You can dress it up any way you want, but the reality is that allowing Premier League clubs to use five substitutes next season is going to give most benefit to the biggest teams.

I understand the arguments in favour of the move, don’t get me wrong. I get that having extra options on the bench allows clubs to rotate players and avoid them playing too much football. And that may help reduce the number of serious injuries and prolonged spells on the sidelines.

But when all’s said and done, don’t try and tell me it isn’t the big clubs who will benefit the most, simply by virtue of the fact they have the deeper squads with more talent to put on the bench.

Smaller clubs put out their best available 11 for a game and then fill their bench with players who, more often than not, are not on the pitch because they are not up to the standard of the first-choice team; or they are younger and less-experienced members of the squad.

Bigger clubs, on the other hand, are able to fill their benches with seasoned internationals and experienced players who are probably just as good as the players out on the grass. These are alternative, equally talented options rather than players you only turn to in an emergency.

A top side, for example, is likely to have four or five superstar forwards, and it will be a delight for their manager to be able to rotate them during games. Smaller clubs probably have a favoured two or three forwards and then others that are little more than backup.

Of course, it was very hard for the Premier League not to adopt this policy considering the five-sub rule is in play in all of Europe’s other major leagues.

But I fear – in fact I am almost certain – that this will end up widening the gap between the top clubs and the rest over the coming seasons.

Is Chelsea turmoil taking its toll?

Are we seeing the first signs of a Chelsea implosion?

In the immediate aftermath of the Abramovich sanctions nightmare, the players seemed to be riding the storm quite well. While they were shaken, they weren’t stirred, and continued to string together good results.

However, they have now lost back-to-back home games to two quite different clubs, and I suspect this may be evidence that the cloud of deep uncertainty hanging over Stamford Bridge is starting to have a negative effect.

Of the two defeats, losing to Real Madrid in the Champions League was probably the most damaging. Barring a dramatic turnaround in the second leg, it means Thomas Tuchel’s team only really have the FA Cup to focus on now, other than making sure they hang on to a top-four place.

But having said that, losing to Real in the quarter-finals of Europe’s biggest competition is the sort of result that can happen. All the big clubs have off days when playing against other giants. It wasn’t a great performance by the London club, but the main difference between the two sides was an on-fire Karim Benzema.

However, the 4-1 defeat to Brentford last weekend was a whole different kettle of fish and, ultimately, possibly indicative that the squad is starting to struggle with the situation they find themselves in through no fault of their own.

Thomas Tuchel. Photo: Adrian Dennis/AFP

A team with Chelsea’s players and manager should simply not be losing heavily at home to the likes of Brentford, even if their opponents were inspired by a resurgent Christian Eriksen. It is the sort of result that will give their domestic opponents confidence that this is a Chelsea team that is struggling mentally.

And while I am sure Tuchel and his coaching staff will be doing everything in their power to shield the squad from the off-field problems, he will know that the only way to put the players’ mind properly at rest is for the ownership situation to be resolved quickly.

Otherwise, what can currently be defined as a blip has potential to grow into a proper slump.

Your say

Last week, I asked for an explanation how Manchester City managed to top Deloitte’s Football Money League despite only relatively recently becoming a ‘rich’ club. Well, here are Hugh Brock’s thoughts:

“Referring to your piece on City last Sunday, where you question City’s rapid growth. Whatever your view of City’s owners, they have been incredible for the club. They have put money in and not expected a penny back.

“The club is very well run and should you ever have the chance to experience a match day at the Etihad, it is clear to see how appealing the day-out experience is and how they have turned the area into a source of revenue. It’s not just 90 minutes but a good 240 of safe, clean entertainment on and off the pitch.

“Success on the pitch has garnered support and commercial deals from Asia and the Middle East. They have provided Pep Guardiola and his players with everything they require for success, but they have also devised and executed a long-term plan which, in revenue terms, has made them the sixth biggest on the planet. 

“In a nutshell, they make money, from commercial deals, and from matchday revenues, off the back of the success which the owners’ investment has created.” Hugh Brock, e-mail.

E-mail: james@quizando.com

Twitter: @maltablade