Saint Charlie Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 Reduced from 7. Surely that doesn't really suit us. Also means versatile players are vital, ie a defender who plays Full back as well as centre back, or a striker who can also play out wide. Strange decision really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kwsaint Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 HAve you got a link to the article? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
niceandfriendly Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 Very odd. Where did you read this? I thought that rule had only been in place 1 or 2 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Garrett Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 very odd, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Marco Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 Not heard the results as the EGm is today but they are also voting on increasing the number of home grown players in a match day squad to 6. I hope that goes through as we would obviously benefit from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 This has been brought in because teams in lower divisions were often struggling to fill a 7-man bench. Not quite sure why they couldn't have left the rule in for the Championship, whose teams generally (our fishy neighbours of course being the exception) have much bigger squads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crab Lungs Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 (edited) Oh well, another thing to change on the FM Editor I 'spose. Still, it's annoying as if you can fill your subs bench, then why not? I suppose it gives the fish****3rs more of a chance though now that they're opponents subs are reduced. Edited 21 July, 2011 by Crab Lungs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wibble Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/LatestNews/0,,10794,00.html Football League clubs have voted to reduce the number of substitutes that can be named on the teamsheet for matches in the npower Football League from 7 to 5. The vote was taken at an EGM at Leicester City's King Power Stadium. A Football League spokesman said: "This was felt to be a sensible and prudent step given the financial challenges facing many football clubs and the commitment made earlier this summer to adopt UEFA's Financial Fair Play framework." Clubs will still be permitted to name 7 substitutes in the Carling Cup and FA Cup and 5 in the Johnstone's Paint Trophy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JRM Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 i preferred the days when it was 1-11 with one sub who was number 12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 Not heard the results as the EGm is today but they are also voting on increasing the number of home grown players in a match day squad to 6. I hope that goes through as we would obviously benefit from it. Depends what the qualifying criteria are. Taking the starting XI from the St Gallen game, which I'd regard as pretty much our best XI at the moment (possibly swapping Guly for either Barnard or Connolly): Davis Richardson - Fonte - Seaborne - Dickson Chamberlain - Cork - Schneiderlin - Lallana Guly - Lambert Who would count as "home-grown"? Clearly Chamberlain and Lallana would automatically count, as players who have come through our Academy system. Would Schneiderlin count, having been signed as an 18-year-old and having been at the club for more than 3 years? Likewise with Bialkowski who's now been here for 5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 This works in the favour of the Skates anyway. Maybe it was brought in to stop them bleating on about poor treatment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 Depends what the qualifying criteria are. Taking the starting XI from the St Gallen game, which I'd regard as pretty much our best XI at the moment (possibly swapping Guly for either Barnard or Connolly): Davis Richardson - Fonte - Seaborne - Dickson Chamberlain - Cork - Schneiderlin - Lallana Guly - Lambert Who would count as "home-grown"? Clearly Chamberlain and Lallana would automatically count, as players who have come through our Academy system. Would Schneiderlin count, having been signed as an 18-year-old and having been at the club for more than 3 years? Likewise with Bialkowski who's now been here for 5 years. Probably only Guly and Fonte but possibly Bialkowski and Schneiderlin. Otherwise probably the rest of the squad qualify with the possible exception of Forte, a Barbados? international. Something like 3 years at club in UK by 21. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capitalsaint Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 Leicester play in the King Power stadium?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 To qualify as home grown, a player will have had to be registered for at least three seasons at an English or Welsh club between the ages of 16 and 21. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The9 Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 Leicester play in the King Power stadium?! They do now, the original naming rights must have expired. Good job we argued to get St Mary's included as part of the original name or we'd be stuck with Generic Corporate Named Stadium which changes annually. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 Otherwise probably the rest of the squad qualify with the possible exception of Forte, a Barbados? international. Forte is English to all extents and purposes. Born and raised in England and played all his football at English club. Just playing for Barbados because he has no chance with England and one or more of his parents/grandparents is a Barbadian. He has spent at least 3 years at an English (or Welsh in the English league system) club before the age of 21 coming through at Rotherham and Sheffield United's academy and thus qualifies as "home grown". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_lambden Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 Wonder if we or any other clubs name a sub goalie now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 Wonder if we or any other clubs name a sub goalie now? Seven subs is only a relatively recent thing in the Football League in the last few years. The vast majority of teams named a sub keeper when it was five subs before the change. It should just return to how it was done before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
labibs Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 This does hurt us, although only in a small way. As someone has said above, it does make versatile players a lot more useful on the bench next season. Good news for Stephens I would have thought and Butterfield. I can definitely see how clubs in L2 would have been struggling to name a match day squad of 18 for every game throughout the season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lutz Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 a Good news for Stephens . . Why is it good news??the geezer don't play for us!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Marco Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 Depends what the qualifying criteria are. Taking the starting XI from the St Gallen game, which I'd regard as pretty much our best XI at the moment (possibly swapping Guly for either Barnard or Connolly): Davis Richardson - Fonte - Seaborne - Dickson Chamberlain - Cork - Schneiderlin - Lallana Guly - Lambert Who would count as "home-grown"? Clearly Chamberlain and Lallana would automatically count, as players who have come through our Academy system. Would Schneiderlin count, having been signed as an 18-year-old and having been at the club for more than 3 years? Likewise with Bialkowski who's now been here for 5 years. The FA say this is the definition of "Home Grown" "The definition of home grown is trained for three years under the age of 21 by somebody in the English and Welsh professional system" So based on that Davis = HG Richardson = HG Seaborne = HG Dickson = HG Harding = HG Chamberlain = HG Hammond = HG Holmes = HG Cork = HG Morgan = HG Lallana = HG Barnard = HG Lambert = HG etc etc I'd guess the only ones who are not HG would be Fonte,Jaidi and Guly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 Why is it good news??the geezer don't play for us!! He is talking about Jack Stephens. The young defender signed recently from Plymouth Argyle. Not, Dale Stephens, the player that was on loan from Oldham Athletic last season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_lambden Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 No multi-ball system next season either. Dan Harding will be fuming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
labibs Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 He is talking about Jack Stephens. The young defender signed recently from Plymouth Argyle. Not, Dale Stephens, the player that was on loan from Oldham Athletic last season. Indeed I was. Stephens can play both right back and CB I think? Supposed to be a very decent young player, I'd like to see him (and Martin) given a few opportunities this season. Dickson will also become more important, being comfortable at left back or left midfield. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crab Lungs Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 I just don't see the purpose of reducing the subs bench. Actually, it's annoyed me. I wonder if players get a "bonus" for being named in a match squad and twitchy chairmen voted to reduce it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mozz Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 With this and the removal of multi-ball it seems that a lot of the clubs seem to be losing sight of the fact that football should be entertaining to encourage ticket sales Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pedro Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 The 7 subs were a maximum, nothing to stop anyone having a lot less, pointless change, wonder what Poyet thinks of no multi-ball. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Charlie Posted 21 July, 2011 Author Share Posted 21 July, 2011 Just prevents players like Stephens and Ward Prowse making the bench. Also means players like either Richardson or Butterfield, Dickson or Harding will struggle to make the bench! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintAndy14 Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 I just don't understand why people vote for these decisions - subs bench reduced and no multi-ball = more players become unhappy as they're not even involved in a matchday squad, less options for managers to bring suitable players on and less entertaining for fans as every time the ball goes out of play it takes a flipping age to get back to the throw-in taker again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint-scooby Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 More rule changes for the non Prem sides, ehhooooo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 I can fully understand the removal of the multi-ball system, as a number of teams basically cheated the system by removing balls when the home team were winning, throwing extra balls onto the pitch to stop the game, trained ballboys to place the ball in the right part of the corner area for the home side but not the away side, etc. Either it's used consistently throughout the game or not at all. With the subs bench changes, nobody's been forcing clubs to name seven subs. If they only want to name five, name five. It's a bit more understandable in Leagues One and Two because many clubs have very small squads, but there's no reason the Championship couldn't have continued with seven-man benches, IMO. As I said earlier, the only team this benefits in the Championship is Pompey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westofshannonsaint Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 less room on the bench to bring youth through, a bad thing imho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsk Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 I can fully understand the removal of the multi-ball system, as a number of teams basically cheated the system by removing balls when the home team were winning, throwing extra balls onto the pitch to stop the game, trained ballboys to place the ball in the right part of the corner area for the home side but not the away side, etc. Either it's used consistently throughout the game or not at all. With the subs bench changes, nobody's been forcing clubs to name seven subs. If they only want to name five, name five. It's a bit more understandable in Leagues One and Two because many clubs have very small squads, but there's no reason the Championship couldn't have continued with seven-man benches, IMO. As I said earlier, the only team this benefits in the Championship is Pompey. Fully agree with all of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaffe Posted 21 July, 2011 Share Posted 21 July, 2011 The change in substitutions you are allowed to make is a very bad, ill advised move. I can understand maybe this being implemented in League One and League Two, but Championship clubs should have the finances to fill a seven person bench. This also means that it is going to be harder to give the promising youth players a game, which is worrying given the amount of money that is being invested in the new training facility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Mikey Posted 22 July, 2011 Share Posted 22 July, 2011 I just don't see the purpose of reducing the subs bench. Actually, it's annoyed me. I wonder if players get a "bonus" for being named in a match squad and twitchy chairmen voted to reduce it... I guess this must be the main reason. Why mention Financial Fair Play in that article otherwise? 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