Lookers_Carl Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 Starting from next season, clubs must have at least 4 players in their 16 who were at the club for three years prior to their 21st birthday Who do we have - Taylor - Allott (came through our youth system and was with us for three years prior to being 21) - Allesandra - Smalley - Lomax - Wolfy - Bell I think this has just increased taylors price even more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnny punkster Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 shame it wasn't 5 or 6,but it's definately a step in the right direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lookers_Carl Posted December 18, 2008 Author Share Posted December 18, 2008 shame it wasn't 5 or 6,but it's definately a step in the right direction. Think this rule will have nothing short of a huge impact on some of the clubs whom get relegated from the prem Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ajjovek Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 which divisions is this in? i'm guessing it doesnt apply to the prem Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnny punkster Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 which divisions is this in? i'm guessing it doesnt apply to the prem yep Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simpo Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 It isn't players who were at the club for 3 years before they were 21, it's players who were in the country for 3 years before they were 21 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lookers_Carl Posted December 18, 2008 Author Share Posted December 18, 2008 It isn't players who were at the club for 3 years before they were 21, it's players who were in the country for 3 years before they were 21 players who were at the club for at least 3 years prior to their 21st birthday. The latter would be against EU law, hence why they were having none of Blatters proposed 6 plus 5 rule Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simpo Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 players who were at the club for at least 3 years prior to their 21st birthday. The latter would be against EU law, hence why they were having none of Blatters proposed 6 plus 5 rule You can be foreign but still be home-grown, rendering the new rule legal. If it was about players coming through the club's own youth system, it would not have passed so resoundingly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsslatic Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 You can be foreign but still be home-grown, rendering the new rule legal. If it was about players coming through the club's own youth system, it would not have passed so resoundingly. Most players who have been at a club for three years since they were 18 would have come through the youth system anyway so I don't think it would have made too much of a difference. One knock-on effect is that fees for players between the ages of 15-18 are going to inflate substantially. Good job the Dale Stephens tribunal has already been and gone! Still, good idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simpo Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 What I'm saying is the only players of ours who would not pass this rule are Stam and Kalala. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsslatic Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 (edited) What I'm saying is the only players of ours who would not pass this rule are Stam and Kalala. Ah sorry, teaches me not to read everything properly. Thought it was four players who had been registered at the club for three years prior to their 21st birthday. Edited December 18, 2008 by jsslatic Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sheridans_world Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 I think people are reading this wrong. It only says a player that is registered domestically for three years before their 21st birthday. That is, it doesnt matter which club they played for (assuming it is a proffessional club), so long as they were registered by their 18th birthday. Meaning, we could quite happily have a squad of 16 Wayne Rooneys (for example) and we would comply with this law. The players dont have to have come through our youth system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnny punkster Posted December 18, 2008 Share Posted December 18, 2008 I think people are reading this wrong. It only says a player that is registered domestically for three years before their 21st birthday. That is, it doesnt matter which club they played for (assuming it is a proffessional club), so long as they were registered by their 18th birthday. Meaning, we could quite happily have a squad of 16 Wayne Rooneys (for example) and we would comply with this law. The players dont have to have come through our youth system. pretty much how i read it,hence my opinion it isn't much going to upset 99% of the clubs already and it should be 5 or 6 in the 16 named squad to mean something...unless the scum of trafford get relegated! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beag_teeets Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 Seems pretty pointless, it should have been that the players have to come through the youth setup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeslover Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 Is the old rule that you pass it on de left hand side still in place? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoytonBlueLad Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 Chron said we only had Kalala and Fleming who would be affected. Not really an issue at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsslatic Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 Not exactly a surprise from the League though, 'acting' tough on the influx of foreign players...yet only issuing the quota to clubs who aren't affected by it anyway. I'd be genuinely surprised if any of the 72 clubs in a FL game have ever played a side which retrospectively would have fallen foul of this rule. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankly Mr Shankly Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 Not exactly a surprise from the League though, 'acting' tough on the influx of foreign players...yet only issuing the quota to clubs who aren't affected by it anyway. I'd be genuinely surprised if any of the 72 clubs in a FL game have ever played a side which retrospectively would have fallen foul of this rule. Yes. Last Saturday not one club would have broken this rule and that was without even trying. Should have been more emphasis on clubs including in the matchday squad a number of players brought through their own youth setup. Which would have far more focus on keeping grass roots strong at levels like ours. This current ruling just smacks a bit of folly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scapegoat Posted December 19, 2008 Share Posted December 19, 2008 Beginning to agree with some on here that this rule is a bit of smoke, mirrors and spin. Sounds good, putting a rule in that seems to support homegrown players - but in essence its one that on greater review means far less. If most / all clubs are already compliant, then its not going to change anything is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.