The9 Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 It makes more sense now as the keepers are now 1, 21 and 31. Gotta have a system Yeah, but that's not a system anyone else has ever used and it doesn't make a great deal of sense. Traditional keeper squad numbers (in England) derived from 22-man squads at major tournaments prior to the 1990s and are 1, 13 and 22 - more recently 12 and 23 have been used to reflect the readiness of foreign players to adopt 13 and the expansion of tournament squads to include a compulsory 23rd player, a third goalkeeper. Last season's use of 1, 23 and 24 was pretty wacky too. Being the number-and-kit keen person I am, I went through the 2010 World Cup squads making a note of the allocation of goalkeeper numbers. It was to do with numbering up two full sets of team kit I had for last season. The interesting thing is that the fact I actually did that is way more interesting than any of the results. (But if you want to know, 1 is set by the rules, 12 was the next most popular, and 18 was more used than 23, especially by South Americans - assuming I'm not misremembering). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 Who'd have thought that a squad list was worth debating... maybe we could try hot dog suppliers next or brand of hot choc? If the hot dog suppliers can inform us of who is likely to be playing or not, go ahead. I'm pretty sure that won't inform the Puncheon and Mills situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 (edited) Ward-Prowse and Jack Stephens having squad numbers is very promising. I'd say it means the square root of not much tbh, squad numbers from about 25 upwards are just where the kids get dumped if they get a number at all, and the process seems pretty arbitrary. Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain was allocated 37 for the Exeter match right at the end of 2009/10 and he didn't have a number until that point all season, whilst Pulis had 21 for all of that season and didn't get near the team. I also remember on Niemi tribute day in Charlton back in 2004 that we had an injury crisis and suddenly added about 10 of the youth squad to the list of those with squad numbers for the sake of the final two matches. They can add people at will, so not being on the list isn't a problem for a youth player. It is slightly more of a problem for Puncheon and Mills. Edited 21 July, 2011 by The9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ricky Redstripe Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 FCK off Forecast. It's like some guy off the street has just wandered into the building. Should insist he's part of any Puncheon deal. I'd take £1 to see both of them gone. Why are people so against Forecast? I've never seen him play but why so aggressively against him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 Why are people so against Forecast? I've never seen him play but why so aggressively against him? Because he's the only person left that some people think doesn't deserve to be in the squad, and some people HAVE to be picking on someone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 how many 3rd choice keepers in championship are better than Forecast I wonder? How many much worse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsk Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 If the hot dog suppliers can inform us of who is likely to be playing or not, go ahead. I'm pretty sure that won't inform the Puncheon and Mills situation. Unless Puncheon and Mills are the hot dog suppliers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsk Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 I've just bought the new shirt with 'Forecast' printed on the back, now they've gone and changed his number FFS! Being anal to the extreme I'd have given Chaplow #8 as he's more of an attacking midfielder. Interesting that 19 is left out. Perhaps we've signed someone, but we're waiting for the opportune moment to announce it (Friday for a bigger walk up on Saturday maybe). Wonder who it could be... So, you think we're going to sign a messy 19 year old?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwsaint Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 Here's the post I responded to: Everyone is entitled to an opinion. If you choose to express that opinion in a public place, such as an internet forum, you have to live with the possibility that others may question it or disagree with it. I did the former on this occasion, as the initial post puzzled me. Here's why, though I've already done this once: We signed Forte in January, so why make suppositions about "if we signed him" when we've already done so? How can he be "rubbish again" exactly? Has he shown himself to be rubbish already in the few minutes he's had on the pitch for us? And how can you say you've never liked a particular player when that player has had so little playing time? Now I have no particular opinion on Forte; he may be brilliant, he may be woeful, he may be anything between those two. I just find it odd that someone can state such strong opinions about him when he's played so little. So I wondered if he'd like to clarify his statement. Is a man not allowed to question another's statement nowadays without being jumped on? Few minutes? He's played 10 games for us and signed around Christmas. I just don't see why we need a mediocre player like him if we are going into the npower championship and need quality players? