SaintNeil90 Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 With only being allowed to name 5 substitutes this season... We have at least 23 players (maybe more if we sign more players) that could make the first 11. We can only name 16 so that makes 7 players who will miss out each game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwsaint Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 My opinion yes but when I suggested it at the beggining of the transfer window everyone seemed to disagree... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint77 Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 simples NO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L1Minus10 Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 Dunno if this has been covered elsewhere but rule change sucks. How can they bring it in a week before the season starts when managers have prepared their squad sizes, partly on the need to have 7 subs. Bring it in for next year then fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintNeil90 Posted 23 July, 2011 Author Share Posted 23 July, 2011 Alot of good players are not going to make the match day squads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 I think yes. If we have a nearly fully fit squad its going to take some very skillful man-management to keep players that will see themselves as first team/first choice, happy with either a place on the bench or in many cases not even making the match day squad. There are obviously much worse problems that a football club can have, but keeping a squad happy is important throughout a season and I think this might be a struggle (see Man City and similar situations). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshsaint92 Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 Yes, if we are wanting to bring a few youngters through and keep the whole squad happy then we need to lose 1 or 2 IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 Dunno if this has been covered elsewhere but rule change sucks. How can they bring it in a week before the season starts when managers have prepared their squad sizes, partly on the need to have 7 subs. Bring it in for next year then fine. Exactly. And what is appropriate for a lower League 2 side isn't really applicable to a team pushing towards the top of the Championship. Surely it could have been worked, so that each division voted seperately, wouldn't have been too much effort and would have made the vote a lote fairer and more relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 With only being allowed to name 5 substitutes this season... We have at least 23 players (maybe more if we sign more players) that could make the first 11. We can only name 16 so that makes 7 players who will miss out each game. squad too big ? .....of course not... we have 46 league games ahead of us + League cup games + FA cup games... Anything can happen..(hopefully not) but...injuries..(Lambert's is only " slight " - whatever that means) or so were told... but... injuries, suspensions ? , loss of form...all play a part in matters..(not to mention the Lee Barnard situation with the courts...) NO ! ..fit players, lots of competotion and having a good bench where we can sub. players in after 60 mins...keeps everyone happy and no-one has to knock their brains out for 96 minutes every match...and I am a great believer in having a "home side " and an " away side" ..don't know about NA, but playing an extra defender in tough away fixtures is handy, as well as having a couple of extra attackers / strikers on the bench in home fixtures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintNeil90 Posted 23 July, 2011 Author Share Posted 23 July, 2011 Every game one of our centre midfielders will miss out on the squad entirely, yet they are all good enough for the first 11. In terms of attacking midfielders we have lallana, de ridder, chamberlain, holmes, guly, forte... and only 3 of these will be in a match squad no doubt. The new substitution rule is ridiculous. Who cares how many subs you are allowed to name, it only matters that you can make 3 subs. Teams will not be able to bring through youngsters as its a risk to name them over a more senior player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintNeil90 Posted 23 July, 2011 Author Share Posted 23 July, 2011 squad too big ? .....of course not... we have 46 league games ahead of us + League cup games + FA cup games... Anything can happen..(hopefully not) but...injuries..(Lambert's is only " slight " - whatever that means) or so were told... but... injuries, suspensions ? , loss of form...all play a part in matters..(not to mention the Lee Barnard situation with the courts...) NO ! ..fit players, lots of competotion and having a good bench where we can sub. players in after 60 mins...keeps everyone happy and no-one has to knock their brains out for 96 minutes every match...and I am a great believer in having a "home side " and an " away side" ..don't know about NA, but playing an extra defender in tough away fixtures is handy, as well as having a couple of extra attackers / strikers on the bench in home fixtures. Its alright saying we need loads of players just in case something happens but the reality is alot of our players are going to miss out and not make many appearances this season. Yes it is good for the club because we can rest players and have cover but in reality players who think they are good enough for the first 11 but dont make many appearances are not going to be happy bunnies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 (edited) Its alright saying we need loads of players just in case something happens but the reality is alot of our players are going to miss out and not make many appearances this season. Yes it is good for the club because we can rest players and have cover but in reality players who think they are good enough for the first 11 but dont make many appearances are not going to be happy bunnies. .they will be happier if they end up being in the squad in the Premiership next season. looking at the overall personnel, many of the younger ones have little /no CCC experience and have already progressed further than they might have dreamed of when we were in L1. on the injury front..remember in the spring.. we suddenly had FOUR midfielders out at the same time ...luckily their subs. did a good job, but we don't want to blow promotion chances because we've got key injuries. ..just when the pressure is on...we're on the back of TWO good seasons, if we miss promotion this season, it'll be harder next ...when the balloon has burst and we'll have to build momentum again. Were not talking about overpaid, spoilt Prem. divas, these are mostly lads beginning to make their careers and it looks good. Edited 23 July, 2011 by david in sweden Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skintsaint Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 We have at least 23 players (maybe more if we sign more players) that could make the first 11. We can only name 16 so that makes 7 players who will miss out each game. Take out the GK's we have 20 players...2 for each position. Not too many at all and good for competion. Not to mention some of these players like Martin, Doble etc wont be expecting first team football every week. Think squad size is about right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintNeil90 Posted 23 July, 2011 Author Share Posted 23 July, 2011 Alot of the players who will miss out are not youngsters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 We used 29 players last season, 36 the season before. Currently have 23 or 24 that could be considered 1st team (not counting Mills or Punch). Is squad too big? No, probably just about right if we add new CB. Expect 2 or 3 players to go out on loan. Injuries and suspensions will mean most will get in the matchday squad often enough. Agree that dropping to 5 subs is bad news for bringing in young players, but even 5 subs is too many. They should have made the rule that at least 2 subs should be under say 21. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 I think it's about right at the moment. I feel that to have a big enough squad to last a full season then you need 20-24 good players, plenty of options with a few young players on the fringes. When you take into account that Holmes & Connolly have question marks over their fitness, Jaidi may struggle to play twice a week, Puncheon wont play and might not be here and Chamberlain also might not be here and the squad also contains 3 goal keepers i think we are about right. Realistically there are about 16-18 players who could claim to be first choice in their position, although in reality Davis, Fonte, Lambert, Lallana and Chamberlain (if here) are really the only automatic choices, the rest are up for grabs. with the likes of Jonno Quick, Holmes & Seabourne who are squad players. I think in terms of competition for places we are in a pretty good position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 We used 29 players last season, 36 the season before. Currently have 23 or 24 that could be considered 1st team (not counting Mills or Punch). Is squad too big? No, probably just about right if we add new CB. Expect 2 or 3 players to go out on loan. Injuries and suspensions will mean most will get in the matchday squad often enough. Agree that dropping to 5 subs is bad news for bringing in young players, but even 5 subs is too many. They should have made the rule that at least 2 subs should be under say 21. Agree with most of that post Vectis, except for the last bit. Age has nothing to do with maturity or coming to form. I'd hate to have to play an untried 19 year old as a sub. in a crucial game because the rule book said so. Too complicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Windmill Arm 2 Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 Fook me !! Some of you will find a friggin drama in everything, the skates have the total opposite problem, I know which id prefer. This forum is being overun by choppers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 I think it's about right at the moment. I feel that to have a big enough squad to last a full season then you need 20-24 good players, plenty of options with a few young players on the fringes. When you take into account that Holmes & Connolly have question marks over their fitness, Jaidi may struggle to play twice a week, Puncheon wont play and might not be here and Chamberlain also might not be here and the squad also contains 3 goal keepers i think we are about right. Realistically there are about 16-18 players who could claim to be first choice in their position, although in reality Davis, Fonte, Lambert, Lallana and Chamberlain (if here) are really the only automatic choices, the rest are up for grabs. with the likes of Jonno Quick, Holmes & Seabourne who are squad players. I think in terms of competition for places we are in a pretty good position. Again, most of yr. message is right but if ANY of the key players you mentioned above were out for a longer period everyone would be changing their underwear by HT. We were absolute cr*p when Lallana was out for those games last season. I hate to have to play a month or more without ANY of the others. Sorry, but the more the merrier. Makes for good competition and gives insurance in case of the unforseen. Anyone who doesn't like it ... (example : Puncheon) is welcome to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
