Jump to content


Rugby League World Issue 400 - Out Now!

RUGBY LEAGUE WORLD MAGAZINE - ISSUE 400 - OUT NOW!
84 pages, 38 years of history from Open Rugby to the present day.
Click here for the digital edition to read online via smartphone, tablet and desktop devices including iPhone, iPad, Android & Kindle HD.
Click here to order a copy for delivery by post. Annual subscriptions also available worldwide.
Find out what's inside Issue 400
/ View a Gallery of all 400 covers / WH Smith Branches stocking Issue 400
Read Jamie Jones-Buchanan's Top 5 RLW Interviews including Marwan Koukash, Lee Briers, Gareth Thomas, Steve Ganson & Matt King OBE


League Express

Podcast

Photo
- - - - -

What's in a number?


  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#1 andyram

andyram
  • Coach
  • 941 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 08:37 AM

Interesting to see what numbers the players have been given for the new season,i'm sure Tom will be putting on all the information later,but what do people think about seeing Austin at 21,Akaidere at 2,Jy-Mel at 7,Spaven at 23,then Makali Aizue at number 32! Would be interesting to see if Glenn thinks the squad numbers are important or just numbers.

#2 grumpyoldram

grumpyoldram
  • Coach
  • 2,595 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 04:45 PM

Interesting to see what numbers the players have been given for the new season,i'm sure Tom will be putting on all the information later,but what do people think about seeing Austin at 21,Akaidere at 2,Jy-Mel at 7,Spaven at 23,then Makali Aizue at number 32! Would be interesting to see if Glenn thinks the squad numbers are important or just numbers.

I'm surpirised GM sees hales as a centre - thought he was a back rower who could play centre at a pinch.

#3 Rammo23

Rammo23
  • Coach
  • 197 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 07:23 PM

Have these numbers been given out to the players or have they been picked by the players themselves does anybody know ?.

#4 Blind side johnny

Blind side johnny
  • Coach
  • 9,056 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 08:31 PM

The link to the allocation of squad numbers gives a fairly comprehensive explanation behind them, if you would care to read it.

My main concern is the youthfulness of our half-back partnership and front row - it's going to be a steep learning curve for some of these lads and I do hope they're up to it.

In GM we trust. :mellow:

Edited by Blind side johnny, 14 December 2012 - 08:31 PM.

Believe what you see, don't see what you believe.


John Ray (1627 - 1705)

#5 Crown Flatter

Crown Flatter
  • Coach
  • 1,646 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 09:58 PM

Makes me wonder if those players with the higher numbers are the ''also-rans'' and will be drafted into the squad only when necessary. If GM sees them as merely numbers, then what's the point? Number 21 as a winger and 23 for a scrum half/hooker is ridiculous, but then so is the whole squad number system.

So James Craven gets the no.1 shirt as he was the first player signed for the coming season (and not that it is the number for a full back) and Spaven gets 23 in memory of some former football player! If Aizue is 42 then give him that number instead of trying to take ten years off his age (although I understand he is really 35).

It's all so unnecessary.
Legs, Dews, Legs.

#6 Wakefield Ram

Wakefield Ram
  • Moderator
  • 1,550 posts

Posted 14 December 2012 - 10:14 PM

The squad numbers are just that - numbers. No one is going to get picked because they have a particular number.

#7 dogga

dogga
  • Coach
  • 341 posts

Posted 15 December 2012 - 10:07 AM

i see tebby gets 14 is that his height
union whats that?

#8 Ackroman

Ackroman
  • Coach
  • 1,776 posts

Posted 18 December 2012 - 12:22 PM

i see tebby gets 14 is that his height


Don't know unless you use units.

#9 Crown Flatter

Crown Flatter
  • Coach
  • 1,646 posts

Posted 18 December 2012 - 01:02 PM

The squad numbers are just that - numbers. No one is going to get picked because they have a particular number.


