Monkey Tennis Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 2 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said: I'm using us as an example, because I know the most about our situation. Changing it to 25 would make no difference. None. Celtic and Rangers came 5th and 7th in terms of "players used" last season and both gave dross youth game time at the end which bumped those numbers up. Not one club used under 25, yet the majority of bottom six clubs had some form of struggle with injuries at some point. Livingston had no strikers and relied on a CM to fill in, for example. St Mirren relied on loan players to improve their quality and stay up, under your rules theyd have gone down with a whimper, being unable to sign anyone decent in January. Is it genuine, this belief that clubs would only somehow be affected in isolation? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 (edited) 3 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: Is it genuine, this belief that clubs would only somehow be affected in isolation? What the f**k are you on about? Every team would be affected, every team would be weakened. How you cant process the fact teams with a far bigger budget would be affected less than teams with no fucking money, if you're forcing them to have tiny squads on permanent contracts, is utterly beyond me. The overall quality of the league would drop for absolutely no reason other than trying to hinder two teams a bit. Edited June 23, 2019 by RandomGuy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 5 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said: The overall quality of the league would drop for absolutely no reason other than trying to hinder two teams a bit. Other than for the best reason possible then? Your eager acceptance of serfdom is laughable. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: Other than for the best reason possible then? Your eager acceptance of serfdom is laughable. I hope you're trolling. Anyone who'd happily see their own team suffer, purely because other teams, who'd remain stronger, would also suffer a bit, is a fucking moron. IMO every team should have a wage cap of £200 a week, every team would be absolutely fucking rancid, but at least we'd see Celtic and Rangers be shite too eh. In fact why stop there, every club on the planet should be capped to a wage of £200 a week and 11 players. Disagreeing means youre happy accept your clubs place in the pecking order. Edited June 23, 2019 by RandomGuy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 1 minute ago, RandomGuy. said: I hope you're trolling. Anyone who'd happily see their own team suffer, purely because other teams, who'd remain stronger, would also suffer a bit, is a fucking moron. IMO every team should have a wage cal of £200 a week, every team would be absolutely fucking rancid, but at least we'd see Celtic and Rangers be shite too eh. Great idea that last bit, although your £200 figure is on the low side. If you think your Cup win in 2014 owed nothing to the fracturing of the OF duopoly, then my friend the "fucking moron" you refer to, is close at hand. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 (edited) 6 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: Great idea that last bit, although your £200 figure is on the low side. If you think your Cup win in 2014 owed nothing to the fracturing of the OF duopoly, then my friend the "fucking moron" you refer to, is close at hand. Aye, we only won the cup because Rangers died. You'll be on about tainted trophies next FFS. One minute you're mewling about folk accepting their place behind the Old Firm, next minute you're mewling about how teams only win things because the Old Firm sabotaged themselves. You're ignoring the fact a loan player played in both the Semi and Final of that run for us, of course, and the fact we used over 30 players that season as we rested players to recover from injury so they could play in cup games. I'm not sure how forcing the likes of Millar, MOH, Wotherspoon and MacLean to play through injuries in relatively meaningless league games wouldve helped us tbh. Edited June 23, 2019 by RandomGuy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 2 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said: Aye, we only won the cup because Rangers died. You'll be on about tainted trophies next FFS. One minute you're mewling about folk accepting their place behind the Old Firm, next minute you're mewling about how teams only win things because the Old Firm sabotaged themselves. You're ignoring the fact a loan player played in both the Semi and Final of that run for us, of course, and the fact we used over 30 players that season as we rested players to recover from injury so they could play in cup games. I'm not sure how forcing the likes of Millar, MOH, Wotherspoon and MacLean to play through injuries in relatively meaningless league games wouldve helped us tbh. Oh, Good Lord. I'm not suggesting this rule should be imposed solely on St Johnstone - do try to get your head round that please. I've not for a moment suggested that the Cup win is remotely "tainted" - what a silly allegation. Instead, I see OF ones as pretty hollow. You're the one desperate to uphold and maintain the grotesque imbalance. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 1 minute ago, Monkey Tennis said: Oh, Good Lord. I'm not suggesting this rule should be imposed solely on St Johnstone - do try to get your head round that please. Yes, but you're also not suggesting the rule should be imposed solely on the Old Firm, either. My point is, teams with a bigger budget would be affected less with restrictions than smaller teams. EPL has squad restrictions, richer teams still comfortably come out on top. It's almost as if clubs having to spend £50m on 20 players rather than 40 makes them spend a bit more of that money on the 20 they have. Still bewildered you think that would be beneficial. Smaller clubs would still lose their best players, it would just be down South rather than to the Old Firm. There would be zero benefit, and quoting anything that happened around Rangers demise as some form of proof is just daft, as we're unlikely to ever have the scenario of one of them in the lower tiers ever again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 2 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said: Still bewildered you think that would be beneficial. Smaller clubs would still lose their best players, it would just be down South rather than to the Old Firm. There would be zero benefit, and quoting anything that happened around Rangers demise as some form of proof is just daft, as we're unlikely to ever have the scenario of one of them in the lower tiers ever again. You're not nearly as bewildered as I am by your suggestion that not losing players to the Old Firm, would be of no benefit. The point about Rangers once being in the lower leagues is not that those circumstances might repeat - do you honestly think that's what I was saying? The point instead, is that others benefit when OF power is diminished, by whatever means. