Number 17 for gaskell : Tue Dec 09, 2014 1:17 am  

Apparently and don't no how true this is friend of mine saw him wearing 17 training gear Gaskell said didn't want 6 or 7 anyone no if this is true

Re: Number 17 for gaskell : Tue Dec 09, 2014 7:19 am  

I think I read somewhere that jimmy wasn't a fan and would let them pick whatever. I do hope we have some sort of sensible allocation, it just won't seem right if Clough for example picks number 1. Wasn't it leigh in there SL season who allocated them alphabetically? Just didn't look right

Re: Number 17 for gaskell : Tue Dec 09, 2014 7:27 am  

Bets'y Bulls wrote:

I think I read somewhere that jimmy wasn't a fan and would let them pick whatever. I do hope we have some sort of sensible allocation, it just won't seem right if Clough for example picks number 1. Wasn't it leigh in there SL season who allocated them alphabetically? Just didn't look right

My first season back in 1997 I remember squad numbers were all over the place, halves of Robbie Paul, Glen Tomlinson or Graeme Bradley each with 1, 2 and 3. Stuart Spruce at 28, James Lowes at 25, Steve McNamara with 26, Bernard Dwyer with 23. Number 9 eventually went to outside back Kevin Crouthers. 10 Nathan Graham, 7 Paul Cook.

Them wot days.

[Bullseye]

Re: Number 17 for gaskell : Tue Dec 09, 2014 9:55 am  

Don't like squad numbers. Bit of a gimmick.

[Bulliac]

Re: Number 17 for gaskell : Tue Dec 09, 2014 12:56 pm  

They are a gimmick I agree, or at least not necessary. That said, there are benefits, not least the chance to for clubs to sell shirts with lettering and numbering, which must add a bit to income. Generally, I don't think it matters over much with your own team, since you usually know who is who without numbers most of the time, but with other teams, and particularly in the lower divisions where players aren't as instantly recognisable, it's easier to keep track of who is who with squad numbers and names on the back.

I guess, in truth it's really just a case of aping soccer.

Re: Number 17 for gaskell : Tue Dec 09, 2014 1:07 pm  

It saves money for the clubs also, for example if you have 4 players that will interchange playing 6, 7 & 9 during the year and one player is a size "M", one in size "L", one a size "XL" and one a size "XXL" then you have to get 4x3 shirts (12 plus the relevant spares), etc. where as if they have their own suqad number then you only need the 4 shirts (plus spares).

Re: Number 17 for gaskell : Tue Dec 09, 2014 1:46 pm  

The thing is, I've seen the players before wearing numbered training gear that wasn't theirs. They just happened to pick it up and put it on.

Until the official shirt numbers are announced, I'd not get over excited by things like this

[Bulliac]

Re: Number 17 for gaskell : Tue Dec 09, 2014 3:28 pm  

Agree, significance value is pretty low, and players may well also 'hang on to' training gear from one season to the next, and come to think of it, wasn't Gaskell no. 17 last year?.

Re: Number 17 for gaskell : Tue Dec 09, 2014 11:13 pm  

Bulliac wrote:

Agree, significance value is pretty low, and players may well also 'hang on to' training gear from one season to the next, and come to think of it, wasn't Gaskell no. 17 last year?.

Yes he was...

[Pumpetypump]

Re: Number 17 for gaskell : Wed Dec 10, 2014 12:53 pm  

I think in honour of the various players that oversaw our progressive fall from grace we should retire numbers 1 to 99. I'd like a string of digits on the back ideally.