TEMPORARY SUBS MAY BE IN PLACE NEXT TERM

TEMPORARY concussion substitutes — one of the cornerstones of Sportsmail’s campaign for football to tackle its dementia crisis — could be in place next season. A meeting of rulemakers IFAB next Wednesday may see a vote on bringing in a trial, which would potentially begin as early as next month in America’s MLS. Momentum has been gathering to bring in temporary subs, which allow a player suffering from a head injury to be taken off with the potential of going back on to the field should they be deemed fit to do so by experts. It is thought that the addition would relieve pressure to make a quick decision and see players more open to coming off the field of play should they know that there is a chance they can return. IFAB are meeting in London next week to consider an application to let trials commence by a number of leading leagues, including the Premier League and MLS. A number of unions, including the PFA, are also behind it. The Scottish FA are also thought to be open to the trial. In November 2020, this newspaper launched a campaign calling on football to finally tackle its dementia crisis and calling for the IFAB to ratify temporary concussion substitutes. Chris Sutton, who was instrumental in the campaign and whose father, exprofessional Mike, passed away following a ten-year battle with dementia, called on those involved to ‘do the right thing’. ‘What’s the downside?’ he said. ‘We saw so many situations at the World Cup, right from the start with the Iranian goalkeeper initially staying on the pitch against England when he clearly was not right. ‘Temporary substitutes are common sense. All we are asking for is the best duty of care for the current players and they clearly haven’t been getting that. That’s the long and short of it. ‘I still don’t get what the problem is. A player getting a more thorough check, where’s the issue?’ Sutton believes that temporary subs are a logical next step. ‘Improving the medical attention following a blow to the head — how is that a bad thing?’ he asked. ‘It’s stupid that there is opposition really. ‘It’s a far better option than permanent subs. There may well be idiots trying to abuse the system when it comes in and feign injury but they should be held to account, and given the scrutiny and cameras in the game now that should not be too difficult.’ Should a vote take place, each of the four home nations would hold a vote along with FIFA. Three votes would be enough to see the motion passed. A further IFAB meeting is scheduled in London in March, where the trial could be ratified, although the voting structure is different, with FIFA getting four votes and a 75-per-cent majority needed.