subs coming off the field

S

soccerfan63

Member
Just a minor gripe here, but I wish the officials association would realize that HS games are not professional games with 3 subs the entire game. To waste 15-20 seconds for every sub coming off the field by making the incoming player wait is just stupid. How much time is wasted over the course of a game by doing this? I realize that the laws of FIFA probably state this but to do this in a game with unlimited subs just takes too much time off the clock. Especially when players walk over. Also, why suddenly do this in a regional match when it has not been done this way all year? Really kills the flow of the game.

Maybe some officials on this board can enlighten me.....
 
 
In the pros, coaches will sometimes introduce a sub to disrupt the flow the game. However, the refs are allowed to add extra time for substitutions. I suppose that a high school ref could stop the clock, but it’s not worth it for 15-20 seconds.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
soccerfan63 said:
Just a minor gripe here, but I wish the officials association would realize that HS games are not professional games with 3 subs the entire game. To waste 15-20 seconds for every sub coming off the field by making the incoming player wait is just stupid. How much time is wasted over the course of a game by doing this? I realize that the laws of FIFA probably state this but to do this in a game with unlimited subs just takes too much time off the clock. Especially when players walk over. Also, why suddenly do this in a regional match when it has not been done this way all year? Really kills the flow of the game.

Maybe some officials on this board can enlighten me.....
Click to expand...
In what game did you see this? I saw it in the Mason/Loveland game last night, too, and was wondering if that was the CR's preference or a directive by OHSAA for these regional and state matches.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
phatneff said:
In what game did you see this? I saw it in the Mason/Loveland game last night, too, and was wondering if that was the CR's preference or a directive by OHSAA for these regional and state matches.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Mason-Loveland and that is the first time I had seen it this season.
 
If the ref feels subs are excessive or are taking too long the clock can be stopped.

In the last game i was at it was done twice.

It's the right thing to do.
 
Generally we will permit play to restart IF the subs approaching the bench area will not be near where the restart is taking place. IF teams begin to sub frequently in the 2nd half, trying to milk he clock in a close game, especially in the post-season or key conference games, most of us will stop the clock & inform said HC that it will stop every time they choose to sub.

However, "by the book", having the in-coming subs wait until the players they are replacing are at least VERY near to the bench before coming on IS the technically correct procedure......
 
MJ_SoccerRef said:
Generally we will permit play to restart IF the subs approaching the bench area will not be near where the restart is taking place. IF teams begin to sub frequently in the 2nd half, trying to milk he clock in a close game, especially in the post-season or key conference games, most of us will stop the clock & inform said HC that it will stop every time they choose to sub.

However, "by the book", having the in-coming subs wait until the players they are replacing are at least VERY near to the bench before coming on IS the technically correct procedure......
Click to expand...

First of all, I want to complement the officials I have seen this season, I think they have been excellent. (not that I am the be all judge of such things, just want to make it clear that this is not meant to be a ref-bashing thread).

I wonder if the practice of waiting for the subs to come off the field completely was meant for games with unlimited subs. Not even considering time-wasting intentionally, I just think it takes too much time off the clock and kills the flow of the game.
 
I wonder about not calling fouls in the box. I watched MND take MC (Beavercreek) out of the game early with excessive physical play. She had her legs taken out from in the box early. She was brought down from behind shortly after, just outside the box with another no call. She finally got the call around midfield. She eventually got a couple more and eventually persevered.

I'd argue it's known your less likely to get the call in the box, but that was a bit excessive.
 
Hoosier Parent said:
I wonder about not calling fouls in the box. I watched MND take MC (Beavercreek) out of the game early with excessive physical play. She had her legs taken out from in the box early. She was brought down from behind shortly after, just outside the box with another no call. She finally got the call around midfield. She eventually got a couple more and eventually persevered.

I'd argue it's known your less likely to get the call in the box, but that was a bit excessive.
Click to expand...
Perspective plays a large role. Was it a foul? Was her legs taken out or just your perspective from the stands? Most quality officials at every level, will blow the whistle more in the middle of the field to control the game, as opposed to in the box. But as a wise man once said, "a foul is a foul, no matter where your at on the field".
 
HSfooty1977 said:
Perspective plays a large role. Was it a foul? Was her legs taken out or just your perspective from the stands? Most quality officials at every level, will blow the whistle more in the middle of the field to control the game, as opposed to in the box. But as a wise man once said, "a foul is a foul, no matter where you're at on the field".
Click to expand...

You're right on all accounts. I was sitting in the stands 70 yards away and did not have the best angle for either play. I based my assessment on the fact the defender came through the offensive player on one play and tripped the offensive player on the other, and did not see the ball change trajectory during the play, suggesting the defender didn't touch the ball on either play, but took the offensive player out of the play.

I would say that most referee's give the defender the benefit of the doubt in the defensive 18 and I don't know that it's a bad thing. I do feel those plays set the tone for that game and changed the trajectory of the game until the final 20 minutes or so. I would rather Refs being conservative in the box, than giving PK's all willy nilly.
 
HSfooty1977 said:
Perspective plays a large role. Was it a foul? Was her legs taken out or just your perspective from the stands? Most quality officials at every level, will blow the whistle more in the middle of the field to control the game, as opposed to in the box. But as a wise man once said, "a foul is a foul, no matter where your at on the field".
Click to expand...

I don't agree with that "foul is a foul" comment. A PK can be a game winner in many games and in my opinion, it should be a clear, obvious foul. Sometimes a questionable foul at midfield can be used to settle the game down, and that same call should not be made in the box. I am sure I will have refs disagree with me on this, but I just hate seeing the game decided by a PK. Let the players decide the game. My opinion is that most professional (EPL, international, MLS, etc.) refs call it that way but many HS refs seem to have a different take on it.
 
When I Center, my instructions to my ARs, regarding defensive fouls in the Penalty Area, is this: when you see something in the PA that appears to be a PK-foul.....look to me before giving the 'Pop & Shake'......I will indicate (through pre-arranged signals & words) whether I had a clear angle & evaluate that contact as, at worst, "Trifling" and thus a 'no call'; ALL 'trifling' fouls should be 'no calls'. IF, however, I was screened and again give the pre-agreed upon indicators that I'm looking for their help........my advice is then this: "Make sure the defender 'got their money's worth'......that it's a $79.95 Foul from Macy's, and not a 99 cent special from Dollar General."

To your point, Soccerfan63, if a player doesn't want to be called for a PK foul, DEFEND BETTER / SMARTER! If there is indeed a foul in the Penalty Area that DESERVES to be called, SHOULD be called, and the Center doesn't make that call.....are we not then "deciding the outcome", by NOT 'getting it right'? I would add that having played Keeper in my youth & early adulthood......without ANY DOUBT......every PK I have ever whistled came on a play where said defender made a completely horrible choice against that attacker. The bottom for me as an Official is two-fold: "Get It Right".

I will add this point RE 'officiating mechanics', that is the approach of FIFA / USSF, that many of us carry over to NFHS play:The AR is NOT supposed to call fouls that they are certain the Center has had a clear view of, but rather ONLY those we are reasonably certain he did not see from his angle. In essence, therefore, contrary to what many non-Officials / Spectators / Coaches / Players and other life forms might THINK.......those 3 Officials do NOT have "equal responsibilities" when it comes to calling fouls. We're not ref'n basketball......
 
Hoosier Parent said:
I would say that most referee's give the defender the benefit of the doubt in the defensive 18 and I don't know that it's a bad thing. I do feel those plays set the tone for that game and changed the trajectory of the game until the final 20 minutes or so. I would rather Refs being conservative in the box, than giving PK's all willy nilly.
Click to expand...

I tend to be very proactive with players......I talk to them as much or more than the majority of Officials; some might say 'too much'. Perhaps when play then carries into a PA, they know I'm watching closely, etc.

To your point I put in bold.....IF I see a foul in the Penalty Area that I KNOW I would whistle at mid-field, we WILL have a PK restart. That's not "Willy Nilly". That IS being consistent, and applying the Rules accurately, honestly. And, no, I don't award more PKs than what others do.
 
I find it interesting that there is no introduction to this discussion of the possibilities of advantage, or of attacker initiating contact, or flopping. I see as many, or more, of these situations in the PA than defenders 'taking out' attackers.
 
MJ_SoccerRef said:
I tend to be very proactive with players......I talk to them as much or more than the majority of Officials; some might say 'too much'. Perhaps when play then carries into a PA, they know I'm watching closely, etc.

