Author Topic: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019  (Read 1570 times)

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2535
FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« on: June 12, 2019, 07:53:34 AM »
The best women soccer players in the world are starting round two of this soccer tournament. Games are played in France, so most of them occur during the work day. Except that many of us are retired!

jinga nation

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1225
  • Location: 'Murica's Johnson
  • Left, Right, Peddlin' Shite
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #1 on: June 12, 2019, 09:42:50 AM »
Those opening round games... 9, 13 smackaroos with nil reply.  The gulf in the teams is... (saying vast might be an understatement).

Real stuff starts in the next round when the top teams start playing.

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2535
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #2 on: June 12, 2019, 10:06:14 AM »
Agreed, although it would be amazing if Thailand can put the sting of those 13 goals behind them and play well enough to move on to round of 16.

simonsez

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 795
  • Age: 33
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #3 on: June 12, 2019, 03:30:35 PM »
I'm a medium fan of this event - soccer is probably sport #8 that I follow but I do have my armchair opinion after the 13-0 drubbing, specifically.

I'm okay with 13-0 as a result by itself BTW.  My issue is that Alex Morgan is still in the game scoring her 4th and 5th goals.  I mean it was 7-0 after 56 minutes and 8-0 in the 74th when she netted the hat trick.  To me, if she's record-chasing (I know this is coach's decision for who plays - she tied Michelle Aker's single-game record for World Cup goals, yay) that's a cheap way to go about it. 

If she's not explicitly record-chasing and just out there playing hard - that's great she's such a professional but how about we a) give some experience to a sub (or honor if the sub is a veteran) and b) not get our most dangerous striker hurt unnecessarily by either a freak incident in a blowout or by a pissed off Thai woman who feels angry/embarrassed.  Maybe the issue is with number of allowable subs - I have no idea why this is limited to three when you have 23 people on the team.  For instance, Rose Lavelle (a forward) scores two goals including her second one in the 56th minute when the game was well won and veteran Carli Lloyd comes on as a sub in the 57th minute and gets a goal later on in stoppage time - that was awesome!  Let's have more of that (like 21 year old Mallory Pugh coming on as a sub in the 69th and scoring in the 84th!)!  Would love to see Davidson get some burn, even if garbage time.

By limiting subs to 3, I get you're trying to showcase which teams have the endurance and mental fortitude to win (which admittedly the whole 'beautiful game' isn't my reason for enjoying watching/playing soccer, but whatever) - but in this game who was going to win was not in doubt with nearly 40 minutes left.  So the point of 3 subs wasn't at play - I wish they would allow more subs in blowouts at least - not unlimited but certainly more than 3.

Like I said, you have 23 players on the team and you were stomping them.  It just seems more sporting in a 13-0 soccer match if your subs came on and continued doing damage (which they did no doubt!) rather than your best offensive finisher getting five goals in a blowout.  As mentioned, this is probably just annoyance directed at the substitution rule and not anything that can be changed in the middle of the tournament or at any player/coach on the dominant side.  US women kick ass!

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6429
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #4 on: June 12, 2019, 03:40:53 PM »
I'm a medium fan of this event - soccer is probably sport #8 that I follow but I do have my armchair opinion after the 13-0 drubbing, specifically.

I'm okay with 13-0 as a result by itself BTW.  My issue is that Alex Morgan is still in the game scoring her 4th and 5th goals.  I mean it was 7-0 after 56 minutes and 8-0 in the 74th when she netted the hat trick.  To me, if she's record-chasing (I know this is coach's decision for who plays - she tied Michelle Aker's single-game record for World Cup goals, yay) that's a cheap way to go about it. 

If she's not explicitly record-chasing and just out there playing hard - that's great she's such a professional but how about we a) give some experience to a sub (or honor if the sub is a veteran) and b) not get our most dangerous striker hurt unnecessarily by either a freak incident in a blowout or by a pissed off Thai woman who feels angry/embarrassed.  Maybe the issue is with number of allowable subs - I have no idea why this is limited to three when you have 23 people on the team.  For instance, Rose Lavelle (a forward) scores two goals including her second one in the 56th minute when the game was well won and veteran Carli Lloyd comes on as a sub in the 57th minute and gets a goal later on in stoppage time - that was awesome!  Let's have more of that (like 21 year old Mallory Pugh coming on as a sub in the 69th and scoring in the 84th!)!  Would love to see Davidson get some burn, even if garbage time.

By limiting subs to 3, I get you're trying to showcase which teams have the endurance and mental fortitude to win (which admittedly the whole 'beautiful game' isn't my reason for enjoying watching/playing soccer, but whatever) - but in this game who was going to win was not in doubt with nearly 40 minutes left.  So the point of 3 subs wasn't at play - I wish they would allow more subs in blowouts at least - not unlimited but certainly more than 3.

