Postponements due to lack of available players

Richinns · Post by **Richinns** » 05 Oct 2016, 08:57

Firstly - great result last night and a very valuable three points.

Moving on from this - we were only able to produce a squad of 15 last night and what with further injuries and suspensions it has to be asked whether we will be able to actually fulfil the next fixture?

Team last night was:
Moore
Ward (DOUBT)
Gallifuoco (DOUBT)
McGinty
Rowe-Turner
Young
Richards
Lathrope
Reid (DOUBT)
Blissett
Sparkes (OUT â€“ HAMSTRING CONFIRMED BY HIM ON TWITTER)

Bench:
Chaney
Williams (OUT â€“ SUSPENDED)
Chamberlain
Nicholson
With Robba still away on international duty, Verma massively unlikely to be back and Gerring still having three games left on his suspension.

We also donâ€™t know if any others are carrying knocks/injuries other than those that were witnessed limping and who knows what can happen between now and then in training!

As things stand without bringing anyone in or a recall of the kids out on loan (not sure if that option is available in the terms of their loans?) then a possible worst case scenario (as it appears to stand from a far) is we might only 10! Best case currently (without additions or/and recalls) is 13.
What are the options open to the club in a scenario where we would not be able to field a team and what penalties could/would be applied if we postponed the game on these grounds?

fred disley · Post by **fred disley** » 05 Oct 2016, 09:25

I can understand professional footballers having contact and bone injuries being the game that it is, but the amount of muscle and tendon issues we are getting is far too high . I read a very good article on the very same thing happening at Manchester city under there previous management and training structure. amongst their squad, they had the highest level of hamstring and tendon injuries in all the premier league.
Besides a lot of scientific waffle which I did not understand , what did come out was that the players were not fit enough to run for ninety minutes and the manner of the training schedule was not focusing on the requirements of the game , i.e. the need to run about constantly. Strangely when they changed to a different routine these injuries dropped dramatically and watching city this season they all look like they could run a marathon.

jpope · Post by **jpope** » 05 Oct 2016, 09:49

I spoke to Ward after the game and he said that he was fine and he didnt have an injury. He also said Reid went down because he was so bloody knackered. Sparkes has a slight hamstring injury but it shouldnt be too serious. Gallifuoco didnt go down and so where that suggestion of injury came from I dont know and so we will be fine.

Jeff · Post by **Jeff** » 05 Oct 2016, 10:04

I think it would be massively frowned upon. Didn't Middlesborough get points deducted years ago for postponing a game for these very reasons?

Law of averages dictates that 1 or 2 of the doubts will make it OK. I don't think Hancox is out on loan, which might make him available. And I would assume Duke's loan could be cut short if needs must. There would also be the option to register Academy (or whatever it's called now) players to make the bench.

If all the reds above fail to make it, you'd have to think we'd line up with:
Hancox at RB (or Richards depending on who is fit, but that would leave us 1 short in midfield)
LRT joining McGinty in the middle
Nico at LB
Chaney in for Sparkes
Chamberlain for Reid

Hardly a team to inspire confidence!

Orange Gull · Post by **Orange Gull** » 05 Oct 2016, 10:59

Hancox is out on loan, he played for Bridgwater last night.
https://x.com/OfficialBTFC84/status/783372042057945089

Gullscorer · Post by **Gullscorer** » 05 Oct 2016, 11:14

KN says 'we are down to the bare bones', and is looking to add to the squad: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/37561396

wivelgull · Post by **wivelgull** » 05 Oct 2016, 12:38

I notice that the follicly challenged ED BALDY was in goal for Paulton Rovers.

freddisley · Post by **freddisley** » 05 Oct 2016, 12:49

We have a ready made and experienced centre half on the door step who is available in Todd, he is unattached so we can sign him even if it is on non- contract terms, he could do a job for us in the short term, what we do not need is another inexperienced 18 year old from some academy regardless of their future talent.

Jerry · Post by **Jerry** » 05 Oct 2016, 14:37

Jeff wrote:I think it would be massively frowned upon. Didn't Middlesborough get points deducted years ago for postponing a game for these very reasons?

Law of averages dictates that 1 or 2 of the doubts will make it OK. I don't think Hancox is out on loan, which might make him available. And I would assume Duke's loan could be cut short if needs must. There would also be the option to register Academy (or whatever it's called now) players to make the bench.

If all the reds above fail to make it, you'd have to think we'd line up with:
Hancox at RB (or Richards depending on who is fit, but that would leave us 1 short in midfield)
LRT joining McGinty in the middle
Nico at LB
Chaney in for Sparkes
Chamberlain for Reid

Hardly a team to inspire confidence!

Duke was warming up with the rest of the squad before the game last night.

As he wasn't on the bench I assume his loan hasn't been cancelled and that he trains with us during the week and only goes to Cornwall for matches.

CP Gull · Post by **CP Gull** » 05 Oct 2016, 15:50

jpope wrote: Gallifuoco didnt go down and so where that suggestion of injury came from I dont know and so we will be fine.

Maybe he didn't (go down) but he was certainly carrying an injury as he hobbled into the Gulls Nest with a bleddy great ice pack on his knee after the game! Hopefully he will be ok, but he must be something of a doubt!

brucie · Post by **brucie** » 06 Oct 2016, 11:14

Todd wasn't up to this standard last time he was here. He hasn't played for donkeys years - he isn't what we need. Liability.

tomogull · Post by **tomogull** » 06 Oct 2016, 12:39

brucie wrote:Todd wasn't up to this standard last time he was here. He hasn't played for donkeys years - he isn't what we need. Liability.

Incorrect Brucie. Toddy has played for Eastleigh for the past three seasons. He has always been a 100% player and I'd be happy to see him signed on non-contract terms if we are down to 'bare bones' as Nicho is saying. He's only 35 and we're told he keeps himself fit so as Fred Disley has posted, as things are at present, I'd rather see him in the side than an inexperienced youngster.

Jerry · Post by **Jerry** » 06 Oct 2016, 14:10

tomogull wrote: Incorrect Brucie. Toddy has played for Eastleigh for the past three seasons. He has always been a 100% player and I'd be happy to see him signed on non-contract terms if we are down to 'bare bones' as Nicho is saying. He's only 35 and we're told he keeps himself fit so as Fred Disley has posted, as things are at present, I'd rather see him in the side than an inexperienced youngster.

He has played a grand total of 11 games for Eastleigh in those 3 seasons, with only 4 starts. His only appearance last season was as an 89th minute sub in September. His last start was in December 2014

I agree with Brucie.

brucie · Post by **brucie** » 06 Oct 2016, 14:41

I agree with Jerry. 4 starts in three years for a player who so lacked pace last time he was here that he couldn't keep up. The notion that he is the answer is ridiculous.

I would rather have an eighteen year old youngster.

wivelgull · Post by **wivelgull** » 06 Oct 2016, 15:21

There's a lot of agreeing going on here. Not wanting to be left out, I agree with brucie AND tomogull.

Torquay United Fans Forum