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 8 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: You're not nearly as bewildered as I am by your suggestion that not losing players to the Old Firm, would be of no benefit. The point about Rangers once being in the lower leagues is not that those circumstances might repeat - do you honestly think that's what I was saying? The point instead, is that others benefit when OF power is diminished, by whatever means. Yes, but everyone elses "power would be diminished" too. Your logic is flawed, and the example YOU used of Saints win the Scottish Cup is flawed, because Rangers were "diminished" while every other club strengthened, the gap wont be closed like that if you stick restrictions on everyone. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Moomintroll Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 You're not nearly as bewildered as I am by your suggestion that not losing players to the Old Firm, would be of no benefit. The point about Rangers once being in the lower leagues is not that those circumstances might repeat - do you honestly think that's what I was saying? The point instead, is that others benefit when OF power is diminished, by whatever means.MT, you have lost the plot here a bit but I agree with your argument in principle. Restrict squad sizes to 23/25 registered players but allow unlimited development (u-21) players to augment this. Allow no more than 5 outbound loanees & if this is breached then reduce the squad size accordingly (f**k you Chelsea). That seems to be a reasonable compromise. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DukDukGoose Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 (edited) Edited June 23, 2019 by Merkland Red 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 6 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said: Yes, but everyone elses "power would be diminished" too. Your logic is flawed, and the example YOU used of Saints win the Scottish Cup is flawed, because Rangers were "diminished" while every other club strengthened, the gap wont be closed like that if you stick restrictions on everyone. Restricting everyone absolutely helps, because only those at the top of our grossly distorted game are best placed to exploit deregulation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 9 minutes ago, Moomintroll said: 23 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: You're not nearly as bewildered as I am by your suggestion that not losing players to the Old Firm, would be of no benefit. The point about Rangers once being in the lower leagues is not that those circumstances might repeat - do you honestly think that's what I was saying? The point instead, is that others benefit when OF power is diminished, by whatever means. MT, you have lost the plot here a bit but I agree with your argument in principle. Restrict squad sizes to 23/25 registered players but allow unlimited development (u-21) players to augment this. Allow no more than 5 outbound loanees & if this is breached then reduce the squad size accordingly (f**k you Chelsea). That seems to be a reasonable compromise. Compromise? We need a bloody revolution! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 1 minute ago, Monkey Tennis said: Restricting everyone absolutely helps, because only those at the top of our grossly distorted game are best placed to exploit deregulation. Celtic and Rangers can afford 25, first team quality, players. No other club can. There would be no benefit to other clubs in restricting squad size. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Moomintroll Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 Compromise? We need a bloody revolution!Intae them! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 1 minute ago, RandomGuy. said: Celtic and Rangers can afford 25, first team quality, players. No other club can. There would be no benefit to other clubs in restricting squad size. Ah, you see 25 as too many as well. You're coming round. The brainwashing has been thorough though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 3 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: Ah, you see 25 as too many as well. You're coming round. The brainwashing has been thorough though. It doesnt matter the number, Celtic and Rangers have far more money than any other club so will always be able to afford a far better quality of squad. The amount of money they can spend doesnt change under your new rules. EPL is the only example of a division with squad restrictions, and a financial gulf between clubs, and it makes zero difference. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tarapoa Posted June 23, 2019 Share Posted June 23, 2019 We’ve had some great loan players at AFC over the years, some of whom became real fans’ favourites - Danny Ward, Michael Hector, James Maddison, Ryan Christie and more recently Max Lowe. However, there have been some duds too - and they can be a bit of a pollution when you look down teams and note that half the players don’t actually belong to that club . I think loans within the same division should be banned - and capped at four per first team squad per club. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted June 25, 2019 Share Posted June 25, 2019 Monkey Tennis clearly identified a valid problem here, but not for the first time, the solution is slightly mental and would not work. 0 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.