Like I said, you have 23 players on the team and you were stomping them.  It just seems more sporting in a 13-0 soccer match if your subs came on and continued doing damage (which they did no doubt!) rather than your best offensive finisher getting five goals in a blowout.  As mentioned, this is probably just annoyance directed at the substitution rule and not anything that can be changed in the middle of the tournament or at any player/coach on the dominant side.  US women kick ass!

The issue was more the over-the-top manner in which the USA women were celebrating goal #11, 12 and #13.

A WC goal is a WC goal, and you can only play the opposition in front of you, but when you are that far in front a little bit of humility would go a long way to building rapport with global fans. Not that they seem to care, but there's no need to carry on.

As it stands, the impression most casually interested observers receive is that Team USA are a bunch of playground teenage bullies delighting in beating up kindergarteners.

____________

Our Australian women have a real scrap now to get through to the knockout stages after throwing away a game and playing poorly against Italy. I'm sure they'll bounce back, but the pressure is really on now against Brazil.

simonsez

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 795
  • Age: 33
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #5 on: June 12, 2019, 03:42:58 PM »
I'm a medium fan of this event - soccer is probably sport #8 that I follow but I do have my armchair opinion after the 13-0 drubbing, specifically.

I'm okay with 13-0 as a result by itself BTW.  My issue is that Alex Morgan is still in the game scoring her 4th and 5th goals.  I mean it was 7-0 after 56 minutes and 8-0 in the 74th when she netted the hat trick.  To me, if she's record-chasing (I know this is coach's decision for who plays - she tied Michelle Aker's single-game record for World Cup goals, yay) that's a cheap way to go about it. 

If she's not explicitly record-chasing and just out there playing hard - that's great she's such a professional but how about we a) give some experience to a sub (or honor if the sub is a veteran) and b) not get our most dangerous striker hurt unnecessarily by either a freak incident in a blowout or by a pissed off Thai woman who feels angry/embarrassed.  Maybe the issue is with number of allowable subs - I have no idea why this is limited to three when you have 23 people on the team.  For instance, Rose Lavelle (a forward) scores two goals including her second one in the 56th minute when the game was well won and veteran Carli Lloyd comes on as a sub in the 57th minute and gets a goal later on in stoppage time - that was awesome!  Let's have more of that (like 21 year old Mallory Pugh coming on as a sub in the 69th and scoring in the 84th!)!  Would love to see Davidson get some burn, even if garbage time.

By limiting subs to 3, I get you're trying to showcase which teams have the endurance and mental fortitude to win (which admittedly the whole 'beautiful game' isn't my reason for enjoying watching/playing soccer, but whatever) - but in this game who was going to win was not in doubt with nearly 40 minutes left.  So the point of 3 subs wasn't at play - I wish they would allow more subs in blowouts at least - not unlimited but certainly more than 3.

Like I said, you have 23 players on the team and you were stomping them.  It just seems more sporting in a 13-0 soccer match if your subs came on and continued doing damage (which they did no doubt!) rather than your best offensive finisher getting five goals in a blowout.  As mentioned, this is probably just annoyance directed at the substitution rule and not anything that can be changed in the middle of the tournament or at any player/coach on the dominant side.  US women kick ass!

The issue was more the over-the-top manner in which the USA women were celebrating goal #11, 12 and #13.

A WC goal is a WC goal, and you can only play the opposition in front of you, but when you are that far in front a little bit of humility would go a long way to building rapport with global fans. Not that they seem to care, but there's no need to carry on.

As it stands, the impression most casually interested observers receive is that Team USA are a bunch of playground teenage bullies delighting in beating up kindergarteners.
Yeah, I should've added that part.  Rapinoe sliding across the field celebrating at 9-0 was hard for me to watch.

RetiredAt63

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 11189
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #6 on: June 12, 2019, 04:59:26 PM »
We played Monday - 1-0 against Cameroon, so that must have been an exciting game.  New Zealand next and then the Netherlands.  I hope CBC broadcasts the games.
« Last Edit: June 12, 2019, 05:02:15 PM by RetiredAt63 »

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2535
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #7 on: June 13, 2019, 08:46:03 AM »
I wonder if they couldn't voluntarily rest an 11th player: put subs in, but also just play the remaining game with 10 on a side and rotate who's sitting out every few minutes?

