Did Man City Break the subs rule?

[Hanbury_Wolf]

https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/foot...und-ties-after-making-too-many-substitutions/

THE CARABAO CUP descended into fresh farce with Arsenal and Manchester City dragged into a substitutions probe.

Carabao Cup Rule 10 states: “Each team is permitted up to seven substitutes of whom not more than three may take part in the match.
"Where any match goes to extra-time each club will be permitted to use an additional sub (in extra-time only).”

 

[1312]

I don't understand the issue here. In a normal match, you're allowed three subs.

If you play extra time you're allowed another one, which equals four.

It doesn't matter when you make the changes.

 

[Nige100]

I would say no. It appears to me that the rule states you can only make the 4th sub in extra time which is what both clubs did. The 1st, 2nd & 3rd subs are available at any point.

 

[Ginger Chimp]

You can make three subs as per normal (inc ET) plus another additional one in ET.

Simple and easy to understand.

 

[WW1963]

As if they would be that stupid.

 

[DasWolf]

How can anyone find it hard to understand?

 

[Big Saft Kid]

Ffs. It's a simple rule the average 5 year old can understand

 

[Belgian]

It's easy to understand, and I'm not bilingual at all. Only 3 subs in normal time and only one subs in the extra time.

The rule say only one subs in extra time, only one, in every cases

 

[Ginger Chimp]

Ffs. It's a simple rule the average 5 year old can understand

Which is, presumably, why The Sun struggles with it.

[Note: when reading the above please feel free to substitute “The Sun” for your own, personal, abusive, name/phrase]

 

[Belgian]

The referee said nothing. I think they break the rule, but the referee allowed the subs

 

[Deleted member LP 3925]

I imagine it is highly unlikely that the game will be replayed or whatever, so as penance, could Man City give us a couple of players for the rest of the season?

 

[Shifnal Wolf]

No

 

[GoldenHorseshoe]

No

Double no

 

[jrpb-3]

You can make three subs as per normal (inc ET) plus another additional one in ET.

Simple and easy to understand.

exactly this. The only thing that's changed this year is that an extra 4th sub is allowed in extra time. When the other 3 can be made is the same as it always was which includes extra time.

here's the actual rule wording.

10.2 Where any match goes to extra time (in accordance with the provisions of Rules 14.4, 14.5 and/or 14.6), then subject to the League having obtained the prior approval of the International Football Association Board (IFAB) to the application of this Rule, each Club participating in that match will be permitted to use an additional substitute (in extra time only).

 

[Alex Rae The Substitute]

Fake news. Sad

 

[The Professional]

Ffs. It's a simple rule the average 5 year old can understand

The above. It isn’t rocket science.

 

[Jonzy54]

What I find ironical is that on their Forum some fans think Arsenal may be in trouble for doing exactly what they have done

 

[Deleted member 5910]

The Sun stirring the pot, I see. The evidence clearly exists within the article that they didn't break this rule. Do they think two referees would get this wrong by allowing the subs?

 

[Alex Rae The Substitute]

The Sun stirring the pot, I see. The evidence clearly exists within the article that they didn't break this rule. Do they think two referees would get this wrong by allowing the subs?

No but they know the average Sun reader won’t read the facts of the article just skim read the details, and job done, you’ve got yourself a shareable article getting you lots of clicks!

 

[marrs-guitar]

I don't think they have broken it but the rule is badly worded which is why there is scope for debate.

It should be rephrased with more precision to state that in the event of extra-time, a team has the option of making 4th substitution during extra-time period in addition to making use of any of the 3 available substitutions not used during the standard 90 minute match.

 

[WednesfieldWolf]

 

[Wall heath Wanderer]

So basically this came about as someone from Norwich had trouble with numbers, strange considering the amount of digits they have to count with.

 

[Derbywolf85]

I do see where the debate comes from with this.

The rules essentially say that you can use one extra sub during Extra Time. But Man City and Arsenal have interpreted that to say that if you go to ET you can make up to 4 Subs across the 120 minutes.

Wolves and Norwich would argue that the rules state you can only make one sub regardless of how many you used in the 90 minutes.

Don't expect them to get booted out, but it will open up a debate about the clarity of the rules.

 

[Wolfheart]

In truth there is a story.

It’s open to interpretation because is worded poorly.

 

[turner845]

No they didn't break any rules and there is not even a debate about it, the wording clearly states "each Club participating in that match will be permitted to use an additional substitute (in extra time only)."

I really don't see how that is open to any debate or interpretation and the fact that not only two clubs have allowed it but also the 8 match officials across the 2 games as well. It is also worth noting that we were also looking to bring on a 4th substitute (Miranda) late on in extra time presumably in order for him to take a penalty but the ball didn't go dead for it to happen.

