Competition for places is always a good thing I think, and players say this themselves. Laudrup has stated from the off that his vision is a smaller squad with two players for each position and judging by the signings and departures (those that have happened or look like they are about to happen) I can see it's coming together. If you're one of the two you know you have a real chance of competing for a start, either though choice, injury or suspension, so you're a happy bunny. It increases risk, as others have pointed out but it can make for a really happy squad, particularly if you have multi-positional players as favoured by the Manager. So it seems we're not going to have fringe players at all, really. The younger players play with the U-21s with a possibility of a breakthrough - if they're talented enough they'll make it - whilst most of the senior players are in the mix to play. It keeps wages down (that'll please HJ) and I really see the logic in it. Is this a model that is common elsewhere? Where has Laudrup picked this up from? Forgive my ignorance but it seems unusual to me. In the Prem we've always been told that the rigours of the game mean that you just can't have a small sqaud but Laudrup - inexperienced in this division - will go ahead with it. I envisage that this plan will be complete with the shipping out of our erstwhile 'fringe' players, either permanently or on loan sometime soon. Thoughts?
he may think we wont be playing many extra games ie- cup runs etc so gambling on low injuries we may be ok ?
Not sure, st. Could be, but I just sense this is a deliberate philosophy. I'm unaware of other teams that have the same mindset. Maybe others do, I don't know. Is is a Continental thing perhaps?
If you have a core of 24 players, 2 for each position that are seniors, then a solid U-21 squad that are not counted in the roster, you have cover for injuries. Look at Bertrand for Chelsea last season, the kid made is debut in the Champions League final and played terrifically well, but didn't get a look in all season. If you don't believe in the U-21's what they hell are they doing at the club; they should be technically good enough but just below regular selection based on experience.
Plus dont forget several players can play in multiple positions so we should be ok unless we get really unlucky with injuries
I think it's quite common in several coutries. It's probably got something to do with economy and the number of matches. Quite frankly, i'm surpriced no one have been thinking about this before in the PL. If you look at our squad, last season 14 of our players played 14 matches or more while 10 players played 26 or more. I am not quite sure why we should need more than 22-23 players + youth when only a few of them play regularly. There are several advantages with a "small" squad. Fewer players means fewer unhappy players. All of them have a real chance of getting gametime. More importently is that fewer players means a lower wagebudget or higher quality on the players because you can pay more if you have less players. In my opinion it is better to have two good players in one posision than one good and two or three average players. Some will argue that you are more endangered to injury, but you will never be garanteed to have one player without injury in each position no matter how many players you have.
How many back up keepers we got not inc tate as i recon vorm would be a great outfield player if needed
apparently, Vorm is excellent outside the 18 Yd box according to those who train with him. Seem to remember Graham and Taylor saying so in an interview once.
