Jump to content
IGNORED

Squad numbers announced for new season


Agard Days Night

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, LondonBristolian said:

Or that he really wanted to bag the 9 shirt now Fammy has gone...

I just feel it wasn't his decision by the wording,

the number 9 shirt held previously by Famara Diédhiou will be worn by Chris Martin who gives up number 7.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Gazred said:

1 GK

2 RB

3 LB

4 CM

5 CB

6 CB

7 RW

8 CM

9 CF

10 CF

11 LW

12+ Subs

Anything else is just too modern and means we have to play something other than 442, gone are the days! ?

I still prefer this number arrangement!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Bristolisredd said:

Club numbers mean nothing 

And yet players like specific numbers. 

This means we get to play a fun game called conjecture to see if we can read something into something that means nothing!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TBW said:

7 isn't a striker number

It's almost like it's not the 1970s anymore. 

Cantona, Ronaldo, Owen (at Man Utd). Chris Martin last season...

Numbers don't really mean much these days, but to say 7 isn't a strikers number.....

1 hour ago, redsquirrel said:

isnt it normally lucky 7s, seeing as we have a 13, perhaps we binned 7 as the unlucky one. who was 7 before?? maybe a new deal possible??

 

Chris Martin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd hope that leaving the 7 shirt free means we're getting a winger in, but the past few years I believe it's gone Marvin Elliott, Korey Smith then Chris Martin.

At the very least I think it means we'll have 1 more first teamer joining.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know everyone is a bit doom and gloom about this season coming but, looking at that squad, it’s actually a really decent group of players with not too many gaps and no passengers now. 
 

Even if we didn’t manage to get a striker of quality in, then I wouldn’t be too upset going into season with that group. If a few key players find form, we could be very decent. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gazred said:

1 GK

2 RB

3 LB

4 CM

5 CB

6 CB

7 RW

8 CM

9 CF

10 CF

11 LW

12+ Subs

Anything else is just too modern and means we have to play something other than 442, gone are the days! ?

Good to see Atkinson as 5, not 77 or whatever. Implies a good strong no nonsense central defender.

Or it could mean the square root of jack ****! ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Taz said:

Cantona, Ronaldo, Owen (at Man Utd). Chris Martin last season...

Numbers don't really mean much these days, but to say 7 isn't a strikers number.....

Ronaldo went to United as a winger and Beckham replacement. 

Owen took 7 as it's what was left. Berbatov was 9 and Rooney, 10.

Martin took 7 as it's what was left and changed it at the first chance he's gotten.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, TBW said:

Ronaldo went to United as a winger and Beckham replacement. 

Owen took 7 as it's what was left. Berbatov was 9 and Rooney, 10.

Martin took 7 as it's what was left and changed it at the first chance he's gotten.

Shevchenko. Mbappe.

Granted it's not a "traditional" strikers number, but it's used a fair bit.

My original (slightly tongue in cheek) point, was that we're after a striker that can score goals - not be a target man, or make assists - one who scores. We have 7 vacant, the only lower end number. If there was a goalscoring striker out there who wore the number 7, then perhaps that could be a smaller pool to start a rumour from.

It wasn't meant as a hugely serious post, but seeing as you put so much effort into it, you forgot to respond about Cantona, and I never mentioned Berbatov or Rooney because they never wore the number 7.

:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TBW said:
4 hours ago, ExiledAjax said:

Anyone slightly surprised that King has taken 10? Is that a thing for him? Didn't think he played the 10 role?

7 isn't a striker number. 

It's almost like it's not the 1970s anymore. 

Alan Skirton wore 7 and scored a few as well.

To us old 'uns, 10 was Bobby Kellard and then Gerry Gow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, LondonBristolian said:

Even with our mass departures, that's still a squad of 34 by my count.

Obviously some will go on loan. Know the 13 shirt was vacant but still wonder if fact Wiles-Richards has it means he is sticking around as 3rd choice (guess someone needs to!)

Similarly guessing Bakinson and Pring are very much part of our plans next year. Cundy part of the squad too, I reckon. 

To be honest 34 may be the number , but at a stretch it’s 23 senior pros and 11 kids , so even with one more in only 24 seniors and kids who are to all intentions under 23’’s , can see at least  6 or more going out on loan , regardless of having a number, so the rest back up the squad , Pearson will think that’s about right 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some players attach themselves to numbers as part of their "brand"/superstition/schoolboy number etc. 

Some players genuinely don't care.

When I played (albeit MUCH lower level) there where genuine punch ups over numbers and money exchanged in certain instances. I'd normally take what was left in the bag - I remember playing a Hampshire cup game at CF with the number 2 shirt because the RB wanted 10 and was the hardest bloke in the team. Upset the ref and the opposition a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, VT05763 said:

It is planned for most of the younger and/or Academy products to be staying with the First Team squad, less of them being loaned out than perhaps many think.

More likely higher earning senior squad players going on season long loans - IMO.

I tend to agree, less going out on loan, if Nige wants to run a trimmer first team squad, then no point carting Bell and / or Conway out on loan if you need them to cover Wells for example.

Who of the senior squad players do you see going out on loan?

5 hours ago, GrahamC said:

Would expect Wiles-Richards to play for the U23s when he can, so makes a lot of sense for him to do so with Wollacott now gone.

It is a large number but does effectively include the majority of our U23 squad, around a dozen of these can be classed as that, leaving us with a logical 22 or so.

Yep, backed up in the u23s by Will Buse and Luca Smith if fixtures are too close / coincide with travel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Davefevs said:

I tend to agree, less going out on loan, if Nige wants to run a trimmer first team squad, then no point carting Bell and / or Conway out on loan if you need them to cover Wells for example.

Who of the senior squad players do you see going out on loan?

 

Palmer , Nagy and Moore would be candidates IMO. (if not sold)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Taz said:

Shevchenko. Mbappe.

Granted it's not a "traditional" strikers number, but it's used a fair bit.

My original (slightly tongue in cheek) point, was that we're after a striker that can score goals - not be a target man, or make assists - one who scores. We have 7 vacant, the only lower end number. If there was a goalscoring striker out there who wore the number 7, then perhaps that could be a smaller pool to start a rumour from.

It wasn't meant as a hugely serious post, but seeing as you put so much effort into it, you forgot to respond about Cantona, and I never mentioned Berbatov or Rooney because they never wore the number 7.

:rolleyes:

I never mentioned Cantona because obviously there are odd cases but if you want to be pedantic then Eto'o for Everton and Baros for Liverpool wore #5 so that's as much a striker number in the Premier League than #7 is from your examples so far.

My point is, to see #7 empty and think "ooooh striker incoming", is wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...