The Football League

[BWFC_Insane]

I'd love to hear their justification for restricting out squad to 23 players. Whilst I fully understand they wanted to monitor the club's budget alongside the business plan presented by the takeover I don't see how a player restriction is either fair, or sensible.

If they said 'your business plan allows for a wage budget of X compliant with FFP and proven to be affordable based on said plan, oand we will monitor to ensure you don't surpass this' that would surely be a more sensible monitoring?

If we choose to have 23 players on that budget or 27 surely that is the club's choice?

The artificial restrictions they have put in place are actually interfering with the competitiveness of the league as, it seems we can't decide ourselves how to spread and spend our resources.

Then to top it off we have to pay in a nonsense competition on Tuesday and can only make a certain number of changes or face a fine.

TLDR: Football League are cvnts.....

[bristol_Wanderer3]

I don't think we can blame the EFL. When it comes down to it, it appears we still haven't submitted all the required documentation and that is why we are subject to the one in out scenario. If we are going to blame anyone I think we should look closer to home. Also the rules seems to state 24 players, not 23, although Iles seems to going on about 23 players.

See this link, that Worthy posted yesterday...appendix 5, Part3, Section 10.2.1

http://www.efl.com/global/appendix5.aspx

[BWFC_Insane]

I don't think we can blame the EFL. When it comes down to it, it appears we still haven't submitted all the required documentation and that is why we are subject to the one in out scenario. If we are going to blame anyone I think we should look closer to home. Also the rules seems to state 24 players, not 23, although Iles seems to going on about 23 players.

See this link, that Worthy posted yesterday...appendix 5, Part3, Section 10.2.1

http://www.efl.com/global/appendix5.aspx

Hmm perhaps. I still think it's bobbins that there is a number rather than budgetary restriction.

[Tombwfc]

I bet they'll give in. This is what the league does. It has rules, clubs don't bother following them, they back down and nobody learns anything.

The FL Trophy is an absolute farce though, that much is true.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I don't know the answer to this. What I do have is a question or two. Sometimes questions help frame the thought process.

Why are the rules put in place? To protect clubs from idiotic owners? To protect players from idiotic owners? To protect other clubs from the unfair advantage of rich owners? (The latter is the seeming reason for FFP, if not SCMP.)

How many players in a squad is too many? During a season, can clubs realistically select more than two dozen players with anything like enough appearances? Even if you don't think it needs be proscribed by legislation, what is the perfect squad size? How else should we stop rich clubs stockpiling players, to the detriment of their rivals and those players themselves?

If this were another club who had dropped down into our division carrying an oversized wage bill, would we magnanimously say they could sign another player when one got knee-knack?

One could say it's already somewhat unfair. If you want to make the league more fair, shouldn't we be restricted to spending the same turnover-to-wage percentage?

Like say I don't have the answers or even string opinions but it's an interesting, sprawling topic.

[bobo the clown]

Well put Barnet. It's a bugger when it hits home ... and more so when we don't know the rules in detail, or how it affects us in particular.

If it remains the case that we've only presented a homeopathic version of the accounts then we need to sort that out. Meanwhile, nil desperandum. There were plenty here predicting a slide straight-through the trap door ... again. They were amongst the optimists given how many thought we were a-gonner back in the Spring.

... & it's not like Pratley or Mavis or Clough or Dervitte are any good or anything.

[Nicko58]

I don't think we can blame the EFL. When it comes down to it, it appears we still haven't submitted all the required documentation and that is why we are subject to the one in out scenario. If we are going to blame anyone I think we should look closer to home. Also the rules seems to state 24 players, not 23, although Iles seems to going on about 23 players.

See this link, that Worthy posted yesterday...appendix 5, Part3, Section 10.2.1

http://www.efl.com/global/appendix5.aspx

Hmm perhaps. I still think it's bobbins that there is a number rather than budgetary restriction.

The restriction of the squad numbers looks to be there as a punishment for our failure to comply with the rules rather than just being a financial safeguard, which I suppose is fair enough. By my reckoning we have enough room to make at least one or possibly two more signings without shipping anyone else out, as we have twenty-one (though it will be twenty-two when Andrew Taylor inevitably starts a game) players available to us now who meet the definition of a registered Established Player.

The untimely injuries to our most important players really are beginning to suffocate us now, though, and not just because we can’t play them. Even if the Football League decide to relax the restrictions of the embargo, my concern would be whether the board could actually afford to sign any new players whilst at the same time paying Pratley's and Davies' wages.

[BWFC_Insane]

I don't think we can blame the EFL. When it comes down to it, it appears we still haven't submitted all the required documentation and that is why we are subject to the one in out scenario. If we are going to blame anyone I think we should look closer to home. Also the rules seems to state 24 players, not 23, although Iles seems to going on about 23 players.

See this link, that Worthy posted yesterday...appendix 5, Part3, Section 10.2.1

http://www.efl.com/global/appendix5.aspx

Hmm perhaps. I still think it's bobbins that there is a number rather than budgetary restriction.

The restriction of the squad numbers looks to be there as a punishment for our failure to comply with the rules rather than just being a financial safeguard, which I suppose is fair enough. By my reckoning we have enough room to make at least one or possibly two more signings without shipping anyone else out, as we have twenty-one (though it will be twenty-two when Andrew Taylor inevitably starts a game) players available to us now who meet the definition of a registered Established Player.

The untimely injuries to our most important players really are beginning to suffocate us now, though, and not just because we can’t play them. Even if the Football League decide to relax the restrictions of the embargo, my concern would be whether the board could actually afford to sign any new players whilst at the same time paying Pratley's and Davies' wages.

Taylor is registered. We had to release Finney to do so.

We have 22. We need a backup goalkeeper, a winger, striker and probably some more midfield cover. We aren't going to get all that clearly, but with space for just one more as it stands it isn't easy. As Parky says, hopefully the league will give us some dispensation.