To your point I put in bold.....IF I see a foul in the Penalty Area that I KNOW I would whistle at mid-field, we WILL have a PK restart. That's not "Willy Nilly". That IS being consistent, and applying the Rules accurately, honestly. And, no, I don't award more PKs than what others do.
Click to expand...

Sorry if I offended you Ref, I was just suggesting that based on my experience, referees tend to be more conservative on those calls in the box than midfield and pointing out that was better than the alternative of referees of various degrees of experience, using various level of discretion on such a game turning call.
 
MJ_SoccerRef said:
When I Center, my instructions to my ARs, regarding defensive fouls in the Penalty Area, is this: when you see something in the PA that appears to be a PK-foul.....look to me before giving the 'Pop & Shake'......I will indicate (through pre-arranged signals & words) whether I had a clear angle & evaluate that contact as, at worst, "Trifling" and thus a 'no call'; ALL 'trifling' fouls should be 'no calls'. IF, however, I was screened and again give the pre-agreed upon indicators that I'm looking for their help........my advice is then this: "Make sure the defender 'got their money's worth'......that it's a $79.95 Foul from Macy's, and not a 99 cent special from Dollar General."

To your point, Soccerfan63, if a player doesn't want to be called for a PK foul, DEFEND BETTER / SMARTER! If there is indeed a foul in the Penalty Area that DESERVES to be called, SHOULD be called, and the Center doesn't make that call.....are we not then "deciding the outcome", by NOT 'getting it right'? I would add that having played Keeper in my youth & early adulthood......without ANY DOUBT......every PK I have ever whistled came on a play where said defender made a completely horrible choice against that attacker. The bottom for me as an Official is two-fold: "Get It Right".

I will add this point RE 'officiating mechanics', that is the approach of FIFA / USSF, that many of us carry over to NFHS play:The AR is NOT supposed to call fouls that they are certain the Center has had a clear view of, but rather ONLY those we are reasonably certain he did not see from his angle. In essence, therefore, contrary to what many non-Officials / Spectators / Coaches / Players and other life forms might THINK.......those 3 Officials do NOT have "equal responsibilities" when it comes to calling fouls. We're not ref'n basketball......
Click to expand...

I think this is a real good point. I can't tell you how many times I cringe at defenders with two hands on a striker with the ball and being physical with them in the box. Play with fire and sometimes you get burned, and a savvy striker (not too many at the HS girls level, maybe boys) will take advantage of that recklessness and take a dive. Even with that, sometimes a player just stumbles and falls or gets pushed and the call is made, rightfully so. The defender is just being sloppy and stupid and gets the call against them.

I like your comments on the AR, wish and hope all Centers take that approach. Good to know that you are communicating with the AR at such a high level.
 
MJ_SoccerRef said:
Generally we will permit play to restart IF the subs approaching the bench area will not be near where the restart is taking place. IF teams begin to sub frequently in the 2nd half, trying to milk he clock in a close game, especially in the post-season or key conference games, most of us will stop the clock & inform said HC that it will stop every time they choose to sub.

However, "by the book", having the in-coming subs wait until the players they are replacing are at least VERY near to the bench before coming on IS the technically correct procedure......
Click to expand...

SO MJ Soccer Ref- I am assuming this is NOT the same crew that did the Strongsville-Twinsburg game? I find it hilarious that in one game refs allow 12 players on the field for 6-10 minutes and in another the refs are so anal about substitution procedures. Ironic that I posted this just a week before the Strongsville game....
 
soccerfan63 said:
SO MJ Soccer Ref- I am assuming this is NOT the same crew that did the Strongsville-Twinsburg game? I find it hilarious that in one game refs allow 12 players on the field for 6-10 minutes and in another the refs are so anal about substitution procedures. Ironic that I posted this just a week before the Strongsville game....
Click to expand...

First of all, it's not about "being anal"......it is the correct procedure for substituting, period. Secondly, NOTHING about this unfortunate event is 'hilarious'........and I'm certain no one feels worse about it than that officiating crew.
 
Hoosier Parent said:
Sorry if I offended you Ref, I was just suggesting that based on my experience, referees tend to be more conservative on those calls in the box than midfield and pointing out that was better than the alternative of referees of various degrees of experience, using various level of discretion on such a game turning call.
Click to expand...