Barbaebigode

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 162
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #8 on: June 13, 2019, 09:32:34 AM »
I think the substitution rule is like that because Fifa doesn't like changes. That's it. It was a small concession back in the 70s (there were no substitutions before then) and it takes ages for a significant change to the rules to be made. Fifa is run by a bunch of dinosaurs with vested interests

I mean, aside from changing the substitution rules, why not stopping the clock when the ball is out of play, for example. It would instantly end the shameful spectacle of grown ups pretending to be hurt, ball boys taking too long to return the ball, goalies tying shoelaces instead of goal kicking, etc.

never give up

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2019
  • Location: UK
  • Not spending like there is tomorrow
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #9 on: June 13, 2019, 09:39:40 AM »
Teams with great strength in depth would love to be able to use more subs but it would be unfair on smaller clubs/countries. Limiting the subs also prevents a manager from completely changing their formation rather than working with what they have during a game. It would border on farcical if an entirely different team were playing at the end than had started the game.

Come on England!

Dabnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1886
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #10 on: June 13, 2019, 09:45:40 AM »
Teams with great strength in depth would love to be able to use more subs but it would be unfair on smaller clubs/countries. Limiting the subs also prevents a manager from completely changing their formation rather than working with what they have during a game. It would border on farcical if an entirely different team were playing at the end than had started the game.

Come on England!

What about allowing more substitutions but limiting eligible players per match? As in substitute all you like but only these 3 players can come in as replacements.

simonsez

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 795
  • Age: 33
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #11 on: June 13, 2019, 09:49:56 AM »
Teams with great strength in depth would love to be able to use more subs but it would be unfair on smaller clubs/countries. Limiting the subs also prevents a manager from completely changing their formation rather than working with what they have during a game. It would border on farcical if an entirely different team were playing at the end than had started the game.

Come on England!
Can you expand on this in the context of a lopsided victory?  Specifically, how is it unfair and how would it be a farce?  The Thailand team also had 23 players.  I don't see how it is unfair if both teams are same size and are allowed the same number of subs.

Who cares about a manager's formation or if the team appears different than the way it started in a 13-0 game?  I don't see why that matters one iota.  Is that why people watch - just to monitor formation and check that the team on field is similar to one that started?  I feel I must be missing something with my viewing experience as I consider a 13-0 World Cup match more of a farce than say, a 8-0 game that involved a few more subs.

never give up

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2019
  • Location: UK
  • Not spending like there is tomorrow
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #12 on: June 13, 2019, 09:59:28 AM »
I wasnít speaking from the perspective of the 13-0 game, just generally. Think of the club game too. If Real Madrid could put 11 subs on a team with the fraction of the budget would be a lot less likely to compete. If five Madrid players were having a bad game the manager could take them all off and replace them with players that are still better than the opposition. Law of averages some of them will play well or better than the players that were having an off day. Upsets would be a lot less likely to happen. The strength of football is that on any given day anyone can beat anyone. Unlimited subs would suit the richest clubs or national teams with large populations/interest in the game.

Watchmaker

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 511
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #13 on: June 13, 2019, 10:30:09 AM »
I think the substitution rule is like that because Fifa doesn't like changes. That's it. It was a small concession back in the 70s (there were no substitutions before then) and it takes ages for a significant change to the rules to be made. Fifa is run by a bunch of dinosaurs with vested interests

I hate FIFA as much as anyone, but a lot of the changes they've tried to make to the game just haven't worked out, so I'm hesitant to encourage more fiddling. VAR, for example.

My biggest problem with the 13-0 results is that Thailand shouldn't even be in the tournament. The point of having qualifying is to narrow it down to teams that can compete. They expanded the women's world cup to 24 teams for the last one, and there just aren't 24 women's national teams that can reasonably compete. They should  put it back down at 16 (They are doing the same thing to the men's world cup with equally bad results).

For this reason, I view the group stages as a final qualifying round and I will start paying real attention in the knock-out rounds.

never give up

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2019
  • Location: UK
  • Not spending like there is tomorrow
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #14 on: June 13, 2019, 10:37:51 AM »
Yes itís a difficult one that. Do you inspire people by allowing them to participate on the largest stage and hope they learn from the experience to close the gap in the future or do you try to put on the best tournament. The former risks humiliation and discouragement and undermining the tournament while the latter approach may mean some countries never qualify and the country loses interest in participating.

Watchmaker

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 511
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #15 on: June 13, 2019, 10:40:09 AM »
Yes itís a difficult one that. Do you inspire people by allowing them to participate on the largest stage and hope they learn from the experience to close the gap in the future or do you try to put on the best tournament. The former risks humiliation and discouragement and undermining the tournament while the latter approach may mean some countries never qualify and the country loses interest in participating.

