FEV-KT87 Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 1. Hardman 2. Saxton 3. Smeaton 4. Welham 5. Steel 6. Briggs 7. Kain 8. Morrison 9. Finn 10. Dickens 11. Dale 12. Grayshon 13. Field 14. Allan 15. Parker/Nandye 16. Manning 17. Tonks 18. Spears 19. Divorty 20. Lynch 21. Coady 22. Lee 23. Sheriffe 24. Marabe 25. Swift 26. Hardaker 27. Dobek 28. Carr 29. Williamson some pleasant suprises in there Dobek gettin rewards for his hard work but Zak Hardaker at 26 suprises me a big vote of confidence for him....BIG things to come from him? YOU CANT CRUSH PRIDE!!!! A season dedicated to Gareth John Swift League winners 2010 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marklaspalmas Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 29 players is a big squad. Last year we started out with just 23, although players were added throughout the season. Of the 29 players, 15 played last season and 14 are new names. Such a big turnover of players seems the norm nowadays. Surprising to think that of the 15 players who are repeating from last season, 10 players have changed their shirt number and only FIVE players have the same shirt number as they had last year. I have to admit Im not much of a fan of squad numbers, it all seems a bit pointless tbh. https://www.fevarchive.co.uk/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birchy Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 29 players is a big squad. Last year we started out with just 23, although players were added throughout the season. Of the 29 players, 15 played last season and 14 are new names. Such a big turnover of players seems the norm nowadays. Surprising to think that of the 15 players who are repeating from last season, 10 players have changed their shirt number and only FIVE players have the same shirt number as they had last year. I have to admit Im not much of a fan of squad numbers, it all seems a bit pointless tbh. I think it seems sensible...a lot of new players and player squeezing into weird positions last year. this is the first real 'powel' squad. I expectd a big shuffle UP THE ROVERS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob Fowler Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 I honestly do not think squad numbers are necessary in the Championship. Clubs have to go to the expense of putting names on shirts and have to purchase more playing shirts than are required. It is nothing to do with traditionalist, but if we want to bring new supporters into the game, how do we explain which numbers represent a position? A simple 1 - 13 plus subs is all I need. To be a ROVER is a privilege not to be taken lightly, with fans like ours, we will always be honoured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuart56 Posted January 23, 2010 Share Posted January 23, 2010 29 players is a big squad. Last year we started out with just 23, although players were added throughout the season. Of the 29 players, 15 played last season and 14 are new names. Such a big turnover of players seems the norm nowadays. Surprising to think that of the 15 players who are repeating from last season, 10 players have changed their shirt number and only FIVE players have the same shirt number as they had last year. I have to admit Im not much of a fan of squad numbers, it all seems a bit pointless tbh. One statistic you missed Mark which I think is important. The starting 13 only have 4 players who didn't feature last year. Lots of newcomers but also a lot of faith in the heart of last years team. < - Always remember, without experiencing the lows you don't really appreciate the highs - > Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Hemmi Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 Some compitition from 9 to 25 eh?! Struggling to see who he'd leave out, dale, manning, graysion, spearsy, divorty, Allen, field, all top players! Good headache like Featherstone Rovers: league champions 2010... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Evans Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 (edited) we haven't had this luxury in years. Hobbsy struggled to motivate some players in his squad. He couldn't drop anyone out of the team because there were few, if any, in the reserves to make the step up. i.e. little or no competition for places so some players could have the mornge on or put in half @rsed performances knowing their place in the team was assured! Now, the club have assembled a good squad with a depth greater than i can remember in recent years! Keeps the mind focussed methinks. Edited January 24, 2010 by Robin Evans "I love our club, absolutely love it". (Overton, M 2007) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew Vause Posted January 24, 2010 Share Posted January 24, 2010 29 players is a big squad. Last year we started out with just 23, although players were added throughout the season. Of the 29 players, 15 played last season and 14 are new names. Such a big turnover of players seems the norm nowadays. Surprising to think that of the 15 players who are repeating from last season, 10 players have changed their shirt number and only FIVE players have the same shirt number as they had last year. I have to admit Im not much of a fan of squad numbers, it all seems a bit pointless tbh. Agree entirely, squad numbers are only required if the players' names are on the shirts (unless of course you get a new set done for every game). It must be a nightmare for stats! also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now