding a lead make a sequence of unnecessary substitutions during the final minutes. It's bad enough at times with 3 substitutions.
 
I think more subs favours systems coaches playing high energy football. That might be wealthy clubs, it’s probably more likely to be, but it might not.
 
It certainly will favour a high tempo.system but only if you have the money to pay players to barely play. Day in day out, it favours managers who get it wrong from the off but have the budget to stuff the bench with players who should be playing elsewhere.
 
Last edited:
Wonder how quickly Tamplin would have burned through five subs on one of his “busier” days.
I reckon he'd have been the first manager to use all 5 by half time.

I really think there needs to be some sort of cap on how many changes you can make during the second half. If a manager is bold enough to make tactical changes during the first half, allow him to keep some replacements in reserve, but 3 per side once the second half has started is more than enough. One of my pet hates is pointless late substitutions that clearly have no purpose other than to waste time and interrupt the momentum of the other team.
 
I reckon he'd have been the first manager to use all 5 by half time.

I really think there needs to be some sort of cap on how many changes you can make during the second half. If a manager is bold enough to make tactical changes during the first half, allow him to keep some replacements in reserve, but 3 per side once the second half has started is more than enough. One of my pet hates is pointless late substitutions that clearly have no purpose other than to waste time and interrupt the momentum of the other team.
There is a limit in PL. You can only break the game three times. (So a h/t sub doesn’t count.)
 
There is a limit in PL. You can only break the game three times. (So a h/t sub doesn’t count.)
I had a feeling that was the case but wasn't sure. You'd think it'll be the same in our league, rather than a free for all. It's still going to take longer to administer each interchange. Our women's team made 5 simultaneous substitutions during the final game and it seemed to delay the game for about 5 minutes. Ryan is normally quite sparing in his use of substitutes and I couldn't work out what was happening at first.
 
It does make for some different outcomes and interesting juggling at times. You’re far less likely to give a player with a knock the first five mins of the second half - when subbing him at half time is “free” from the break of game perspective.

On the other. If you’ve already made say a couple of injury subs early you see the final batch come quite late (eg post 80). Now that’s really no different to how it would have been when you only had three subs. But it feels different when you know five changes are the norm and usually there are 3-4 made before say 70.
 
Clapton FC have withdrawn from the SCEFL and appear to have collapsed. A sad, if not unexpected, end for one of the greatest London amateur clubs, after the demise of the old boy era.
 
Clapton FC have withdrawn from the SCEFL and appear to have collapsed. A sad, if not unexpected, end for one of the greatest London amateur clubs, after the demise of the old boy era.

I thought that was Clapton Community that were shunted into the SCEFL?
 
Get very confused by Clapton. But if that’s the version that came to Peckham this season then it’s a real shame - players and staff were a really nice set of people.
 
Clapton CFC appealed against the move to the Southern Counties but that appeal was turned down by the FA. For those south of the river it does mean the Tons will have a number of games in South London including Lewisham Borough.
 
Hearing SE Dons are making an announcement at 11am in Sunday, moving to Saturday football and taking over a South London step 6 club ........
 
This suggests it will be Forest Hill Park. Wonder if this means they will groundshare with Lewisham at Ladywell as FHP currently do?

 
This suggests it will be Forest Hill Park. Wonder if this means they will groundshare with Lewisham at Ladywell as FHP currently do?


I was searching their Twitter feed for clues earlier and some of the photographs were clearly taken at the new Cray Wanderers ground in Sidcup. I believe Bexley (who were reprieved from relegation in Peckham Town's division) have already arranged to share there, although there are (or have been) one or two three way ground shares on 3G pitches, with one team playing on Friday evenings where necessary.
 
The people running SE Dons are on the top two or three non league teams in terms of you tube views. I suspect they have enough brains to work out a lease....
 
There’s some savvy business brains involved with that club so I’m struggling to see the new club ground sharing at the Ladywell Arena as I sure they’ll be looking to attract the level of support some of their big cup games have got.
 
The big SE Dons announcement turned out to be little more than an announcement that there will be another announcement. They say they'll be competing in the SCEFL Division 1, but no mention of where they'll be playing, and no explanation of how they can be accommodated in a division whose clubs were allocated by the FA last month. It sounds like they intend to retain the name ("same badge") but will the FA/SCEFL permit a takeover of an existing member club at this late stage?

 
Classic teaser! I'm assuming that any takeover of another club and name change would have been agreed with the SCEFL / FA already in order to make this sort of announcement, otherwise it would be hugely embarassing.

If they've pulled this off then fair enough to them, but there must be quite a few clubs out there seeing this and thinking about all the work they put in to try and get promoted only for someone to fly in and grab a place by other means...(bit like the groundshare / promotion thing we seem to see more and more)
 
Back
Top Bottom