If that's the case, I will ask the question again - what's the point of them? The numbers should be used to indicate position, not someone's ideal age or the first to be signed.
Legs, Dews, Legs.

#10 Blind side johnny

Blind side johnny
  • Coach
  • 9,056 posts

Posted 18 December 2012 - 01:59 PM

If that's the case, I will ask the question again - what's the point of them? The numbers should be used to indicate position, not someone's ideal age or the first to be signed.


I think it has all been explained previously CF that it is to do with the cut and fit of modern shirts, which are bespoke for each individual player. One right wingman may be quite a different size to another for example so it could be unreasonable to expect the same shirt to fit both.
Believe what you see, don't see what you believe.


John Ray (1627 - 1705)

#11 Crown Flatter

Crown Flatter
  • Coach
  • 1,646 posts

Posted 18 December 2012 - 11:11 PM

I know it's been explained, but I will never agree with it.
Legs, Dews, Legs.

#12 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,485 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 08:42 AM

Squad numbers are here to stay. There's no going back this time, We only changed last year because of promised financial savings that didn't materialise.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#13 Crown Flatter

Crown Flatter
  • Coach
  • 1,646 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 10:23 AM

Squad numbers are here to stay. There's no going back this time, We only changed last year because of promised financial savings that didn't materialise.


What promised financial savings were these?
As you seem to be in the know about such things, kindly inform the wider audience - well me, anyway.
Legs, Dews, Legs.

#14 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,485 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 10:45 AM

What promised financial savings were these?
As you seem to be in the know about such things, kindly inform the wider audience - well me, anyway.


The "fact" that we'd use less jerseys. Which turned out not to be a fact at all.

All this is old ground.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#15 Blind side johnny

Blind side johnny
  • Coach
  • 9,056 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 04:41 PM

I know it's been explained, but I will never agree with it.


Oh. Like the scrummaging rules I guess!

:rolleyes:
Believe what you see, don't see what you believe.


John Ray (1627 - 1705)

#16 Kelsey The Ram

Kelsey The Ram
  • Coach
  • 381 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 09:13 PM

To be honest a number is a number.
"Are you tryin' to mug me off in front of my pals?"

#17 distantdog

distantdog
  • Coach
  • 2,421 posts

Posted 19 December 2012 - 09:45 PM

To be honest a number is a number.


Clearly not. You yourself stated in an earlier post that it would be interesting to see what number players were given.

For us older members of the forum, numbers have very specific positional meanings and it has been hard getting used to a prop playing with the number 4 or a winger with the number 16, though in reality it made no difference.

Personally I used to be dead against squad numbers, but am now for them, and understand how they make sense.

#18 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,485 posts

Posted 20 December 2012 - 08:42 AM

8 Dominic Brambani - now there's a number that made no sense. :lol:
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"

#19 Blind side johnny

Blind side johnny
  • Coach
  • 9,056 posts

Posted 20 December 2012 - 12:16 PM

Clearly not. You yourself stated in an earlier post that it would be interesting to see what number players were given.

For us older members of the forum, numbers have very specific positional meanings and it has been hard getting used to a prop playing with the number 4 or a winger with the number 16, though in reality it made no difference.

Personally I used to be dead against squad numbers, but am now for them, and understand how they make sense.


I think you're right. After all at one time they didn't necessarily all wear the same shirts (so GOR tells me anyway).
Believe what you see, don't see what you believe.


John Ray (1627 - 1705)

#20 Griff

Griff
  • Coach
  • 7,485 posts

Posted 20 December 2012 - 02:32 PM

I think you're right. After all at one time they didn't necessarily all wear the same shirts (so GOR tells me anyway).


That's true - have a look at the St Helen's team from the 1897 Cup Final. They look a reyt rag-tag bunch. :lol:

Interestingly, player id started not with numbers, but with cricketers wearing different coloured belts in the mid 19th century.
"We'll sell you a seat .... but you'll only need the edge of it!"




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users