|Does exactly what it says on the tin - the forum for football-related discussion.
But he arrived over a season later than Collison was given 10, each to their own, but I'm not a fan of teams who leave mainstream numbers open, all while regularly fielding players wearing #37 (looking at you again Liverpool)
We ended up that season starting games with 3-4 players in shirts above 30 after all.
See now we had john carew who was suppose to be our striker for the season.. he could of been number 10 instead of wasting my fav number on him!!
its almost a shame parker didnt leave sooner because i could of seen jack in number 8 and 10 left for a striker which would of been baldock (not that i wanted him gone but we all knew)
Next season if we leave it as it is we wouldnt start 1-11 anyways
lets say for sake of arguement 16 = 6 so 1-11 (including new number 6)
number 1 will prob be henderson and jussi could well have his number 22 meaning thats 22 in goal
rb will be demel or ob atm neither under 15 number wise
cb tomkins and reid but i dont see reid as a starter.. wasted the number 2 there
lb george.. cool num 3
midfield 14 16(6) 4 12 plus whatever number diame has
now thats hardly 1-10 so its worth leaving them free for proper players to fill
Spiegel intrigues me, squad number wise. Should we give him the #1 jersey, seeing as Jussi may end up with his favoured 22 and Henderson looks set to keep 13?
Clearly he won't be the No 1 for some time, but it would seem somewhat bizarre if we have keepers wearing 13,22 and something in the 30's, but no actual #1.
Probably just me?
Liverpool's #1 is Brad Jones, their 3rd choice. Happens more than you'd think.
I knew as soon as I posted this that some melt would take an attitude like this.
Why? The thread title is pretty clear as to what it's about, so if the topic bores you that much, why feckin well open the thread, let alone post a response?
For every inch you think I have OCD, you are ten times more stupid for behaving like this.
The thread title says "squad numbers?" not "grown men discussing who should wear what number based on their position or quality like some five year olds even though it doesn't really matter and most people including players themselves probably don't give a rat's ass"
What post were you hoping to read when you clicked on the thread, out of interest.
Well it might not be the most exciting or fast moving thread, but it has managed to get to 9 pages, so there must be enough of an interest otherwise it would never have got past page 1.
LR sums it up anyway - what exactly did you expect, the thread title is simple enough and informative enough to have given you some clue of it's content, surely?
Once again, the thread title doesn't say anything about this childish bs about how appropriate is it for a non starter CB to wear No.2. I opened the thread thinking maybe there's been an announcement on which numbers will the new signings wear but definitely not this. And btw. my first post wasn't meant to be mean as i don't necessarily think that OCD makes you stupid or anything. I just find it strange that any adult would want to indulge in such debate. That's it.
Well like I said, seemingly people do want to talk about it. Doesn't mean it's that important in the grand scheme of life or even in the grand scheme of West Ham discussion, but since everyone we sign is going to have to wear a number at some point, I fail to see the harm speculating.
I have never tried to suggest it's a big deal, despite me starting the thread and posting numerous times in the thread since, but to say it's childish seems a little harsh, if I may say so. I fully understand there are many people who,as you succinctly put it, don't give a rat's ass about the numbers, but as I say, if people feel that way, surely it's better to say nothing than to be needlessly harsh on people.
Its not that strange.
Nor is the worry that, however its numbered at the moment, that's one weak squad right there.
whats the beef with the title it says squad numbers and then a question mark, if it was the actual numbers it wouldnt have the question mark
i think its a good discussion, personally i like to see the proper numbers used and not a starter wearing number 37
Will never happen again. Squad numbers are a marketing tool, both for the club and for the players. Tevez has kept #32 ever since we had him. Beckham always tries for #23 since Madrid. The days of 1-11 are gone.
And who cares really? I mean, the players may have favourite numbers, but does it really matter who wears what number?
Sure, you don't really want Carlton wearing number 1, or any outfield player, but beyond that I don't see what difference it makes.
What difference does it really make if a CB who may or may not be first choice (he'll be there or thereabouts, imo) wears number 2, or number 88?
The only real point I have to make is that I think it is sad that we have retired our number 6 shirt. I really don't agree with retiring numbers
Sure, some will argue that having someone like Matthew Upson wearing Bobby Moore's number 6 devalues the shirt. I couldn't disagree more strongly. If anything all it would do is highlight the shortcomings of our ex-captain, but does nothing to diminish the legacy of Bobby Moore
Yet on the other hand, I imagine that a player wearing our number 6 (who actually had an interest in playing for us) would get a lift, and extra motivation, knowing what the number on his back represents. On the one hand, it may have inspired Upson to grow a spine and step up to the plate (unlikely, I know), but on the other it denies a player like Tomkins, who has grown up at West Ham surrounded by the history of that shirt, the chance to draw on that inspiration and try to emulate the great man who wore his number. And it is especially sad as in Tonks we have a player who is truly worthy of wearing our number 6, imo
Users browsing this forum: dciron, Google Adsense [Bot] and 23 guests