The rule change is uneven because 'Big Six' - Liverpool, City, Chelsea, United, Arsenal, and Spurs - have high-quality bench power and can carry peer-to-peer alternatives.IFAB approved the FIFA proposal last month.As the Premier League prepares to restart on June 17, the authorities allowed five substitutions per match, instead of three, in the remaining nine rounds. However, there is a school of thought that changes will work for the great.Is the change in the mid-competition rule legal?Completely legal. Last month, the (IFAB) International Football Association Board approved the FIFA proposal and allowed for a temporary change to the remaining matches of the 2019-20 season. "IFAB agreed to make a temporary amendment to the laws of the game on the basis of a proposal received from FIFA seeking to protect the welfare of players," said the FIFA. Teams will have three chances to make these five replacements and will also be allowed to have nine players on the bench instead of seven. Some Bundesliga clubs used five substitutes after restarting.Why did FIFA suggest the change?FIFA has suggested this keeping in mind managing the player's workload during football after COVID-19. The three-month layoff period affects players' fitness. In addition, a tight schedule increases the risk of infection and there is a risk of excluding players if they become infected with the coronavirus. "The concern in this regard is that the frequency of matches is higher than normal, which may increase the risk of potential injury due to the player's overload," FIFA said in a statement.In the context of the Premier League, why is change so uneven?Simply because "Big Six" - Liverpool, Manchester City, Chelsea, Manchester United, Arsenal and Tottenham Hotspur - have high classic bench strength and can withstand similar substitutes. Minor clubs, in terms of money, have no extra wealth. As reported by Telegraph Sport, Wolverhampton Wanderers only used 20 players in this period. Wolves are sixth on the table with 43 points and the change appears to be giving a clear advantage to their four main rivals such as United, Chelsea, Arsenal, and Spurs. Leicester City, currently third with 53 points, has used 21 players so far. United, on the other hand, used 25 in the Premier League, while Chelsea used 24.Has any club opposed change?Yes, Aston Villa, Bournemouth and West Ham United have reportedly voted against change. They are all caught in downhill scrap. For example, on July 1, West Ham is scheduled to play against Chelsea. Now, Chelsea manager Frank Lampard has the option of resorting to players such as Antonio Rudiger, Ross Barkley, Callum Hudson-Odoi, or Olivier Giroud if he wants to spin his players. On the other hand, Hammers manager David Moyes may have to resort to someone like Ben Johnson who has not yet played a minute in the Premier League this season.How did the change work in Bundesliga?The German Bundesliga has benefited from this in terms of workload management and intensity maintenance. "You can see in the first games that after 60 or 70 minutes, the players were really tired because there were no preparations or friendly matches." It was a really good thing. "We have avoided injuries," Simon Rolfs, sports director of Bayer Leverkusen, was quoted by the Telegraph Sport newspaper as saying.article source: indianexpressimg source: usa today postAlso Read: Premier League allows 5 substitutes when season restarts
The Super League project received a massive boost from the European Court of Justice and could have a huge impact on the future of football.The European Court of Justice (ECJ) on Thursday gave a huge boost to the Super League project, by passing a landmark ruling that UEFA and FIFA contravened EU laws by preventing the formation for Florentino Perez' pet project.This ruling could change the future of football and will be good news for European clubs that proposed forming the breakaway league. When the news first developed, it received widespread protests from angry fans and UEFA even threatened sanctions if the clubs went ahead with the plan, and nine sides pulled out.In their ruling, the EFJ stated that FIFA and UEFA abused their dominant position by preventing clubs from competing in a European Super League. Despite the ruling, it is still not confirmed if the Super League project will be approved as the court did not rule on it specifically.Real Madrid, BArcelona, Juventus and nine other top European clubs announced the ESL in April 2021. But the move collapsed within 48 hours after massive outcry from fans, governments and players. The clubs also included Manchester United, Manchester United,Liverpool,Manchester City, Chelsea, Tottenham Hotspur, Arsenal, AC Milan, Inter Milan and Atletico Madrid.Meanwhile, A22, a sports development company, which was made to assist the ESL, had stated that FIFA was holding a monopoly position with UEFA, which breached the EU's Competition and Free Movement Law.UEFA stated that the ruling didn't validate the ESL. It further added that its new rules would comply with all relevant European laws and regulations.The court said that FIFA and UEFA must 'comply with the competition rules and respect the freedoms of movement', adding that their rules on approval, control and sanctions amounted to 'unjustified restrictions on the freedom to provide services.'"That does not mean that a competition such as the Super League project must necessarily be approved. The Court, having been asked generally about the FIFA and UEFA rules, does not rule on that specific project in its judgment," the court further added.Meanwhile, only two clubs are left from the original ESL plan, and they haven't pulled out; Real Madrid and Barcelona. Both clubs took the ase to a Spanish court. After the ruling, Real Madrid president Perez said, "The present and future of European football are finally in the hands of the clubs, the players and their fans."Also Read: 'Rohit Sharma Is A Question Mark...': Ex-India Star's Stunning Claim Amid MI Captaincy Row