 

[turner845]

To add to my previous post Bristol Rovers also made 2 substitutions against us in extra time (as well as 2 in 90 minutes) but nothing was mentioned then. I would imagine that there have been other instances this season as well but because 2 top clubs have now done this it makes a good 'story'.

 

[Dan G WWFC]

Even if they did. They won't do anything.

If it was the other way around and Wolves and Norwich did it, you can believe City and Arsenal will be going though.

All they will do is say it wasn't clear and make a statement reinforcing the rule.

Even if they broke the rule, which is up to interpretation at the moment.

 

[Deleted member 5910]

In truth there is a story. It’s open to interpretation because is worded poorly.

“Each team is permitted up to seven substitutes of whom not more than three may take part in the match."

People who are misreading the new rule are forgetting a match can be 90 minutes, or 120 minutes. If Arsenal and City only used two subs after 90 minutes, they are still entitled to use their remaining sub, and the additional sub granted them in the extra time period.

All this article represents is a basic reading and comprehension test.

 

[that bloke there]

I do see where the debate comes from with this.

The rules essentially say that you can use one extra sub during Extra Time. But Man City and Arsenal have interpreted that to say that if you go to ET you can make up to 4 Subs across the 120 minutes.

Wolves and Norwich would argue that the rules state you can only make one sub regardless of how many you used in the 90 minutes.

Don't expect them to get booted out, but it will open up a debate about the clarity of the rules.

I don't think Wolves would argue this at all, or at least I hope not. You used to be able to make three subs, including in extra time, but now you can make an extra one, but only in extra time. The governing bodies do need to clarify the rules though, as at the moment they imply that the extra sub cannot take part in the penalty shootout should a draw occur after extra time. I doubt that this was what they intended. They maybe need to change the wording to 'make a substitution' rather than 'use a substitute'.

 

[merseawolf]

Surpised no one booted the ball out in the last minute to get Miranda on. There was 2 or 3 oppertunities to do so

 

[SingYourHeartsOut]

Bonkers, everyone knows what the rule means even if the wording might not be the clearest.

 

[ShropshireLad]

There's no way that both City and Arsenal will be disqualified for several obvious reasons.

 

[Padraig]

There is no interpretation other than the correct one unless you can’t read

 

[Ginger Chimp]

There's no way that both City and Arsenal will bee disqualified for several obvious reasons.

The most obvious being they’ve done nothing wrong.

 

[Wolfheart]

Actually as with anything if there is a query of interpretation especially in law it’s open to whatever anyone decides it means.

We all know that what they did was fine.

However that does not mean the rules can’t be interpreted differently because they aren’t as clear as they should be.

Which is the reason for the confusion.

 

[Sephiroth]

Im sure the ref wouldnt have let them do it - non story

 

[JadeWolf]

Actually as with anything if there is a query of interpretation especially in law it’s open to whatever anyone decides it means.

We all know that what they did was fine.

However that does not mean the rules can’t be interpreted differently because they aren’t as clear as they should be.

Which is the reason for the confusion.

I was gonna say, that's how I saw it. Normally you can make up to 3 subs, but if the match goes to extra time, you can make up to 4 subs. Some people are saying that you can only make one sub in extra time, even if you've not used up all three from the first 90 minutes.

 

[WillenhallWolfie1980]

Its 3 subs in 90 mins and 1 additional in extra time

Man city made 2 subs in 90 and 2 in extra time

This is where the article comes from

I think the EFL need to clarify the rules

 

[jrpb-3]

I was gonna say, that's how I saw it. Normally you can make up to 3 subs, but if the match goes to extra time, you can make up to 4 subs. Some people are saying that you can only make one sub in extra time, even if you've not used up all three from the first 90 minutes.

if you interpret it as 3 in normal time and 4th in extra time, then you could als oargue that if you only made 2 in normal time you couldn't make any in extra time as the 3 must be in normal time and the one in extra time should be the the 4th, and would only be the 3rd in that case which isn't allowed as the 3 have to be used in normal time only which is clearly ridiculous


As all the rule actually says is if the game goes to extra time you are allowed an additional substitute, nowhere does it say the first 3 are only allowed in normal time. there is no need for any clarification

 

[Jonzy54]

if you interpret it as 3 in normal time and 4th in extra time, then you could als oargue that if you only made 2 in normal time you couldn't make any in extra time as the 3 must be in normal time and the one in extra time should be the the 4th, and would only be the 3rd in that case which isn't allowed as the 3 have to be used in normal time only which is clearly ridiculous

Can you say that again backwards ?