The three and six-substitution rules in football: A preliminary comparative analysis in quantitative replacing, game statistics, win rate and winning probability

Abstract

The present study aimed to analyze the effects of the 3-and 6-substitution rule and qualification round on substitution pattern, game statistics, win rate, and winning probability in Brazil's largest U-20 football tournament. Methods: We analyzed 1,339 matches from the São Paulo Junior Football Cup implementing a before-after design considering 6 years (three seasons for 3-subs and three for 6-subs). Results: Approximately 31% of teams used the total number of replacements of 6-subs with the same substitution pattern between rounds. The win rate for both substitution rules was approximately 79% (OR = 3.10, 95%CI [2.18, 4.51]) with a small reduced magnitude (approximately 5%) in 6-subs knockout games. Logistic regression analysis showed that the 6-subs regulation tournament predicted a reduced probability (-12%) of a match ending with a win in the knockout round. There were 6-subs knockout effects (p < 0.05) on game statistics with "negligible" effect size (ES) on "effective playing time" (+1 min; ES = 0.15); decreased "goal scoring" (-0.3;ES = 0.09) and "red cards" per match (-0.1; ES = 0.06). An ordered probit model and partial effects showed that including a replacement unit on a team increased the winning probability by 8% in the group stage, and reduced the chance (-4%) for the opponents trying to do the same in the knockout stage. Conclusion: Overall, 6-subs caused minor effects on the game statistics, win rate, and winning probability. Understanding substitution strategies and motivation, individual and collective performance effects, and whether there will be changes in the game profile will become relevant research issues when a greater number of substitutions rules are universally instituted.

Impact of One Additional Substitution on Player Load and Coaching Tactics in Elite Football

“…In line with recent studies, our findings support the idea that an additional substitution would benefit the game [2,28,29]. The assessment of an additional substitution in regular time clearly indicates the potential for load reduction and an increase in the tactical influence of the coaches on the match.…”

“…While these findings indicate that frequent substitutions can help maintain the health of athletes through squad rotation [28,29], other factors should not be neglected. As already mentioned, the amount of load players experience in relation to their rest time must be considered, especially among the national team players [30][31][32].…”

“…Frequent substitutions can reduce fatigue during a match and between matches and help maintain the health of athletes through squad rotation [28,29]. This becomes even more consequential when the player load is compared to the player rest time.…”

The Five-substitution Option Enhances Teams’ Running Performance at High Speed in Football

“…These authors investigated the Italian Serie A in the 1994-1995 season (with 2 substitutions per match) and in the 1995-1996 season (3 substitutions per match) and they concluded that the reasons to perform the substitutions were more physiological than tactical. Ribeiro et al [28] showed that the increase from 4 to 6 substitutions in young football teams did not produce any variation in the number of the main match statistics analysed in football and it did not affect the winning rate, and the winning probability of the teams with more substitutions. However, none of the studies assessed physical performance variables such as distance covered during the match or high intensity running demands.…”

“…This option was available for team coaches to aid in the management of players’ playing times during congested calendars, but coaches only have three windows to perform these five substitutions, as with the prior up-to-three substitutions regulation. To date, only two studies have analysed the effect of increasing the number of substitutions in match statistics 28 29 . Varela-Quintana et al 29 examined coaches’ behaviour before and after the FIFA regulatory reform in 1995 that authorized the third replacement.…”