Squad Numbers 2015/16

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?


I'd guess that those amongst us who have OCD when it comes to squad numbers probably played a lot of championship manager in their youth. Choosing your squad numbers was actually an exciting part of the game.. For me anyway

Ahem, some of us are STILL playing it! Just to show to you all how sad I really am, I have very specific positions for just about every number when playing CM!!

1. GK (der, obviously!)
2. DR
3. DL
4. DMC
5. DC
6. DC
7. MR
8. MC
9. FC
10. FC
11. ML
12. DR or DRC
13. GK
14. DC
15. DLC
16. MRC
17. MLC
18. MRLC or FRLC (funnily enough, I'm not picky about 18!)
19. FC
20. MC
21. FC
22. D/MR
23. FC
24. MRC
25. DMC
26. DC
27. FC
28. MLC
29. DC
30. Not that picky
31. DC
32. DMC
33. D/ML

And er I'm not that fussed after 33!!!
I'll get me coat.
 
  1. Howard
  2. Alcock
  3. Harris
  4. Wallace
  5. Brayford
  6. Basham
  7. Flynn
  8. Wallace K
  9. Murphy
  10. Sharp
  11. Baxter
  12. McNulty
  13. Willis
  14. Done
  15. Collins

  16. McGahey
  17. Sammon
  18. McEveley
  19. Campbell-Ryce
  20. Freeman
  21. Reed
  22. Higdon
  23. De Girolamo
  24. Long

  25. Calvert-Lewin
  26. McFadzean
  27. Adams
  28. Khan
  29. DiMaio
  30. Woolford
Given last night's team, and the Newcastle and Matlock line-ups, looks roughly about right. I think the development players like Coustrain will get a squad number if they manage to break into the 1st team squad. Scouggs and Coutts don't know. Not too fussed either way about the numbers, I just wish they'd be more recognizable from a distance. Black numbers on red and white stripes are impossible to read. :confused:
  1. 20007_10205562023303239_584272417973722236_n.jpg 11707589_907147596022556_2251110005450875053_n.jpg
 
I know you were anticipating this but surely you cant be realistically bothered about numbers on the back of shirts. We're in division 3 and have more pressing needs to fulfil.
 
What if they've been bought the shirt by a kindly, well-meaning grandparent who is ignorant of current team selection?
What if a small child emptied their piggy bank for last season's shirt in the forlorn hope that Brayford was likely to remain number 5 for the duration of his contract?

Never had a name on shirt since 95/96 season (approx) when I got hodges and he left shortly after. I tried ripping it off as a frustrated youth would but ended up making a right mess of it lol
 
Annoyed me more when Porter was wearing it!

Didn't James Beattie have number 6 (upside number 9 I'm guessing? I'd have gone for 99 myself)

Anyway I googled to see if there was any other players with wierd squad numbers and this is from the mirror

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/row-zed/worst-ever-squad-numbers-1-6079272

Ivan Zamarano once wore 1+8 for Inter because Ronaldo had 9.

Shevchenko, Flamini and Ronaldinho signed for AC Milan and took 76, 84 respectively 80... The years of the births.
 
Wonder if it had anything to do with Pele wearing the iconic 10 shirt in the 1970 World Cup?
Maybe but on his debut for us (he scored too with a header) against Spurs, he wore the number 10 shirt (according to Complete Records book) and did so in his 11 of the 13 appearances for the rest of the 1967-68 season. He wore 11 in 3-0 defeat at L**ds and 9 in home defeat against West Ham (both in April 1968). He wore number 10 in his first 16 games of the 1968-69 season before wearing number 8 in the 2-0 home win against Charlton then in his only game in the next two months (think he was out injured) he wore number 10 (0-0 at home to Huddersfield). He was the sub (replacing Barlow) in the FA Cup defeat at Mansfield and then wore number 8 for the rest of the season. Earlier today I had always thought he wore number 8 for the whole of the 1969-70 season (my first match as a committed Blade was in January 1970 and he was number 8) but looking at Complete Records he was wearing number 10 from August 1969 to October 1969 (apart from the home game against Charlton) and then wore number 8 from the 4-0 win against Blackburn in Nov 1969 until the 1-0 win at Bristol City in April 1970 (he wore 10 in that game) but returned to 8 for the last 2 games of that season. From the start of the 1970-71 season until his departure to L**ds in Summer 1976 he had always wore the number 10 shirt in the games he played in
 
Ivan Zamarano once wore 1+8 for Inter because Ronaldo had 9.

