Football’s lawmakers are facing a unified and growing demand to finally introduce temporary concussion substitutions, with over 25 major leagues and player unions including the Premier League, MLS, and Serie A, piling pressure on the International Football Association Board ahead of a crucial vote next month.
IFAB will review the proposal at its Annual General Meeting in Cardiff in March, and the message from the sport’s stakeholders is clear: the current protocols are outdated and dangerous. With medical understanding of brain injury now far advanced and the physical demands of the modern game greater than ever, resisting what is being called an “overdue correction” appears increasingly untenable.
The push follows a formal request from leagues and FIFPRO to run official trials, a request notably absent from IFAB’s communications after its last business meeting, a move that has raised eyebrows among those who argued the case at length. The Premier League, backed by the EFL and PFA, has submitted its own detailed framework designed to eliminate any competitive concerns, long the sticking point for IFAB.
Under the proposed model, if a team uses a temporary concussion sub, their opponent would also receive an extra substitution to maintain fairness. Every incident would be reviewed post match by an independent medical panel using video evidence to prevent tactical abuse, with all trial data shared with FIFA and IFAB.
Previous resistance hinged on ongoing trials for additional permanent concussion subs. With that trial period now complete, supporters argue there is no procedural reason left to delay. “The last obstacle is gone,” stated one league executive involved in the talks.
The backdrop to the debate is sobering. A growing number of former professionals have been diagnosed with dementia linked to repeated heading and concussion, turning theoretical risk into tragic reality. Against that, continuing to ask a dazed player to pass a pitch side assessment in minutes, or forcing a team to sacrifice a permanent sub, feels morally and medically indefensible.
As one source close to the discussions put it: “This is the rare reform that is medically sound, operationally practical, competitively fair, and long overdue.” In other words, for IFAB, it should be a complete no brainer.
