Parky

One of AS's big advantages is that he can see weaknesses in defenders better than most having built a career on it.

shouldn't happen either. salry cap is the way, even if it's the uefa mooted percentage of turnover. i alos agree with the earlier mentioned change to the loans regulations but think abolisionis too far. 3 loans a season max? no loans within the same division and for under 23's or 21's only. 3 or 5 max per season lasting for 28 days. Just posted above Liv have a 62 man squad. [move]Fucking hell!!!!![/move] Mind that includes reserves and the youth team, surely? But all eligible to play in the PL. That's why he has 17 out on loan....Hoovering up talent is what this is all about. Something has to be done to bring competition back to the PL.....

shouldn't happen either. salry cap is the way, even if it's the uefa mooted percentage of turnover. i alos agree with the earlier mentioned change to the loans regulations but think abolisionis too far. 3 loans a season max? no loans within the same division and for under 23's or 21's only. 3 or 5 max per season lasting for 28 days. Just posted above Liv have a 62 man squad. [move]Fucking hell!!!!![/move]

Uefa havebranded as "ridiculous" the number of players on the payroll of the Premier League's Big Four clubs. Liverpool, who under Rafa Benítez have stockpiled a 62-man squad, the biggest in the league and enough for more than five full teams, have come in for particular criticism. Uefa limit clubs to 25 players each for the Champions league and their general secretary, David Taylor, speaking exclusively to Observer Sport, said: "Ridiculous. 62? You could have two full-size practice games. You can only field 11 at one time. It's an open question as to how many you actually need. Is it 20, 25?" Taylor's comments are likely to spark a further row between the governing body of European football and the Premier League. Last week William Gaillard, special adviser to Uefa president Michel Platini, said: "One proposal which seems to be gaining a consensus is limiting the number of professional contracts as we already do in the Champions League. But we would need to get the backing of the major clubs, of the associations running their domestic competitions." Taylor said he is unsure what benefit Liverpool might derive from having so many professionals. "You'd have to ask them," he said. When the question was put to Liverpool, they declined to comment. The Premier League said squad size was a matter for individual clubs. "The size of a club's squad is for the club to decide upon. They will have their own aspirations to progress in different competitions over the season and as such will have a squad available to them that they feel meets those demands." Arsenal and Manchester United have more than 50 professionals each and Chelsea 46. Bolton have the fewest: 27. Taylor supports limits on squad size and said: "Uefa has been in the vanguard of this and we certainly feel it's very useful. But that's for organisers of domestic leagues to decide among the clubs." Liverpool have so many players that Benítez has been able to loan out 17 of them this season. Some of those on the Anfield payroll told Observer Sport that they find the situation "frustrating" and "demoralising". One young player, Craig Lindfield, 20, who is on loan at Accrington Stanley, said: "That's the difference between Liverpool and other clubs, young lads get more of a chance elsewhere." Gordon Taylor, the PFA chief executive, admitted to concerns over the future of these young players.

shouldn't happen either. salry cap is the way, even if it's the uefa mooted percentage of turnover. i alos agree with the earlier mentioned change to the loans regulations but think abolisionis too far. 3 loans a season max?

Abolish loans. ...and reduce squad size. The only reason Villa have started to fail is cause their tiny squad compared to the big [move]4.[/move] don't know about that. anyone know how many players man utd have used in the prem this season compared to villa ? i would limit the size though just to stop some clubs hoovering up any talent. I feel they knowingly do it to reduce competition from lesser sides. Maybe a look at the transfer system...Limiting players to one transfer over 24 months or summat like that. Players constantly agitating for a move after one good season/half a season in some cases means the club that has developed them losing out or a bigger club buying them and putting them on the bench.

Abolish loans. ...and reduce squad size. The only reason Villa have started to fail is cause their tiny squad compared to the big [move]4.[/move]

The major issue is the big clubs hoovering up all the young talent, correct/balance this and we're half way there.

Not a bad idea.

Top 2 automatic qual for CL and next two have 2 leg play offs against 5th and 6th. That will put it back in the mix and ensure 3rd and 4th miss out now and again. Or both finalists of the Uefa cup qualify auto for the next seasons CL.

How do you connect spend to the long throw bro?

It's a bloody sickness. Need to get players standing in front or subs running around near the thrower etc...

I'd look fast in La Liga. Beat me to it.

Bottom llne is it's anti-football.

Of course everyone can take a corner, like everyone can take a throw in, just some will be bad and some will be good at both. Rory Delap is world class at set pieces, just as David Beckham is. You can't say throw ins are less important either considering the amount of goals Stoke have got using them to their advantage. It is an importnant tactic in some styles of football. Call them negative if you wish but how much would you love to be in Stokes position. It's innovative, but it's shit much like Vista.

I'd look fast in La Liga.

This kind of player over a longer period would probably succeed. Indeed if he'd gone to a club not so short of players and got a few games here and there and been given time to adjust he'd probably be fine. £10m was a heck of a lot of money mind. Real worth for me would be about £4m.

He hasn't cleared the debt he's just moved it.

In before the lock.

It's clear teams are using it now to waste time and run down the clock. Also it is a strange way of keeping possession off the pitch. Pompey used it against us to slow the game during our good spells etc...I read somewhere Stoke are wasting 12 min a game with this lark. Simple ans would be to allow a maximum 5 secs for a throw in and repeated abuse would see the throw in go to the other side.

You see when you do that you make it happen. [Lost\]

I'm beginning to realise that perhaps I'm working with the dark side.

Alves couldn't score with a Hamburg prossie.

Yup. Keep.