Squad numbers

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

Paulus

Active Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2009
Messages
1,637
Reaction score
2,304
I’ve never quite come to terms with squad numbers but over the years they’ve sunk into my consciousness and I’ve built up a bank of prejudices about squad numbers and what they say about the players who wear them

This is somewhere near my thoughts at the moment –

1 - Starting keeper
12 - back-up keeper
13 – Youth keeper who is too dodgy to use and is grateful for the 13 shirt that no-one else would touch with a bargepole.
2 - Right back
5,6 - Starting center backs
3 - left back
4 - generally decent defender that gets a fair amount of starts due to injury – 3rd centre back if playing 3 at the back
7 - right wing/wide midfield – preferably with gap toothed smile, socks around ankles, possibly Scottish or Irish, 5 foot 8 max.
11 - left wing/wide midfield, more direct than a number 7 – good crosser/dead ball specialist.
10 – best player – hole attacker, attacking mid, takes curling free kicks.
9 – Main Striker either poacher or big bastard, penalty taker.
8, - dirty bugger, midfield enforcer, skill at a premium.
14, 15 - squad midfielder/strikers that rarely score a goal, and you really want to flog off to some mugs for big money
16, 17, 18, 19 - utility players
20 – box to box midfielder who somehow never delivers for 2 matches running and fiercely divides the supporters.
21, 22 – Next great thing youth player
23 upwards - desperation signings, mediocre youths soon to be plying their trade in non-league and previous manager’s signings that every one wishes would go away.

Compare this then with our team at Wimbledon:

25 Moore
13 Wright
5 O'Connell
19 Ebanks-Landell
18 Freeman
21 Duffy
15 Coutts
6 Basham sub 4 Fleck
24 Lafferty
10 Sharp sub 27 L Clarke
11 Done sub 8 Scougall

Got to say it’s a bit of a shambles numbers wise, really only 1 player, 5 O’Connell, who fits in with my prejudices. Now of course this reflects our recent turmoil but even so this nonsense definitely detracts from my enjoyment of matches. I find it harder to spot patterns of play, tactical switches etc. I often struggle to read double digit numbers on shirts and having their names and other assorted shit on them makes it more difficult still. To be honest the only way I tend to identify players at all now is from familiarity, their size, running style, hair colour, mannerism etc. and all so clubs can flog personalized shirts to the gullible.
 



Really.....



























It's a familiarity thing:)
 
Last edited:
Surely it's not a problem recognising the players?

For anyone who does find it hard, just wait till we've got Burke, Duffy and Done on the same pitch!
 
20 almost descibes Brian Howard perfectly, except he never delivered for one game in a row and more or less everyone agreed he was lazy and ineffective. I can't think of any other 20s for us or anybody else who has ever fit that description.

Not sure how you've built up those idea about numbers outside 1-11, 12 has rarely been a keeper for us and the rest of them really don't fit either except a lot of sub strikers wearing 14.
 
20 almost descibes Brian Howard perfectly, except he never delivered for one game in a row and more or less everyone agreed he was lazy and ineffective. I can't think of any other 20s for us or anybody else who has ever fit that description.

Not sure how you've built up those idea about numbers outside 1-11, 12 has rarely been a keeper for us and the rest of them really don't fit either except a lot of sub strikers wearing 14.

Didn't Bruno Ribeiro wear 20 for us?
 
You can't really talk about the No. 14 shirt without thinking about Cruyff. I've always hopeful that the Blades might find a footballing genius to fit our no. 14 but unfortunately we've had Tuttle, Nallis, Sommeil and Bruce Dyer amongst others. But no I didn't say my number prejudices come exclusively from Blades players - it's an imprecise science at best that has been a bit more troubling at the start of this season with so many new signings appearing. I mean 24 Lafferty, 20 Wilson - how does this help anyone know what to expect? Am I really out on my own in finding all of this nonsense a bit disconcerting? I mean it doesn't exactly inspire confidence does it?
 
It does also depend on formation you're playing too, which is obviously harder to judge as the squad numbers are there for the full season.

4-4-2
1
2 - 5 - 6 - 3
7 - 4 - 8 -11
9 - 10
Our current formation should be:
3-5-2
1
4-5-6
2.............3
7-8-11
9-10
But, in modern football the 4-3-3 and the false 9 use #10 as the attacking midfielder.

4-3-3
1
2-5-6-3
4-10-8
7-9-11

False 9
1
2-5-6-3
6-8
7-10-11
9
All numbers above 11 can be given to whoever they like with the exception of 13 & 22 (or 12 at a push), which should go to GKs.
 
Last edited:
Forget 'shirt' numbers and think of 'squad' numbers - otherwise you have to mix and match names with different shirts every time you make a change to the starting line-up.
I always knew it was a mistake to bring the idea of substitutes into the game! :mad:
 



Its amazing any of these got a game if the higher the number the lesser chance of playing

download (2).jpg

that number 42 might be going spare

its a squad game these days ,most teams use 24 to 30 players per season
 
Last edited:
What's the highest any player has worn in a competitive game for us? Any advances on the #41 shirt worn by Terry Kennedy in 2010/11?
 
ythe picture above shows 10 proper prem players in their shirts

yaya toure was 42

Allow me to reiterate:

What's the highest any player has worn in a competitive game for us? Any advances on the #41 shirt worn by Terry Kennedy in 2010/11?
 
It is indeed a squad game but in the old days players would 'fight' for the no. 1 shirt, the no. 9 shirt etc and maybe this internal competition helped keep them on their toes.
 
The pigs have a keeper wearing 2, a centre forward wearing 6 (when 9 was available, unlike Beattie) and several wearing numbers in the 40s through choice. We've got less problems that they do.
 

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