TBF rules will be different. And they're going to be much more willing to use kids at home to Cambridge.
But if they can find a team for the cup using kids then they can find a team for us using kids. The rule is 13 players and a GK not your best 13 players and a GK.
I agree to an extent. I'm a bit more relaxed about it now TBH. The decision has been made and although I don't agree with it we do benefit to some extent as well. It could prove to be a real blessing in disguise not to have a real packed festive schedule. Salisu will miss the cup game which he probably would have been rested for anyway. It's almost like a mid-season break for us with 2 games in 3 days stuck in the middle of it.
But is it? It's the point that I and a few others were discussing on here earlier in the week. To my knowledge, the PL have been very opaque over what constitutes a "player" for the purposes of this regulation. For example, is it restricted only to players who each club has formally registered in their 25-man squads? The EFL have been clearer than the PL as to what their definition is. Depending on the PL's exact definition (and also whether the FA have their one), it is perfectly possible that a side could fail to meet it for a PL game, but still be required to play an FA Cup match. (I'm not saying that is right. And I'm certainly not trying to defend Newcastle. My point is more that the PL need to make this 13 player regulation far clearer as to what exactly it is - and then leave no stone unturned when investigating whether or not a club fails to meet it.)
All players signed during the January transfer window should be ineligible to play in games originally scheduled to be played before the window opened. That's a nice, common sense idea, that the Premier League bigwigs will never bloody think of.
The counter-argument to this will be that players who are transferred out of a club ought then to be eligible to play for their original club (ie the club they played for, before the window opened). This is completely impractical, but will almost certainly be what PL bigwigs use as an excuse to allow players to play for their new clubs
Taking into account everyone who they are missing - and assuming that no-one previously unavailable has become available - I think Newcastle still could have fielded the following side tomorrow: Dubravka Krafth Schar Lascelles Murphy Almiron Longstaff Shelvey Hendrick Joelinton Gayle The youngest member of that 11 I believe is Longstaff, who is 24. Forget about ability. Forget about bench strength. If a club can put out a starting XI of that age and experience - and by and large, with them in their correct positions - then they should be required to play.
Makes you wonder what the point is of 25 man squads. If clubs are allowed to rearrange matches in preference to utilising players 23, 24, and 25, then why bother owning those players? Just save your money.
The Premier League is a product and it’s pretty clear they don’t want games played between teams back up players. Or games played between one team with most of their squad available and another with lots of players out. Especially if it involves a team people actually watch and care about on a large scale.
Unlike last year when we had to play with lots of kids? Covid was last year too and they didn’t have this rule. I won’t be surprised it changes again before the end of the season about the time we play a top end team so they can batter us when we play our B team.