A bad tournament is bad for the game, and a good tournament is good for the game. This, in my mind, overrides any other issues.

talltexan

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2535
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #16 on: June 13, 2019, 11:45:24 AM »
Exciting reversal in the Australian-Brazil game, with Aussies, scoring 3 goals to take a 3-2 lead!

Jouer

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 386
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #17 on: June 17, 2019, 04:37:30 PM »
I love this event. My wife and I went to all the games played in Ottawa 4 years ago when Canada hosted. (great value to see world class athletes, btw)

I hate that all the talk has been about the celebrations. Really wish the world was watching clips of great goals instead of cellies. Way to fuck it up, USWNT.

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6429
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #18 on: June 20, 2019, 06:37:16 AM »
Teams with great strength in depth would love to be able to use more subs but it would be unfair on smaller clubs/countries. Limiting the subs also prevents a manager from completely changing their formation rather than working with what they have during a game. It would border on farcical if an entirely different team were playing at the end than had started the game.

Come on England!
Can you expand on this in the context of a lopsided victory?  Specifically, how is it unfair and how would it be a farce?  The Thailand team also had 23 players.  I don't see how it is unfair if both teams are same size and are allowed the same number of subs.

Who cares about a manager's formation or if the team appears different than the way it started in a 13-0 game?  I don't see why that matters one iota.  Is that why people watch - just to monitor formation and check that the team on field is similar to one that started?  I feel I must be missing something with my viewing experience as I consider a 13-0 World Cup match more of a farce than say, a 8-0 game that involved a few more subs.

The problem with unlimited rotation/substitutions and use of all substitute players on the bench is that it doesn't reward teams that are physically fit to play 90 minutes at high intensity.

Fitness is a huge component of the game at the back end of a match, and allowing unlimited substitutions negates this advantage.

MasterStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2157
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #19 on: June 20, 2019, 07:09:10 AM »
My daughter and I have been enjoying the games during the day. Unfortunately weíll miss todayís game as weíll be on the road.

marty998

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6429
  • Location: Sydney, Oz
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #20 on: June 21, 2019, 03:33:42 AM »
Exciting reversal in the Australian-Brazil game, with Aussies, scoring 3 goals to take a 3-2 lead!

It's about time we had some luck with referees and the VAR. Australia always seem to be on the wrong end of those calls at the World Cup.

Always thought it was because our acting skills are just not up to scratch :D

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 10703
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #21 on: June 21, 2019, 11:49:17 AM »
Teams with great strength in depth would love to be able to use more subs but it would be unfair on smaller clubs/countries. Limiting the subs also prevents a manager from completely changing their formation rather than working with what they have during a game. It would border on farcical if an entirely different team were playing at the end than had started the game.

Come on England!
Can you expand on this in the context of a lopsided victory?  Specifically, how is it unfair and how would it be a farce?  The Thailand team also had 23 players.  I don't see how it is unfair if both teams are same size and are allowed the same number of subs.

Who cares about a manager's formation or if the team appears different than the way it started in a 13-0 game?  I don't see why that matters one iota.  Is that why people watch - just to monitor formation and check that the team on field is similar to one that started?  I feel I must be missing something with my viewing experience as I consider a 13-0 World Cup match more of a farce than say, a 8-0 game that involved a few more subs.

The problem with unlimited rotation/substitutions and use of all substitute players on the bench is that it doesn't reward teams that are physically fit to play 90 minutes at high intensity.

Fitness is a huge component of the game at the back end of a match, and allowing unlimited substitutions negates this advantage.

I agree with this to a point, but don't think that the current rules are the best solution or what's best for the game.  I'd like to see more substitutions allowed - perhaps up it to 5 players per match - but continuation of the 'sub-and-done' rule: once you come out of the game you can't go back in. Teams wouldn't want to take out their best players, particularly early, and with five substitutions it allows for some strategy but requires that at least 5 of your field players (half) must be fit enough to go the entire 90 minutes.  It would also allow teams on the winning end of a blowout to more easily take on a defensive posture earlier.

soccerluvof4

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5245
  • Location: Artic Midwest
  • Retired at 50
    • My Journal
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #22 on: July 01, 2019, 03:05:41 AM »
Teams with great strength in depth would love to be able to use more subs but it would be unfair on smaller clubs/countries. Limiting the subs also prevents a manager from completely changing their formation rather than working with what they have during a game. It would border on farcical if an entirely different team were playing at the end than had started the game.

Come on England!
Can you expand on this in the context of a lopsided victory?  Specifically, how is it unfair and how would it be a farce?  The Thailand team also had 23 players.  I don't see how it is unfair if both teams are same size and are allowed the same number of subs.

