He said: "I like the 20 players (in the squad). It doesn't make any sense to travel with 20 players and then you arrive in the stadium and have to send two guys to the stands when the clubs pay every player and invest in every player.

"And it's much better for a manager to have on the bench a right-back, a left-back, a centre-back, a winger, a midfielder, a striker.

"It's much better to have everything there because it's the ammunition you need. For all tactical reasons, beauty of the game, competitive of the game, it's a fair way to treat players because they want to feel they're in the game, and they feel that on the bench.

"It's different to staying at home. So the 20 players on the bench, I love it.

"It gives you more chance to bring young people (on) and gives a much better feeling to everybody. Twenty players on the bench, I think very, very good.

"The five subs, I don't mind it. In the majority of matches, myself, I felt no need for that.

"But one thing is no need, another thing is no chance. So if you have the chance to do it, I don't think it's a problem.

"Because it can only be done in three periods, it doesn't affect much more the real time of the game, coaches cannot stop the game five times as you know. I think it's fine.

"I don't see a problem at all with that."