Clubs, ourselves included, have squad players because they have the potential to contribute when others are unavailable. Very often that becomes their only opportunity to get into the first team. Your suggestion could see a clubs have any number of squad players missing, due to call ups, then 2 or 3 injuries occur and still have to play when they now can't utilise those squad players who have been called up.
The answer, if there are going to be 4 weeks each season where international call-ups result in postponement, is to schedule less games be played.
The problem ultimately stems from FIFAs desire to grab a bigger slice of the money pie that is available in football at the moment. Same reason as why 2034 World Cup is going to Saudi Arabia.
The large teams who paid for their u-21 teams to participate via solidarity payments, the smaller clubs who welcome even a small boost in attendances and being able to use their stadium's more than 25 times a year and the Inbetween clubs like ours who treat it as a slightly enhanced reserve competition to blood youngsters and those on the periphery of returning from injury whilst trousering some gate and appearance money and having an outside chance of a big run out at Wembley where boycotting fans suddenly set that aside.
I'm not a fan of it but it's not that simple, and it's almost entirely midweek anyway.
My affection for WWFC - and I make no apologies for trying to provide a little balance to the occasional negativity on here - grew even stronger when I watched the interview with Rob Couhig and Joe Jacobson. This is what inclusivity really means and it makes me proud to be associated with our club.
The game has moved so far in a relatively short space of time towards the big clubs and associations. The money involved in the top end of the game, is ruining it for everyone else. It won't be long until the EFL may need to breakaway themselves to protect smaller clubs as the money difference is insurmountable.
The EPPP program has crushed smaller clubs, the TV deals and inflated wages is crushing everyone outside the top flight. It's just not sustainable from Tier 2 down.
The amount of age groups available to play internationals at is causing issues, as is the U23 leagues, U21 internationals and the cap on squad sizes.
If we're going to cap squad sizes at 21/22 outfield players, then I think we need to go back to maximum of three substitutes. This might allow games to go ahead in international weekends.
The system is broken and something needs to give. Be interesting to see where this independent regulator goes.
I would change it radically - abandon U19 to U23 leagues/teams, then only allow age groups up to U18. Over 18s squads limited to 35 players only. So you can play some reserve games. All those decent players between 19 and 23 would then be available to Tier 2 clubs downwards and would get the chance to play and the football, in theory, would improve. Introduce salary caps. Get rid of 39M loss over three seasons and change it to max of 5M loss over three seasons.
Appreciate some of this really needs to be thought through but the European Super League isn't far away because clubs are simply going to go bust at a great rate of knots soon.
I don't like the Premier League yoof teams playing in it...but the EFL cup is a competition and we are in it...and I don't mind it (for the reasons given above) though I never get to any games. Be nice to get to Wembley and winning becomes a habit.
I've given up on Internationals to be honest, I would watch highlights if I had heard there was a good game...but the having days off for England games or excitement of planning where and when to watch a live match is long gone for me.
With respect to the venerable @glasshalffull I accept the explanations for rescheduling games, but it does play havoc with my attendance, my commitment to a subscription and if they start tarting about with TV game days and nights it might make it tricky for me to continue as a regular 'customer'.
Another add on for me would be getting rid of parachute payments, or having them reduced greatly in payout and for only one season. The rest of the money goes to increased solidarity payments. That would insulate the EFL more against the eye watering spending of the PL, and clubs like QPR and Bristol City would not feel pressure to tie themselves in financial knots to keep up with the clubs who just came down, which currently trickles throughout the whole system.
Parachute payments and wider FFP are a huge challenge for the future and the leagues and the regulator. They protect the Prems product by making clubs in and around it more likely to spend, wether that is sensible or not.
Clubs at the foot of the Prem would rather buy us an entire new stadium than give tens of millions to some teams in very similar positions who could be rivals in the next year or two. How you ever get 92 clubs to sort that out though I have no idea.
Surely by stopping parachute payments all together, it would encourage clubs to build into contracts of a player, a caveat of "reduced wages" if we get relegated? It seems only fair that with a reduced income, there is a reduced wage. Maybe I am being a bit too simplistic? 🤷♂️
Playing devil’s advocate here but what would happen if Wigan v Wycombe was postponed due to 2 players from each side being called up for international duty & the previous weekend all 4 players got injured & had to withdraw from their respective international squads?
It could also lead to more short term contracts but the problem with either of those things is the competition when you sign people, if these moves mean less long term stability then overseas becomes more attractive.
Unfortunately with the wage drops built in you just get more of the players who signed for desperate struggling clubs in January deciding they absolutely have to leave "for the good of their careers" when the inevitable happens in May.
I must admit it hadn’t occurred to me until I tuned in to watch Horsham V Barnsley tonight, although Barnsley have players missing on international duty, FA Cup replays seem to go ahead
Comments
This is the most sensible way forward I think.
I've slowly moved from going to England game at £40 a ticket even yonks back to not even watching the qualifiers on TV.
The tournaments just about still justify it for me but like you are surprised its not being phased out rather than embigggened.
Goodness knows how the next tournaments will feel with more games. Saturation point probably.
I’m similar too, and this particular group we had effectively qualified after the first match when we beat Italy away
Embigggened ... now that's a word 🙂
I disagree.
Clubs, ourselves included, have squad players because they have the potential to contribute when others are unavailable. Very often that becomes their only opportunity to get into the first team. Your suggestion could see a clubs have any number of squad players missing, due to call ups, then 2 or 3 injuries occur and still have to play when they now can't utilise those squad players who have been called up.