Not offended at all, H.P.....the problem with the written word at times: without inflection, the 'spirit' of what is written can be misunderstood.

Also, with regard to fouls in the PA........a great many of us, likely the vast majority, use what many professional levels referees use: 'silent advantage'......letting that play run it's course for a few extra seconds, to see IF the attackers still a shot off, or a chance for one, WITHOUT actually signaling advantage. That could, MAYBE, come into play with 'no calls' in the PA that you see.
 
soccerfan63 said:
SO MJ Soccer Ref- I am assuming this is NOT the same crew that did the Strongsville-Twinsburg game? I find it hilarious that in one game refs allow 12 players on the field for 6-10 minutes and in another the refs are so anal about substitution procedures. Ironic that I posted this just a week before the Strongsville game....
Click to expand...

When they do their jobs properly, now it's being "anal."

:shrug:
 
MJ_SoccerRef said:
B.D.........."anal" must be the Millennial term for "by the book".........
Click to expand...

Well, the entire season and the first several games of the playoffs were done one way, and then during the Regionals and State the entire process is changed? Maybe the good old boy refs who interpret the rules should get their act together or just give up the reigns to the "Millenials". Why do it one way all season then change the process in the post-season (by the book or not)?

My opinion is that the rule of subs coming entirely off the field was not meant for unlimited subs like we have in H.S. It was meant for games with limited subs. During the regular season, I think the refs correctly interpret the rule so that the flow of the game is not interrupted. Which is technically NOT "by the book". Common sense prevails. But, the "anal" interpretation of having the player coming off the field's foot entirely off the pitch before the sub can step on is "anal" in my opinion. Yes, it is the letter of the rule but problematic because it kills the flow of the game and with the numerous subs that some teams make (not just to kill the clock, just in the normal course of the game) takes up way too much time.

And I think it is "hilarious" that while in one regional game we have it called "by the book" and in another game a round later we have refs (5 of them) that cannot count to 11 (or 12 !). Yes, that is hilarious in a sad and ironic way.

Just trying to point out the obvious inconsistencies in the way the substitution rule is applied.
 
soccerfan63 said:
Well, the entire season and the first several games of the playoffs were done one way, and then during the Regionals and State the entire process is changed? Maybe the good old boy refs who interpret the rules should get their act together or just give up the reigns to the "Millenials". Why do it one way all season then change the process in the post-season (by the book or not)?

My opinion is that the rule of subs coming entirely off the field was not meant for unlimited subs like we have in H.S. It was meant for games with limited subs. During the regular season, I think the refs correctly interpret the rule so that the flow of the game is not interrupted. Which is technically NOT "by the book". Common sense prevails. But, the "anal" interpretation of having the player coming off the field's foot entirely off the pitch before the sub can step on is "anal" in my opinion. Yes, it is the letter of the rule but problematic because it kills the flow of the game and with the numerous subs that some teams make (not just to kill the clock, just in the normal course of the game) takes up way too much time.

And I think it is "hilarious" that while in one regional game we have it called "by the book" and in another game a round later we have refs (5 of them) that cannot count to 11 (or 12 !). Yes, that is hilarious in a sad and ironic way.

Just trying to point out the obvious inconsistencies in the way the substitution rule is applied.
Click to expand...
This is where your "opinion" is wrong.

NFHS governs high school soccer. High school soccer does not go by FIFA rules. So, the referees use the NFHS rules with how they operate during a game. Sure, there is probably some confusion (at times) with referees that are USSF-certified, NISOA-certified, and NFHS-certified.

If HS applied the rule, then it is a HS rule.
 
soccerfan63 said:
Well, the entire season and the first several games of the playoffs were done one way, and then during the Regionals and State the entire process is changed? Maybe the good old boy refs who interpret the rules should get their act together or just give up the reigns to the "Millenials". Why do it one way all season then change the process in the post-season (by the book or not)?

My opinion is that the rule of subs coming entirely off the field was not meant for unlimited subs like we have in H.S. It was meant for games with limited subs. During the regular season, I think the refs correctly interpret the rule so that the flow of the game is not interrupted. Which is technically NOT "by the book". Common sense prevails. But, the "anal" interpretation of having the player coming off the field's foot entirely off the pitch before the sub can step on is "anal" in my opinion. Yes, it is the letter of the rule but problematic because it kills the flow of the game and with the numerous subs that some teams make (not just to kill the clock, just in the normal course of the game) takes up way too much time.