astrasri Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 With only being allowed to name 5 substitutes this season... We have at least 23 players (maybe more if we sign more players) that could make the first 11. We can only name 16 so that makes 7 players who will miss out each game. Are you sure you are on the forum of the right club? If you care to read one or two other threads on here you find that we still need to sign another 5 players yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint77 Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 Fook me !! Some of you will find a friggin drama in everything, the skates have the total opposite problem, I know which id prefer. This forum is being overun by choppers! + one Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turkish Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 Again, most of yr. message is right but if ANY of the key players you mentioned above were out for a longer period everyone would be changing their underwear by HT. We were absolute cr*p when Lallana was out for those games last season. I hate to have to play a month or more without ANY of the others. Sorry, but the more the merrier. Makes for good competition and gives insurance in case of the unforseen. Anyone who doesn't like it ... (example : Puncheon) is welcome to go. Of course we'd be weaker without our key players, that's why they are key players!!! Every club in the world is the same. You can just have a squad full of stars. Thats why i feel we've got a decent balance. 4 or 5 key players, another 12 or 13 or so who could claim to be first choice but have to fight for it and then squad players who will need to push on but can only really expect to play a bit part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ant Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 I think it's about right at the moment. I feel that to have a big enough squad to last a full season then you need 20-24 good players, plenty of options with a few young players on the fringes. When you take into account that Holmes & Connolly have question marks over their fitness, Jaidi may struggle to play twice a week, Puncheon wont play and might not be here and Chamberlain also might not be here and the squad also contains 3 goal keepers i think we are about right. Realistically there are about 16-18 players who could claim to be first choice in their position, although in reality Davis, Fonte, Lambert, Lallana and Chamberlain (if here) are really the only automatic choices, the rest are up for grabs. with the likes of Jonno Quick, Holmes & Seabourne who are squad players. I think in terms of competition for places we are in a pretty good position. Perfect answer to the question posed, in my opinion. With regard to the section I've put in bold above, I too am not convinced that all of the 23 or 24 first team players we currently have are of the quality to push for a starting place without injuries or suspensions. However, they'll be incredibly useful as backup, subs or for when the sh*t hits the fan. If we can comfortably afford to maintain a large squad we'd be mad not to. Even with the shortest of FA Cup/League Cup or (whisper it) play-off runs it could be a 50+ game season don't forget. Sure, you can sign players in January but it'd be better to do so because we choose to - not to buy any old cr*p because our hand's been forced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 [/b] Agree with most of that post Vectis, except for the last bit. Age has nothing to do with maturity or coming to form. I'd hate to have to play an untried 19 year old as a sub. in a crucial game because the rule book said so. Too complicated. It was meant as a way of ensuring that clubs were able to bring young players into the squad. It has been suggested seriously before, part of the squad has to be under a certain age (whether it is 18, 19, 20, 21 or whatever). If all clubs are bound by the same rule it is not an issue. It is artificial but something that has to be considered if clubs are going to continue to produce young players. Nothing to say you have to play the untried youngster, but having to have one or two on the bench means that it is possible to bring them into the squad. It was simple with 7 subs, sit a kid on the bench, get him used to the big match atmosphere, knowing that there was no way he was going to play, but with 5 subs, this option is very limited, given you nearly always waste 1 sub having to have a keeper. Still, bring back the good old days I say, no subs at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 The aim should be to have two players for every position in case of injury and to maintain healthy competition for places. We are as good as there right now, therefore no, the squad is near perfect for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saints_is_the_south Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 The aim should be to have two players for every position in case of injury and to maintain healthy competition for places. We are as good as there right now, therefore no, the squad is near perfect for me. Spot on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintNeil90 Posted 23 July, 2011 Author Share Posted 23 July, 2011 Fook me !! Some of you will find a friggin drama in everything, the skates have the total opposite problem, I know which id prefer. This forum is being overun by choppers! + one A drama? sorry but who said it was a drama? I simply posted a question considering we have a larger squad than most and the subs have been cut to 5. In fact Adkins even hinted that the decision to cut down to 5 subs was a bad one for a club like us with a large squad and for trying to push youngsters through. So no it was not made out to be a drama, just a question to get peoples opinions, because this is a forum. If you dont like it then dont bother commenting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 The aim should be to have two players for every position in case of injury and to maintain healthy competition for places. We are as good as there right now, therefore no, the squad is near perfect for me. no, too many attacking players and not enough quality at CB, we don't really need all of Lallana,Chamberlain,Lambert,Barnard, Holmes,Forte,Connolly,Guly,Doble and De Ridder ,10 players for 4 slots at best.Jaidi will be too slow and Seaborne will prove inadequate so we need to do something about that sharpish, hopefully with Jemal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LGTL Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 I think we need a CB pretty badly. More important than a getting a striker in at the moment I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Chalet Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 Based on 2 per position: Davis Bart Richardson Butterfield Fonte Jaidhi Martin Seabourne Harding Disckson De Ridder Chamberlain Hammond Cork Spiderman Chaplow Lallana Holmes Guly Barnard Lambert Connolly That still leaves us: Fourpast Mills Forte Puncheon Doble Reeves Reckon the squad is about the right number now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Charlie Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 Looks tough for someone like Forte to get a look in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cestrian Saint Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 Yes. Too large with players who aren't capable of getting us out of the Championship. FACT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperMikey Posted 23 July, 2011 Share Posted 23 July, 2011 Mourinho has said that the best sized squad is 23 first-team players. 3 GKs 2 RBs 2 LBs 4 CBs 4 CMs 2 RMs 2 LMs 4 STs Going on our current squad, that gives us: GK - Davis, Bialkowski, Forecast RB - Richardson, Butterfield LB - Harding, Dickson CB - Fonte, Jaidi, Martin, Seaborne CM - Schneiderlin, Cork, Hammond, Chaplow RM - Chamberlain, De Ridder LM - Lallana, Holmes ST - Lambert, Barnard, Guly, Connolly I expect we'll see Mills and Puncheon leave within the week, and the likes of Forte, Doble, Stephens and Ward-Prowse will be on the fringes of the squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david in sweden Posted 24 July, 2011 Share Posted 24 July, 2011 It was meant as a way of ensuring that clubs were able to bring young players into the squad. It has been suggested seriously before, part of the squad has to be under a certain age (whether it is 18, 19, 20, 21 or whatever). If all clubs are bound by the same rule it is not an issue. It is artificial but something that has to be considered if clubs are going to continue to produce young players. Nothing to say you have to play the untried youngster, but having to have one or two on the bench means that it is possible to bring them into the squad. It was simple with 7 subs, sit a kid on the bench, get him used to the big match atmosphere, knowing that there was no way he was going to play, but with 5 subs, this option is very limited, given you nearly always waste 1 sub having to have a keeper. Still, bring back the good old days I say, no subs at all. ...of course and FIFA have already started to legislate for squads for minimum numbers of " homeland " players. For Saints that is a rare blessing, as we have the best Academy in the land, and it is already producing the goods, so we will automatically have youngsters on the bench, and we already have a good number of established British players in our squad. I can't agree with your other point, though. No subs at all could be a real killer. Of course we older types can remember the heroic days when the likes of Terry Paine, Jimmy Gabriel and Cliff Huxford pulling on the green jersey in emergencies (pre-1966 when subs. were introduced) or the brave player who soldiered on despite his injury rather than go off - and likely worsened the injury...but in those days red and yellow cards didn't exist and there was more tolerance from refs. for the shoulder charge or ankle tap...nowadays goal celebrations, or a wrongly placed swear word can have disasterous consequences. No... I think we must have subs. Whether it's 5 or 7 is immaterial really when you can only use 3. The League ruling (for only 5) was (apparantly) - a relief for those cash-strapped clubs who couldn't afford to carry bid squads, and whilst some clubs need the subs. to cover injury problems, other may use it to change the playing formation. See how often subs. come on and score...Connolly did, Jo Tessem did, Wright-Phillips scored more as a sub. than when picked from the start, and I can recall that Tony Funnell and Steve Moran seemed to score quite often when they came off the bench. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now