The answer, if there are going to be 4 weeks each season where international call-ups result in postponement, is to schedule less games be played.
The problem ultimately stems from FIFAs desire to grab a bigger slice of the money pie that is available in football at the moment. Same reason as why 2034 World Cup is going to Saudi Arabia.
It is in the Oxford English Dictionary. Although enlarged would seem more appropriate.
Who would actually miss the EFL Trophy if it were binned? There's three extra fixture slots freed up.
The large teams who paid for their u-21 teams to participate via solidarity payments, the smaller clubs who welcome even a small boost in attendances and being able to use their stadium's more than 25 times a year and the Inbetween clubs like ours who treat it as a slightly enhanced reserve competition to blood youngsters and those on the periphery of returning from injury whilst trousering some gate and appearance money and having an outside chance of a big run out at Wembley where boycotting fans suddenly set that aside.
I'm not a fan of it but it's not that simple, and it's almost entirely midweek anyway.
A perfectly cromulent word.
Lighten up for ruckeration's sake. 😘
You moan about that cup so much I'm wondering if you secretly love it.
D'oh!
I'll happily abandon my principles if we get to the final
I don't mind the odd week off if I'm 100% honest
My affection for WWFC - and I make no apologies for trying to provide a little balance to the occasional negativity on here - grew even stronger when I watched the interview with Rob Couhig and Joe Jacobson. This is what inclusivity really means and it makes me proud to be associated with our club.
Came close a few years ago didn't it? I was already working on my humiliating backtrack
2017, I think?
The game has moved so far in a relatively short space of time towards the big clubs and associations. The money involved in the top end of the game, is ruining it for everyone else. It won't be long until the EFL may need to breakaway themselves to protect smaller clubs as the money difference is insurmountable.
The EPPP program has crushed smaller clubs, the TV deals and inflated wages is crushing everyone outside the top flight. It's just not sustainable from Tier 2 down.
The amount of age groups available to play internationals at is causing issues, as is the U23 leagues, U21 internationals and the cap on squad sizes.
If we're going to cap squad sizes at 21/22 outfield players, then I think we need to go back to maximum of three substitutes. This might allow games to go ahead in international weekends.
The system is broken and something needs to give. Be interesting to see where this independent regulator goes.
I would change it radically - abandon U19 to U23 leagues/teams, then only allow age groups up to U18. Over 18s squads limited to 35 players only. So you can play some reserve games. All those decent players between 19 and 23 would then be available to Tier 2 clubs downwards and would get the chance to play and the football, in theory, would improve. Introduce salary caps. Get rid of 39M loss over three seasons and change it to max of 5M loss over three seasons.
Appreciate some of this really needs to be thought through but the European Super League isn't far away because clubs are simply going to go bust at a great rate of knots soon.
I don't like the Premier League yoof teams playing in it...but the EFL cup is a competition and we are in it...and I don't mind it (for the reasons given above) though I never get to any games. Be nice to get to Wembley and winning becomes a habit.
I've given up on Internationals to be honest, I would watch highlights if I had heard there was a good game...but the having days off for England games or excitement of planning where and when to watch a live match is long gone for me.
With respect to the venerable @glasshalffull I accept the explanations for rescheduling games, but it does play havoc with my attendance, my commitment to a subscription and if they start tarting about with TV game days and nights it might make it tricky for me to continue as a regular 'customer'.
But is it in there with all three Gs? 😵💫
Another add on for me would be getting rid of parachute payments, or having them reduced greatly in payout and for only one season. The rest of the money goes to increased solidarity payments. That would insulate the EFL more against the eye watering spending of the PL, and clubs like QPR and Bristol City would not feel pressure to tie themselves in financial knots to keep up with the clubs who just came down, which currently trickles throughout the whole system.
Parachute payments and wider FFP are a huge challenge for the future and the leagues and the regulator. They protect the Prems product by making clubs in and around it more likely to spend, wether that is sensible or not.
Clubs at the foot of the Prem would rather buy us an entire new stadium than give tens of millions to some teams in very similar positions who could be rivals in the next year or two. How you ever get 92 clubs to sort that out though I have no idea.
Surely by stopping parachute payments all together, it would encourage clubs to build into contracts of a player, a caveat of "reduced wages" if we get relegated? It seems only fair that with a reduced income, there is a reduced wage. Maybe I am being a bit too simplistic? 🤷♂️
Playing devil’s advocate here but what would happen if Wigan v Wycombe was postponed due to 2 players from each side being called up for international duty & the previous weekend all 4 players got injured & had to withdraw from their respective international squads?
Needs to be 3 players from a side to be postponed doesn't it?
It could also lead to more short term contracts but the problem with either of those things is the competition when you sign people, if these moves mean less long term stability then overseas becomes more attractive.
Unfortunately with the wage drops built in you just get more of the players who signed for desperate struggling clubs in January deciding they absolutely have to leave "for the good of their careers" when the inevitable happens in May.
I must admit it hadn’t occurred to me until I tuned in to watch Horsham V Barnsley tonight, although Barnsley have players missing on international duty, FA Cup replays seem to go ahead
"A noble spirit embiggens the smallest man."
@Mr67 Same as the Ex-Pizza Cup. Different rules, presumably.
But there's a G missing 🙄