Torn Asunder Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 The A-league must increase bench numbers. I think 5 plus a keeper. This would give a Manager plenty of options and flexibility to deal with situations unforseen AND it would give more young players the oppurtunity to gain match time. For example, if a game is clearly won or lost you could bring on a first gamer to see how they go. Hope the club execs raised this at their recent meeting with FFA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malloy Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 The A-league must increase bench numbers. I think 5 plus a keeper. This would give a Manager plenty of options and flexibility to deal with situations unforseen AND it would give more young players the oppurtunity to gain match time. For example, if a game is clearly won or lost you could bring on a first gamer to see how they go. Hope the club execs raised this at their recent meeting with FFA. Would like to see this, but i wouldn't mind if they made a restriction on the extra two places making it so they have to be youth players Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
True Until I die Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 make it 5 on the bench incuding GK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toogood18 Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 5 including the GK seems fine for me. 3 + the GK isn't very good IMO Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JYarraside Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 5 including the GK seems fine for me. 3 + the GK isn't very good IMO Deffinately Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Libero Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 Goodwin wouldve got a lot more game time this year if there was a bit more room on the bench. Then he might have stayed with us... who knows... IMO bench should be i.e.: GK = Bolton (if he plays) DEF= Hamill MID= Kalmar FWD= Williams UTILITY= versatile player eg. Germano if hes not on the field already Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scouser Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 This subject was brought up last season & it all boils down to $$$ more players on the bench = more cost's i.e. flights,hotels, etc etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesla Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 This subject was brought up last season & it all boils down to $$$ more players on the bench = more cost's i.e. flights,hotels, etc etc You are already sending 15 guys, 1 more isn't much extra. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scouser Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 It is with 10 teams playing each wk over a season it all adds up, well that's what i was told anyway, just sayin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 Why are we so poor? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingawesomeness Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 One extra player on the bench equals one extra seat on the plane, extra accommodation, meals requirement, etc. Doesn't sound like much, but ends up costing $50,000 per team per season. If the FFA covers, it's $500,000k a year for a person who will not play. A point was raised about teams potentially being able to self-fund that spot, but then there are issues with fairness and additional home team advantages. I think it should still happen, though. Would given increased tactical flexibility and the ability to blood young players sooner rather than later. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tesla Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 One extra player on the bench equals one extra seat on the plane, extra accommodation, meals requirement, etc. Doesn't sound like much, but ends up costing $50,000 per team per season. If the FFA covers, it's $500,000k a year for a person who will not play. A point was raised about teams potentially being able to self-fund that spot, but then there are issues with fairness and additional home team advantages. I think it should still happen, though. Would given increased tactical flexibility and the ability to blood young players sooner rather than later. $50k per team per season isn't much tbh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cadete Posted April 3, 2012 Report Share Posted April 3, 2012 $50k per team per season isn't much tbh. Maycon's salary. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torn Asunder Posted April 4, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 For a National Comp featuring the most popular sport in the world, $50k per year, per club really should be considered chicken feed. Unfortunately for us fans, given the financial state of the game and the ecomomy in general, I guess that just isnt the case. That being said, I am sure that there would be some financial whizz who could produce some numbers in terms of benefit cost for an extra annual investment (note the term, investement) with regards to blooding new players AND winning additional games (by having greater tactial options with more players on the bench). Can a price be put on experience, and what would a home final be worth?? Think about some of the Heart games late in the season where Hamill sat on the bench only as cover for Colossimo. If JVS had one extra player, say Williams, Goodwin or Sarkies, perhaps results may have differed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yelawolf Posted April 4, 2012 Report Share Posted April 4, 2012 (edited) For a National Comp featuring the most popular sport in the world, $50k per year, per club really should be considered chicken feed. yeah but the thing is clubs are already losing money, so extra funds are gonna make it worse for clubs perth are cutting their wage budget next season, even we are considering JVS wasn't offered a new deal. CCM selling players to keep the club breathing etc. i think the only team that has made a profit is victory it would be good to have an extra player but its just giving clubs more costs Edited April 4, 2012 by yelawolf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moops Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 The amount of subs definately need to be increased, hopefully after the new tv deal........... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 The FFA picks up all the away game costs for all clubs. A-League and NYL. (Not sure about W-League and ACL.) The NYL was cut from three rounds to two, and no finals, last season simply because of costs. And a review of both the NYL and W-League is either underway or shortly will be. This has all been chewed over before. It's a costly exercise to take a substitute to an away game all for the sake of him getting on the field for just a few minutes, and most of the substitute GKs never get off the bench. Can't see the FFA increasing the size of the bench just so that clubs can have some extra luxury in terms of match tactics. Won't happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shahanga Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 Surely all clubs travel with an additional player who doesn't make the bench? I mean what happens if one of the squad pulls up injured in the warm up? Any clubs that run on a professional footing would have another player with them (OK, that criteria might eliminate a few teams, granted). A rule change would just mean this player could watch from the bench, not the stands, so it wouldn't cost anything. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Posted April 8, 2012 Report Share Posted April 8, 2012 (edited) Surely all clubs travel with an additional player who doesn't make the bench? I mean what happens if one of the squad pulls up injured in the warm up? Any clubs that run on a professional footing would have another player with them (OK, that criteria might eliminate a few teams, granted). A rule change would just mean this player could watch from the bench, not the stands, so it wouldn't cost anything. But you would still need to bring an extra player to replace the injury replacement you just put on the bench. Edited April 8, 2012 by NoMorePineapple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jw1739 Posted April 9, 2012 Report Share Posted April 9, 2012 Surely all clubs travel with an additional player who doesn't make the bench? I mean what happens if one of the squad pulls up injured in the warm up? Any clubs that run on a professional footing would have another player with them (OK, that criteria might eliminate a few teams, granted). A rule change would just mean this player could watch from the bench, not the stands, so it wouldn't cost anything. Good point. I don't know whether teams take extra players to away matches or whether if they choose to do so who picks up the tab...what I do know is that the FFA in a general sense "covers the costs of away travel" because of the long distances etc. that are regularly involved for certain clubs such as Wellington and Perth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torn Asunder Posted April 11, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 11, 2012 The FFA picks up all the away game costs for all clubs. A-League and NYL. (Not sure about W-League and ACL.) The NYL was cut from three rounds to two, and no finals, last season simply because of costs. And a review of both the NYL and W-League is either underway or shortly will be. This has all been chewed over before. It's a costly exercise to take a substitute to an away game all for the sake of him getting on the field for just a few minutes, and most of the substitute GKs never get off the bench. Can't see the FFA increasing the size of the bench just so that clubs can have some extra luxury in terms of match tactics. Won't happen. It will happen ... eventually Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.