Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
flecky76

NCFC 25 man squad. 2 members short!!!

Recommended Posts

Our 25 man squad needs to be named on 31st Aug. Going by our pre-season signings so far, we have 23 names that are certainties to be included. We have a few Under 21''s that need not be included by virtue of being under 21 anyway.

Premier League rules state that teams MUST name a 25 man squad as long as they have that number of professionals on the books. Therefore, we surely must be 2 players short. Even if we purchased Pacheco, he would be another U21 anyway.

My point is, if we buy no further players between now and 31/8, TWO of those unwanted players WOULD have to be included in our squad, even if it were highly unlikely they would see game time.

I''m sure Lambert would not put himself in this position where he is suddenly naming a previously unwanted player.... I have every faith that he has long since considered all squad numbers etc. But for me, that means that we are 2 players short waiting to be filled. For me, that would be Hahneman and Lansbury, but that''s probably dreamland!

Ruddy

R Martin

D Laet

Naughton

Drury

Tierney

Ward

Whitbread

Barnett

Lappin

Bennett

Pilkington

Crofts

Surman

Johnson

Fox

Hoolahan

Holt

Vaughan

Wilbraham

C Martin

Morison

Jackson

Under 21''s - therefore not named in the 25:

K Smith

Steer

Rudd

Francomb

Ball

Dawkin

Excluded due to not being wanted (not included in any pre-season friendlies):

MacDonald

Tudur-Jones

S Hughes

S Smith

McNamee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Agree. I would chose MacDonald and NcNamee of those discarded players, but why discard them all when we won''t have enough players to make up the squad? Surely Lambert would have known this before pre-season and begun to include them!

Somebody will be at positions 24 and 25, but who???

For me, it would pretty stupid to name U21''s in these postions, when you clearly don''t need to do so and could name 2 other players in the event of an injuury crisis. Yes, McNamee was poor at times last season, but on some occasions he did come on and turn the game (Burnley, Barnsley and Watford to name but 3). Not wanting to wish the worst, but if Pilkington broker down and Bennet got injured, we would have no potential wingers left, so McNamee could be called on in that scenario, however slim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You can see it now, Match of the Day, Saturday night McNamee running rings round Man U, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea and Man City[:^)]

 

Where''s Smudgy when you need him? What he doesn''t know about McNamee isn''t worth knowing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hey, I saw McNamee''s poor performances as much as anyone else and I would never want to see him starting a match. However, coming on as a sub for 10/20 mins is his biggest asset and I saw his performances against Barnsley, Burnley and Watford and he was instrumental in those games in helping us turn losing positions into winning ones (in the case of Burnley a draw from 0-2 down).

I am in now way saying he''s the best thing since mustard because he isn''t! Consistency is his biggest problem. I''m just merely saying that, as things currently stand with our squad numbers, he is worthy of filling either position 24 or 25.

If not him, then who should fill these positions??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you will find that there is no compulsion to actually name 25 players who are over 21 years old when it comes to producing your final squad lists. In fact, the likes of Arsenal, Liverpool and Manchester City did not reach the magic number of 25 last season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="GMF"]I think you will find that there is no compulsion to actually name 25 players who are over 21 years old when it comes to producing your final squad lists. In fact, the likes of Arsenal, Liverpool and Manchester City did not reach the magic number of 25 last season.[/quote]

You have to name 25 players over 21 if you have them on the books

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
First post so go easy. But I can''t help but think we could do with an experienced centre half in that list (Probably been mentioned a few times no doubt already)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Ncfc26"]

[quote user="GMF"]I think you will find that there is no compulsion to actually name 25 players who are over 21 years old when it comes to producing your final squad lists. In fact, the likes of Arsenal, Liverpool and Manchester City did not reach the magic number of 25 last season.[/quote]

You have to name 25 players over 21 if you have them on the books

[/quote]If we still have 25 players come 31st August then we will have to name them then, if all 5 of the unwanted players leave then we don''t have to name them. As a result there is absolutely no suggestion that we need to sign 2 players, and if we have professionals here it would be silly not to register them. This thread is completely pointless and means nothing. I suspect that Smith and Hughes, possibly McNamee, will still be here and as a result two of them will make the 25, it doesn''t mean we have to sign more players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Ncfc26"]

[quote user="GMF"]I think you will find that there is no compulsion to actually name 25 players who are over 21 years old when it comes to producing your final squad lists. In fact, the likes of Arsenal, Liverpool and Manchester City did not reach the magic number of 25 last season.[/quote]

You have to name 25 players over 21 if you have them on the books

[/quote]

Oh really? That''s news to me, linky up a linky please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the rule means "25 at the end of August but in January new signings must replace existing squad" then is it possible that PL is keeping a couple of places vacant to be able to buy or to find a loan in emergency without needing to jettison any player.

Surely if you have 25 on 31/8 there must ba a possibility of replacing in the January window.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You have to re-submit your squad after the January window, so yeah, there''s room for changes and such. But the above poster is right, you HAVE to submit a full 25 player if you have a big enough squad, which we do. So 2 of those expelled played will need to be named.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My point of the thread was not necessarily that we will be purchasing 2 more players to make up the squad, but to suggest that, if 2 fringe players were to make up the final 25, then why ostracise them and not include them in training and pre-season matches?

It seems pointless to me that we would name 2 U21''s in these positions when we don''t need to.

We used 30+ players last season, so while I don''t expect positions 24 and 25 to see much game time (if any), I feel it''s better to include 2 further players JUST IN CASE.

Despite the squad we had last season, remember that we still called on fringe players on the odd occasion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suspect the stumbling block here is that the players do not qualify for their premiership bonus/wage uplift unless they are in the 25 man squad. This would wxplain the desire to get rid of the group that clearly do not feature in his plans. If pull comes to shove it looks as if we would have to name two of that group to fit the rules. Therein will see a game of brinkmanship between the club who wants to get rid and some of the players agents who know that they will never get a chance of wages like that again even for a year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Ncfc26"]

http://www.premierleague.com/page/Headlines/0,,12306~2094341,00.html

 

[/quote]

Thanks, that''s news to me. I presume that the Premiership teams from last season who did not name a full 25 had a lot of under-21s on their books? This rule though won''t make that much difference in the end, if he can get rid of three from OTJ, McNamee, Cody, Smith and Hughes then he could/would have to name the two remaining to make up the 25. I don''t think there is nothing stopping him sending those two out on loan to reduce the wage bill though?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Hoolahans Ped"]I reckon McNamee would be worth a punt in the Prem, pace to burn, would cause havoc with many a premier league full back.[/quote]Surely you cannot be serious? He barely managed to cause any ''havoc'' against L1 and Champ defenders. Not ruling it out but I''d say unlikely, possibly worth a few mins off the bench now and then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×