Who cares about a manager's formation or if the team appears different than the way it started in a 13-0 game?  I don't see why that matters one iota.  Is that why people watch - just to monitor formation and check that the team on field is similar to one that started?  I feel I must be missing something with my viewing experience as I consider a 13-0 World Cup match more of a farce than say, a 8-0 game that involved a few more subs.

The problem with unlimited rotation/substitutions and use of all substitute players on the bench is that it doesn't reward teams that are physically fit to play 90 minutes at high intensity.

Fitness is a huge component of the game at the back end of a match, and allowing unlimited substitutions negates this advantage.

I agree with this to a point, but don't think that the current rules are the best solution or what's best for the game.  I'd like to see more substitutions allowed - perhaps up it to 5 players per match - but continuation of the 'sub-and-done' rule: once you come out of the game you can't go back in. Teams wouldn't want to take out their best players, particularly early, and with five substitutions it allows for some strategy but requires that at least 5 of your field players (half) must be fit enough to go the entire 90 minutes.  It would also allow teams on the winning end of a blowout to more easily take on a defensive posture earlier.


I agree with that. 5 subs would be better. As a huge soccer fan there are alot of rules I would like to see change but doubt many in the near future will. I also agree with those that said put the teams back to 16 vs complaining about teams that get blown out and celebrations. 
« Last Edit: July 05, 2019, 07:50:43 AM by soccerluvof4 »

never give up

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2019
  • Location: UK
  • Not spending like there is tomorrow
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #23 on: July 01, 2019, 11:11:40 AM »
Often international friendlies have allowed seven or eight substitutions in a game. It slows the pace, disrupts the flow and rhythm of the game and teams often look disjointed as the newcomers try to get used to each other. I appreciate in US sports the concept of entire teams changing and running onto the field or court is the norm, but it doesnít suit football. American Football, ice hockey etc are very stop start, with bursts of action. The nature of the play suits massive changes to the team. I donít think itís right for football hence why that has never been introduced.

Anyway the semi-finals look very exciting. An England v Netherlands final would be a great game to watch :-)

nereo

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 10703
  • Location: Just south of Canada
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #24 on: July 01, 2019, 06:11:57 PM »
Often international friendlies have allowed seven or eight substitutions in a game. It slows the pace, disrupts the flow and rhythm of the game and teams often look disjointed as the newcomers try to get used to each other. I appreciate in US sports the concept of entire teams changing and running onto the field or court is the norm, but it doesnít suit football. American Football, ice hockey etc are very stop start, with bursts of action. The nature of the play suits massive changes to the team. I donít think itís right for football hence why that has never been introduced.

Anyway the semi-finals look very exciting. An England v Netherlands final would be a great game to watch :-)

I respectfully disagree.  Friendlies often look disjointed because the coaches are using them to try out less experienced players and different formations... because itís a friendly.  More substitutions in a knock-out game would not be so disjointed, in my estimation.  And a good example is how university games are played.
Iím not advocating whole-squad substitutions or the ability to sub in and out of a game, btw.  One other advantage (from oneís point of view) that additional subs would have is it would reward teams that had deeper benches.  Which I think is important, and should be encouraged more.  A team is more than the 11 players on the pitch.

Anyway, just my point of view.

never give up

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2019
  • Location: UK
  • Not spending like there is tomorrow
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #25 on: July 02, 2019, 10:38:34 AM »
Often the first half of friendlies are fine but at about the 65th minute when a plethora of substitutions are made the game really loses its flow. Itís interesting the different viewpoints. I havenít really discussed football with people based in the US before. I can assure you though that in the 35+ years I have been a football fan man and boy, absolutely no one I have ever spoken to in the UK or Europe has ever wanted more substitutions in the game. There is a reason why in over 130 years of formalised rule making, a large number of subs have not been allowed. It is not right for football.

Other than the flow of the game, rewarding teams with deeper benches is precisely one of the main reasons you donít want to allow lots of subs. The capacity for upsets would be undermined and it would suit clubs with the most money who are strong enough as it is.

I completely appreciate it may seem odd when the majority of US sports allow vast squads to participate in the same game.

All fun stuff. Looking forward to the two semi-finals.

soccerluvof4

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5245
  • Location: Artic Midwest
  • Retired at 50
    • My Journal
Re: FIFA Women's World Cup 2019
« Reply #26 on: July 16, 2019, 04:02:14 AM »
I agree that to many subs would be bad for the game but I dont think changing from 3 to 5 would. Getting up to 7 ,8 plus does ruin the flow. I have 2 that presently play D1 College and that is even a bigger disaster as far as flow goes with the substituting rules