Minimum of one goalkeeper on the bench?

Is this even a real rule? I know in the game the SPL forces you to, not sure if other leagues do. Celtic didn't have a goalkeeper on the bench against Aberdeen, I know Boruc got injured in the warm-up but if he didn't would they have been forced to play him or have him on the bench?

are you not able to leave a space if you cannot fill the sub gk position.... or maybe they designated a sub who would go in goal if needs be. but as far as i know its only in scotland, iv not come accross it anywhere else.

From the SPL Handbook 2008/9. It's not easy language, but:

"Only up to three nominated substitutes for any one Club may take part in a

League Match. A player who has been substituted may not take part in that

League Match again. The list referred to in Rule B7.1 must include two

recognised goalkeepers, one of whom must start the match, and three

outfield players who qualify as Under 21 Players."

Rules B7.1:

"An authorised representative of each Club must provide a written list of the

names of up to 18 Players taking part in each League Match, including the

name(s) of the nominated substitute(s), to the Referee, not less than one hour

before the time of kick-off. The list shall indicate the full names, other than

trialists listed in accordance with Rule D6, of Players and shall indicate the

colour of the goalkeeper's shirt together with the colour of shirt proposed to

be worn by other Players for the Club in the relevant game."

Also on injury - there is another provision which says that if a player is injured before the start of play, after the submission of the list, he may be replaced. Since that rule ^ above only says that there need to be two goalkeepers on your teamsheet when it is submitted, an injury-forced change after that is obviously beyond the rule.

I couldn't be bothered to snip out the irrelevant bits, but basically it is a real rule in the SPL and a few other leagues including Australia's A-League and probably a few others. The game only forces you to pick a sub GK if that is the rule IRL.

A-League has the same rule.

I was gonna say A-League too.

I personally think it's good. In serbia you can have 7 subs and use 3.

So I always have 1-GK 2-DF 1-DM 1-MF 1-AM & 1-ST

It has come in handy on a few occasions but mostly just to make numbers.

I don't think it'll be worth making it a "rule" but is a good "Guideline" to follow

There was no keeper on the bench, but that Slovak(?) full back they've signed (Milan something...) was designated as back up keeper in case Boruc's replacement was injured, so i suppose they still had a keeper on the bench.

From the SPL Handbook 2008/9. It's not easy language, but:

"Only up to three nominated substitutes for any one Club may take part in a

League Match. A player who has been substituted may not take part in that

League Match again. The list referred to in Rule B7.1 must include two

recognised goalkeepers, one of whom must start the match, and three

outfield players who qualify as Under 21 Players."

Rules B7.1:

"An authorised representative of each Club must provide a written list of the

names of up to 18 Players taking part in each League Match, including the

name(s) of the nominated substitute(s), to the Referee, not less than one hour

before the time of kick-off. The list shall indicate the full names, other than

trialists listed in accordance with Rule D6, of Players and shall indicate the

colour of the goalkeeper's shirt together with the colour of shirt proposed to

be worn by other Players for the Club in the relevant game."

Also on injury - there is another provision which says that if a player is injured before the start of play, after the submission of the list, he may be replaced. Since that rule ^ above only says that there need to be two goalkeepers on your teamsheet when it is submitted, an injury-forced change after that is obviously beyond the rule.

I couldn't be bothered to snip out the irrelevant bits, but basically it is a real rule in the SPL and a few other leagues including Australia's A-League and probably a few others. The game only forces you to pick a sub GK if that is the rule IRL.

Guess it's right then, cheers for clearing that up.

There was no keeper on the bench, but that Slovak(?) full back they've signed (Milan something...) was designated as back up keeper in case Boruc's replacement was injured, so i suppose they still had a keeper on the bench.

So could Misun still play outfield or was he only filling the goalkeeper spot?

So could Misun still play outfield or was he only filling the goalkeeper spot?

I'd imagine they would have to technically bring him in as keeper, but they could swap Boruc with who they really wanted to take out in the outfield and then swap back once he's in.

There used to be a rule in the MLS that teams could make a 4th substitution as long as it was a GK substitute, and teams used to do that (until MLS dropped the rule altogether.)

apparently he could do both, goalkeeper if needed and outfield if not...it was legal as well

in game they give u a generated 'fake' player if u cant fill the sub goalkeeper spot...he has t b included

The rule is in place in Denmark too.

Makes no difference to me as I ALWAYS have a keeper on the bench.

In League One, we have never played a keeper on the bench for quite a while. There is no need. The requirement to change your keeper is highly unlikely, and it would cost you 3 points (probably). So what. The loan market is available for injuries and suspensions, as is your youth squad.

I actually only have one recognised keeper in my whole squad. If he got injured or sent off, I would bring a loanee in (you can do this for a keeper even out of the loan window if you don't have a keeper available)

I always have a keeper on the bench anway.

Plus the SPL has 7 subs so its not as if you are cutting down your outfield subs to 4.

Just 2 weeks ago in the Rangers Aberdeen match, Kenny Miller chased the ball and accidently kicked the Aberdeen keeper in the face... blood and all.

Sub keeper came on.

If they had not had him on the bench we would have won.

Its a good rule.

But surely if its a risk that the opposition manager is prepared to take, they shouldn't be forced to compromise their bench options by playing a sub that would never be used in normal circumstances

There are many leagues around the world that insist on 1 GK on the bench.

There are many leagues around the world that insist on 1 GK on the bench.

I think we know that. The question is - should there be?

I think we know that. The question is - should there be?

IRL or in the game?

If in the game, then yes - because compeition rules are mirrored to reflect reality.

If you're talking about real life, this is one for the football forum and not for GD.