And I think it is "hilarious" that while in one regional game we have it called "by the book" and in another game a round later we have refs (5 of them) that cannot count to 11 (or 12 !). Yes, that is hilarious in a sad and ironic way.

Just trying to point out the obvious inconsistencies in the way the substitution rule is applied.
Click to expand...

You're right, it IS "your opinion", and it's meaningless......since you are NOT officiating any of these games. And though it might help you sleep better at night, The Good Ole Boy theory simply demonstrates you are clueless as to how officials receive post-season assignments. You should express your frustration to the OHSAA's Main Office, and ask them for clarification as to how Playoff Assignments are determined. And while you're at it, get a copy of the NFHS Rule Book......and for the first time learn how the substitution process is supposed to handled.....
 
MJ_SoccerRef said:
You're right, it IS "your opinion", and it's meaningless......since you are NOT officiating any of these games. And though it might help you sleep better at night, The Good Ole Boy theory simply demonstrates you are clueless as to how officials receive post-season assignments. You should express your frustration to the OHSAA's Main Office, and ask them for clarification as to how Playoff Assignments are determined. And while you're at it, get a copy of the NFHS Rule Book......and for the first time learn how the substitution process is supposed to handled.....
Click to expand...

Why are you so defensive?

And I am very aware of how HS refs are assigned, coached HS for 15 years so put your arrogant attitude away and try to respect others with differing opinions.. I have the feeling that YOU are the ref that has to micromanage every game, show every fan,player and coach how right you are, and make yourself the center of attention.

I still have not heard a good explanation from you or the other refs on this board as to why subs are handled one way during the season and another way in the tournament.

Granted, I haven't studied the NFHS, FIFA, NCAA and USSF ref guidelines in detail, but if you are denying we have a problem with the way subs are handled then you are the one who is clueless. How in the world can we have a team play with 12 players in a state semifinal game with 5 refs? 2 of those whose basically only job is to manage subs! Quit defending your poor performance as officials and as a professional, address the problem within your organization at the next leadership meeting. All players, coaches and fans want is some consistency. And put away your ego when someone brings up a question or concern about your procedures. This is a discussion board, a forum for those to express their opinions.

In looking at the NFHS guidelines, it states that “. All subs must be beckoned by referee, except at start of a period…” So my point is that the “beckoning” should occur in a manner that does not interrupt the flow of the game and is consistent throughout the season. It is not like we have Wayne Rooney coming off the bench in the 78th minute!
 
soccerfan63 said:
Why are you so defensive?

And I am very aware of how HS refs are assigned, coached HS for 15 years so put your arrogant attitude away and try to respect others with differing opinions.. I have the feeling that YOU are the ref that has to micromanage every game, show every fan,player and coach how right you are, and make yourself the center of attention.

I still have not heard a good explanation from you or the other refs on this board as to why subs are handled one way during the season and another way in the tournament.

Granted, I haven't studied the NFHS, FIFA, NCAA and USSF ref guidelines in detail, but if you are denying we have a problem with the way subs are handled then you are the one who is clueless. How in the world can we have a team play with 12 players in a state semifinal game with 5 refs? 2 of those whose basically only job is to manage subs! Quit defending your poor performance as officials and as a professional, address the problem within your organization at the next leadership meeting. All players, coaches and fans want is some consistency. And put away your ego when someone brings up a question or concern about your procedures. This is a discussion board, a forum for those to express their opinions.

In looking at the NFHS guidelines, it states that “. All subs must be beckoned by referee, except at start of a period…” So my point is that the “beckoning” should occur in a manner that does not interrupt the flow of the game and is consistent throughout the season. It is not like we have Wayne Rooney coming off the bench in the 78th minute!
Click to expand...

So on one hand you want refs to allow the quicker substitution because it interrupts the "flow of the game" but on the other hand you're still mad about the error where one team had 12 players on the field for a part of the time....do you realize if they used the "by the book" (your words) process that the 12 player situation likely would have been avoided? But it would have interrupted the flow of the game as you say. So you're outrage is going in two different directions.
 
winbypin said:
So on one hand you want refs to allow the quicker substitution because it interrupts the "flow of the game" but on the other hand you're still mad about the error where one team had 12 players on the field for a part of the time....do you realize if they used the "by the book" (your words) process that the 12 player situation likely would have been avoided? But it would have interrupted the flow of the game as you say. So you're outrage is going in two different directions.
Click to expand...

