Not excusing the disgraceful way Derby have fiddled the system, but to be fair this is the problem caused by specific EFL rule restricting the squad number BUT including players who shouldn't actually be included by any "realistic" criteria.
We were similarly stuffed a year ago when our allowed squad size was restricted and the 23 included academy players over 18 who had played in makeshift EFL Cup and FA Cup sides, and further meant that if we gave a 19 year old a game, he'd be part of the 23 but someone younger like Charlie Barker wouldn't be
Derby shouldn't be allowed to get away with it, because we weren't, but I don't think the rules as it stands is entirely right.
Not excusing the disgraceful way Derby have fiddled the system, but to be fair this is the problem caused by specific EFL rule restricting the squad number BUT including players who shouldn't actually be included by any "realistic" criteria.
We were similarly stuffed a year ago when our allowed squad size was restricted and the 23 included academy players over 18 who had played in makeshift EFL Cup and FA Cup sides, and further meant that if we gave a 19 year old a game, he'd be part of the 23 but someone younger like Charlie Barker wouldn't be
Derby shouldn't be allowed to get away with it, because we weren't, but I don't think the rules as it stands is entirely right.
Remember when Derby played Chorley in the FA Cup and there whole squad and u23s had to isolate?
Well all those under 18s now count as "players" due having played in that game. If they didn't have them they would be able to sign a few free agents now.
I wonder what a club will do in that situation next time?
Not excusing the disgraceful way Derby have fiddled the system, but to be fair this is the problem caused by specific EFL rule restricting the squad number BUT including players who shouldn't actually be included by any "realistic" criteria.
We were similarly stuffed a year ago when our allowed squad size was restricted and the 23 included academy players over 18 who had played in makeshift EFL Cup and FA Cup sides, and further meant that if we gave a 19 year old a game, he'd be part of the 23 but someone younger like Charlie Barker wouldn't be
Derby shouldn't be allowed to get away with it, because we weren't, but I don't think the rules as it stands is entirely right.
Remember when Derby played Chorley in the FA Cup and there whole squad and u23s had to isolate?
Well all those under 18s now count as "players" due having played in that game. If they didn't have them they would be able to sign a few free agents now.
I wonder what a club will do in that situation next time?
So the cheats have been bitten in the arse by a loop hole…..good
No they havent. Read the BBC article, and surprise, the EFL have given them an exception
In this case i think its good the efl have done that, with the provisions in place, the wage restrictions and 1 years contracts.
The squad limit was harsh on Derby, at least they played their FA Cup game, there was another game i remember were a team was hit with covid and pulled out, Derby could have done the same wouldnt have played the under 18 team and wouldnt have been in this position.
But because they actually played the game it put them in this position, so as i say think efl have shown a bit of common sense with this one actually.
Comments
If the majority of the 72 have taken these monitored loans/grants can't they vote to waiver embargos?
We were similarly stuffed a year ago when our allowed squad size was restricted and the 23 included academy players over 18 who had played in makeshift EFL Cup and FA Cup sides, and further meant that if we gave a 19 year old a game, he'd be part of the 23 but someone younger like Charlie Barker wouldn't be
Derby shouldn't be allowed to get away with it, because we weren't, but I don't think the rules as it stands is entirely right.
Well all those under 18s now count as "players" due having played in that game. If they didn't have them they would be able to sign a few free agents now.
I wonder what a club will do in that situation next time?
Also - only a years contract. I wonder how many players will go for that.
The squad limit was harsh on Derby, at least they played their FA Cup game, there was another game i remember were a team was hit with covid and pulled out, Derby could have done the same wouldnt have played the under 18 team and wouldnt have been in this position.
But because they actually played the game it put them in this position, so as i say think efl have shown a bit of common sense with this one actually.
I cant remember how many first team players we had, but presume it was more than nine, hence the difference in decision?
Its like being told you have £1,000 left to spend on food for a year but you spend £900 on a hooker for a few hours!!
If he gets his head down and plays to his ability, then he'll be one of the best players in the division. Obviously that's a very big 'if' though.
Just hope that Rooney (someone he'd have been with @ Man Utd) can be the help that he needs.
He'd have scared the Italians shitless had he reached his potential - Will never forget that West Ham goal @ Spurs
😂