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jam Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 Yeah, but that's not a system anyone else has ever used and it doesn't make a great deal of sense. Traditional keeper squad numbers (in England) derived from 22-man squads at major tournaments prior to the 1990s and are 1, 13 and 22 - more recently 12 and 23 have been used to reflect the readiness of foreign players to adopt 13 and the expansion of tournament squads to include a compulsory 23rd player, a third goalkeeper. Last season's use of 1, 23 and 24 was pretty wacky too. Being the number-and-kit keen person I am, I went through the 2010 World Cup squads making a note of the allocation of goalkeeper numbers. It was to do with numbering up two full sets of team kit I had for last season. The interesting thing is that the fact I actually did that is way more interesting than any of the results. (But if you want to know, 1 is set by the rules, 12 was the next most popular, and 18 was more used than 23, especially by South Americans - assuming I'm not misremembering). Seems like the system is running through the squad (with the exception of 11 and 13). Right backs at 2, 12 and 22; Left backs at 3 and 23, Centre backs at 6, 15, 16 and 25. Doble, a striker is 29. Makes it more interesting the 5 and 19 have been left available, no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over land and sea Posted 4 August, 2011 Share Posted 4 August, 2011 According to that well known fountain of all knowledge, Wikipedia, five of the Under 21s have been given high squad numbers (between 35 and 40). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southampton_F.C._Academy Of course, anyone can edit Wiki but it does seem an odd thing to make up. I've not seen this confirmed anywhere else - anyone know if this is accurate or made up? The players are: 35 Harlee Dean 36 Andy Robinson 37 Alberto Seidi 38 Lloyd Isgrove 39 Sam Hoskins 40 Aarran Racine The other two U21s, Jack Dovey and Jack Saville, do not have numbers shown. Jack Saville is the only of our players to be missing from all squad lists on the OS. He's no longer shown in the first team squad, U21s or (for obvious reasons) the U18s. Come on OS - sort it out! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 4 August, 2011 Share Posted 4 August, 2011 According to that well known fountain of all knowledge, Wikipedia, five of the Under 21s have been given high squad numbers (between 35 and 40). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southampton_F.C._Academy Of course, anyone can edit Wiki but it does seem an odd thing to make up. I've not seen this confirmed anywhere else - anyone know if this is accurate or made up? The players are: 35 Harlee Dean 36 Andy Robinson 37 Alberto Seidi 38 Lloyd Isgrove 39 Sam Hoskins 40 Aarran Racine The other two U21s, Jack Dovey and Jack Saville, do not have numbers shown. Jack Saville is the only of our players to be missing from all squad lists on the OS. He's no longer shown in the first team squad, U21s or (for obvious reasons) the U18s. Come on OS - sort it out! It seems feasible as we've done similar before, but I'll believe it when I see it in the Match Programme or on the OS, or one of them on the pitch or bench (which is pretty unlikely with only 5 subs). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowers-sfc Posted 12 August, 2011 Share Posted 12 August, 2011 danny fox will be number 13. source - the people who do the shirt printing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avenue Saint Posted 12 August, 2011 Share Posted 12 August, 2011 Good. Centre back @ 5 and Rodriguez @ 11 will be job done. Lovely. Thank you. Goodbye championship Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 12 August, 2011 Share Posted 12 August, 2011 danny fox will be number 13. source - the people who do the shirt printing. Of course, perfectly in line with Nigel's OCD numbering scheme. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bowers-sfc Posted 12 August, 2011 Share Posted 12 August, 2011 Of course, perfectly in line with Nigel's OCD numbering scheme. Eyy? Care to explain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsk Posted 12 August, 2011 Share Posted 12 August, 2011 Eyy? Care to explain? Fox is a LB. LBs traditionally wear number 3; the lowest number ending in a 3 is 13. Easy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 12 August, 2011 Share Posted 12 August, 2011 (edited) Eyy? Care to explain? Yeah, the majority of squad numbers are based on the traditional numbers for that position : Goalkeepers are numbers 1, 21 and 31 Left backs are numbers 3, 13 (apparently) and 23 Centre backs are (5 vacant), 6, 15, 16, and 25. Right backs 2, 12 and 32 Our Centre midfielders have 4, 8, 14, 18. Creative/Attacking midfielders 10 and 20 Wingers (11 - now sold), 17 (and 33 because De Ridder wanted 3x 11) and strikers have 9, (19 vacant) and 29 (plus Lambert and Connolly have kept last years' numbers 7 and 22) The only really weird one is Holmes getting 24, which I assume he got because Bart swapped with him to get the GK numbers to end in 1. Reeves has 28 but is unlikely to feature, and there's some rumour of other kids getting the numbers from 34+ in no particular order but it's not confirmed in the programme or on the web. Edited 12 August, 2011 by The9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 12 August, 2011 Share Posted 12 August, 2011 Wingers (11 - now sold), 17 (and 33 because De Ridder wanted 3x 11) He should have waited.... 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