First of all, I am not outraged at all. Just expressing my opinion on how we can improve the HS game.

And YES, I want it both ways. I want refs to call subs onto the field quickly and keep the flow of the game going. The HS game is horribly choppy with the outrageous amount of subs. In some cases, it seems like every other stoppage is a sub. If that is allowed, speed that up.

However, if you are going to force a new sub to wait until the player leaving has every toe off the field, THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR HAVING 12 ON THE FIELD. That is exactly my point. In one game it is called by the book and a tremendous amount of time is wasted and in another we have 12 players on the field. I find that terribly ironic.

And I don't think that allowing subs to come in reasonably means that you can't keep track of how many players are on the field. Especially with 5 refs. A good ref notes the 1-1 exchange of players or scans the field after a large group of subs come in and can count to 11.
 
soccerfan63 said:
YES. That is exactly my point. In one game it is called by the book and a tremendous amount of time is wasted and in another we have 12 players on the field. I find that terribly ironic.

And I don't think that allowing subs to come in reasonably means that you can't keep track of how many players are on the field. Especially with 5 refs.
Click to expand...

So which do you want? You can't be in favor of both. One might save more time (even though as the refs said, they can stop the clock if needed) but could lead to a ref losing track of the subs. (You keep saying 5 refs but isn't only 1 keeping track of them really in that system? The one on your sideline?) Or you can make the them come to the sideline before the subs come on. This would certainly help eliminate the 12 on the field issue.

You have to choose...which is more valuable to you? Saving the time or making sure 11 is on the field? In a perfect world we should be able to have both but its not a perfect world is it? So which, in your mind, is the bigger issue that needs solved?
 
winbypin said:
So which do you want? You can't be in favor of both. One might save more time (even though as the refs said, they can stop the clock if needed) but could lead to a ref losing track of the subs. (You keep saying 5 refs but isn't only 1 keeping track of them really in that system? The one on your sideline?) Or you can make the them come to the sideline before the subs come on. This would certainly help eliminate the 12 on the field issue.

You have to choose...which is more valuable to you? Saving the time or making sure 11 is on the field? In a perfect world we should be able to have both but its not a perfect world is it? So which, in your mind, is the bigger issue that needs solved?
Click to expand...

Edited my previous post before I read yours, but I want refs who can keep the flow of the game and are able to count to 11. Is that too much to ask for?
 
soccerfan63 said:
First of all, I am not outraged at all. Just expressing my opinion on how we can improve the HS game.

And YES, I want it both ways. I want refs to call subs onto the field quickly and keep the flow of the game going. The HS game is horribly choppy with the outrageous amount of subs. In some cases, it seems like every other stoppage is a sub. If that is allowed, speed that up.
Click to expand...

You changed your post.

There is no 'if". It IS allowed. And as long as its allowed there isn't much you can do to speed it up. Refs can stop the clocks as noted.

soccerfan63 said:
However, if you are going to force a new sub to wait until the player leaving has every toe off the field, THERE IS NO EXCUSE FOR HAVING 12 ON THE FIELD. That is exactly my point. In one game it is called by the book and a tremendous amount of time is wasted and in another we have 12 players on the field. I find that terribly ironic.
Click to expand...

I would agree. But that would slow the game down more and there is no stoppage time in HS. Sounds like in the game where there were 12 that they were using the more traditional process of substituting.

soccerfan63 said:
And I don't think that allowing subs to come in reasonably means that you can't keep track of how many players are on the field. Especially with 5 refs. A good ref notes the 1-1 exchange of players or scans the field after a large group of subs come in and can count to 11.
Click to expand...

I am sure these were by every definition "good refs". They made a mistake. And I sure they weren't happy with their mistake. I am guessing in a 5 man system that not every ref is responsible for every facet of the game. They split responsibilities I believe (I'll let a ref confirm or refute that). So even though there were 5 refs there, I think the one on the sideline is the one responsible for keeping track of the subs (actually two...one on each side). And the CR oversees the entire game obviously.

So even though in your eyes it shouldn't be hard to keep track of players we have an example where a mistake was made.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top