Shevchenko, Flamini and Ronaldinho signed for AC Milan and took 76, 84 respectively 80... The years of the births.
I remember a strange period of defenders wearing traditionally attacking numbers in the Premier League. From memory, Woodgate was wearing 8 at Middlesbrough, Boulahrouz had 9 at Chelsea and Gallas was Arsenal's 10. I'm sure they must have had stories behind them.

And don't listen to anyone having a dig, Matt, I'm a big fan of squad numbers and don't feel I need to justify that to anyone!
 
Once heard a story about a player in Mexico (I think) who was sponsored by the local radio station, so he wore something like 909 as it was their frequency.
 
The pre-season numbers have been quite odd, with K Wallace always wearing 8, although some of the young players have worn 1-11 numbers just because people like Flynn are missing.

I can see why some players get promoted to the first 11, but the minor changes in the 20s are odd. Freeman has worn 21 in all the friendlies, which bumps Higdon from 21 to 23 and Diego from 23 to 24.

If Sharp is given number 10, I expect Scougall to get moved to 8 rather than Wallace getting it (although it was maybe already given to Coutts leaving 18 free for Sammon). The only other likely change is Alcock losing his number 2 so Brayford can have it, but Alcock is probably on his way out anyway.
 

You mean like poor Sean, 15, from Eckington - http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/angry-sheffield-dad-getting-shirty-over-man-united-1-6803889

If you go in the store, they make the point of telling you that the numbers haven't been released yet. If you are having your own name on they ask if it is "definitely" the right size as it can't be refunded.

I guess the website will also have a disclaimer on at checkout?!

“Joseph watches all their games. He streams the matches live"

Something a bit sad about that IMO
 
Last edited:
I know you were anticipating this but surely you cant be realistically bothered about numbers on the back of shirts. We're in division 3 and have more pressing needs to fulfil.

Well until the season starts, it's just a topic for discussion. Some couldn't care less (and I'm guessing you would in that category) and some actually do (like myself and mattbianco among others).... and some pretend not to but actually are bothered (like grecian2000)!
 
Looks like KW is getting the no.8 shirt - got given that number yesterday as well. Bit of a bizarre one, if so.

It would be bizarre. I doubt Wallace will get it TBH.

I imagine that Wallace has been wearing that just because Doyle vacated it. If Sharp is having 10, it would make more sense for Scougall to have it.
 
Two days to go and still no announcement? Is this a way of keeping Gillingham guessing over team selection? Or do you think there are some disagreements over numbers 2, 8 and 10?
 
In an ideal world (i.e. one ruled by me), the attacking numbers would be:

7. Matty Done
8. Jose Baxter
9. Che Adams
10. Billy Sharp
11. Jamie Murphy

But, sadly, it's a far from perfect world (what with my leadership application having been inexplicably been declined).
 
Now we have the captain confirmed, surely the squad numbers cannot be far behind …
It would be nice if once the numbers are out someone at the club would update the "team" section of the official site, which still lists McNulty and Done, for example, as "midfielders".
 
Now we have the captain confirmed, surely the squad numbers cannot be far behind …
It would be nice if once the numbers are out someone at the club would update the "team" section of the official site, which still lists McNulty and Done, for example, as "midfielders".

Wouldn't be surprised then if McEveley gets #5 off Brayford with Brayford taking #2.
 

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom