Cybereagles

It looks to me unnecessary to limit the number of players used in tournaments. Currently, for the men's WC, that number is 23. I think the size of a squad should be left to each country to decide.

The only reason I can think of is to reduce costs. If so, why not simply say that individual countries are responsible for costs over 23 players and will have to provide their own facilities beyond what FIFA provides? FIFA can also limit the number of players allowed in the field during match day which makes sense but has nothing to do with squad size.

I can see where a team is hit by unusual injuries heavily decimating a particular position and needing to bring certain people in but can't as things are today because of squad limit. Or maybe some players in the squad are not panning out. Why shouldn't they be able to call on other players as long as they have the right nationality?
Bell

For the same reason substitutes on the bench and substitution is limited, (1) to increase competition and (2) fairness and equality

danfo driver wrote:For the same reason substitutes on the bench and substitution is limited, (1) to increase competition and (2) fairness and equality

I'M SORRY BUT...

...I don't see how limiting squad size increases competitiveness and fairness.
Bell

23 is an upper limit. If you wan carry 17 players go World Cup that's your business.

As a manager you have to manage your resources and pick your best 23 players - whether you're a country like Brazil with a grand history and a massive pool of players to choose from or whether you're Iceland with a smaller pool and talent ratio - so the number is an equaliser.

Why do you need more than 2 players per position and 3 goalies?

I believe that a team can petition FIFA if they need new players especially goalies but it rarely happens.
That is one reason why teams like Brazil play easy friendlies before the World Cup.

A team can take extra players, they just will not get the FIFA "accreditation" to participate in official FIFA functions.

Bell wrote:It looks to me unnecessary to limit the number of players used in tournaments. Currently, for the men's WC, that number is 23. I think the size of a squad should be left to each country to decide.

The only reason I can think of is to reduce costs. If so, why not simply say that individual countries are responsible for costs over 23 players and will have to provide their own facilities beyond what FIFA provides? FIFA can also limit the number of players allowed in the field during match day which makes sense but has nothing to do with squad size.

I can see where a team is hit by unusual injuries heavily decimating a particular position and needing to bring certain people in but can't as things are today because of squad limit. Or maybe some players in the squad are not panning out. Why shouldn't they be able to call on other players as long as they have the right nationality?
Bell

Have you thought about the unfair advantage this idea would introduce?

I know the richer nations already have an advantage in terms of training facilities, administration, organisation etc. But this would be taking it to another level of unfairness. The richer nations would come with more players as they can afford it hence they would have more depth during the tourney. Imagine a rich country like Germany that can put 3-4 world class teams together. They would have an unfair advantage during a tournament even over countries like Brazil, Argentina and Spain.

There has to be a point where you draw the line to create fairness and genuine competition, which the current system tries to do – i.e. only 11 players on the pitch at one time per team, only 3 subs and only 23 players in total to choose from once at the tournament.

Bell wrote:

danfo driver wrote:For the same reason substitutes on the bench and substitution is limited, (1) to increase competition and (2) fairness and equality

I'M SORRY BUT...

...I don't see how limiting squad size increases competitiveness and fairness.
Bell

Bell wrote:It looks to me unnecessary to limit the number of players used in tournaments. Currently, for the men's WC, that number is 23. I think the size of a squad should be left to each country to decide.

The only reason I can think of is to reduce costs. If so, why not simply say that individual countries are responsible for costs over 23 players and will have to provide their own facilities beyond what FIFA provides? FIFA can also limit the number of players allowed in the field during match day which makes sense but has nothing to do with squad size.

I can see where a team is hit by unusual injuries heavily decimating a particular position and needing to bring certain people in but can't as things are today because of squad limit. Or maybe some players in the squad are not panning out. Why shouldn't they be able to call on other players as long as they have the right nationality?
Bell

Bell,

You do realize that FIFA pays for accommodation pertaining to those guys? FIFA has numerous costs and football is under a budget. It is same reason teams must vacate tournament as soon as they are eliminated. Costs. Yes, NTs may bring as many as they want if in fact they are paying. Currently, several NTs take stand-by players to the tournaments and pay for those but they can only get on squad lists via injury appeals.

Bell, did you realize that the host country is in charge of logistics for the teams attending
a tournament? Think about lodging, feeding, transporting, ...etc.
That's also the reason why once a team is eliminated, it has to ship out or take care of
itself from then on.
Cheers!!!

Oga Bell, because no host country can afford Nigerian-sized squads...
A few years ago we took a delegation of over 500 persons to the UN General Assembly.

Not all countries can afford it.

Gotti wrote:Oga Bell, because no host country can afford Nigerian-sized squads...
A few years ago we took a delegation of over 500 persons to the UN General Assembly.

Wow ! What reason did we - as a nation - give exactly for such a number?

Make I add my own

Bell, I hope you realize it's cheaper to construct this bench for subs

than this one

Odas wrote:

Gotti wrote:Oga Bell, because no host country can afford Nigerian-sized squads...
A few years ago we took a delegation of over 500 persons to the UN General Assembly.

Wow ! What reason did we - as a nation - give exactly for such a number?

Bro, have you not attended village meeting at the neighboring village? Or attended a traditional wedding ceremony? The more people in your entourage, the more it is seen that you have taken the mission seriously! As a groom, take only 4 people to your in laws house and they will ask the gateman to show you the way out!

Not to worry, Bell. You know we are gradually ramping up. Recall we used to play without subs - 11 players alone per match. Now we can sub 3 per match. Perhaps by the time you are 87yrs we would have clibmed to your plateau of limitless number of players. Patience.

chendosplastic wrote:Not to worry, Bell. You know we are gradually ramping up. Recall we used to play without subs - 11 players alone per match. Now we can sub 3 per match. Perhaps by the time you are 87yrs we would have clibmed to your plateau of limitless number of players. Patience.

Serie A allows 11 subs on the bench

to stop Naija taking four hundred and nineteen (4-1-9) players to a tournament

danfo driver wrote:

Odas wrote:

Gotti wrote:Oga Bell, because no host country can afford Nigerian-sized squads...
A few years ago we took a delegation of over 500 persons to the UN General Assembly.

Wow ! What reason did we - as a nation - give exactly for such a number?

Bro, have you not attended village meeting at the neighboring village? Or attended a traditional wedding ceremony? The more people in your entourage, the more it is seen that you have taken the mission seriously! As a groom, take only 4 people to your in laws house and they will ask the gateman to show you the way out!

THANKS FOR YOUR RESPONSES


To summarize the responses you've all kindly provided, there are two reasons why FIFA limits squad size:

1) The cost
2) Level the playing field

The cost factor doesn't make sense to me because FIFA can stipulate that all costs over and above 23 should be borne by individual countries. Furthermore, those outside the 23 cannot be considered in official activities, winners medals or accorded rights given to the others (except, of course, as some have pointed out, in cases where a country petitions for an extra player).

Since both sides are allowed only 11 players at a time, that's all the leveling that's needed. In practice, a country would want to use its best 11 most of the time and would not go down too far into its national pool and risk losing. If a country can go deep to bring in new players that's proof of its superiority. Which is what the tournament is all about.

So I say, limiting squad size is a relic from the past that should be scrapped.
Bell

Bell wrote:THANKS FOR YOUR RESPONSES


To summarize the responses you've all kindly provided, there are two reasons why FIFA limits squad size:

1) The cost
2) Level the playing field

The cost factor doesn't make sense to me because FIFA can stipulate that all costs over and above 23 should be borne by individual countries. Furthermore, those outside the 23 cannot be considered in official activities, winners medals or accorded rights given to the others (except, of course, as some have pointed out, in cases where a country petitions for an extra player).

Since both sides are allowed only 11 players at a time, that's all the leveling that's needed. In practice, a country would want to use its best 11 most of the time and would not go down too far into its national pool and risk losing. If a country can go deep to bring in new players that's proof of its superiority. Which is what the tournament is all about.

So I say, limiting squad size is a relic from the past that should be scrapped.
Bell

So the richer countries/FAs who can carry the cost burden of larger squads ultimately benefit? Yes, give the richer nations a further leg up. Bell, it's the FIFA World Cup not the GDP World Cup.

The YeyeMan wrote:

Bell wrote:THANKS FOR YOUR RESPONSES


To summarize the responses you've all kindly provided, there are two reasons why FIFA limits squad size:

1) The cost
2) Level the playing field

The cost factor doesn't make sense to me because FIFA can stipulate that all costs over and above 23 should be borne by individual countries. Furthermore, those outside the 23 cannot be considered in official activities, winners medals or accorded rights given to the others (except, of course, as some have pointed out, in cases where a country petitions for an extra player).

Since both sides are allowed only 11 players at a time, that's all the leveling that's needed. In practice, a country would want to use its best 11 most of the time and would not go down too far into its national pool and risk losing. If a country can go deep to bring in new players that's proof of its superiority. Which is what the tournament is all about.

So I say, limiting squad size is a relic from the past that should be scrapped.
Bell

So the richer countries/FAs who can carry the cost burden of larger squads ultimately benefit? Yes, give the richer nations a further leg up. Bell, it's the FIFA World Cup not the GDP World Cup.

TheYeyeman,

Am not sure Bell has fully evaluated the impact of what he thinks ought to be policy. Squad limits are indeed necessary not just in terms of FIFA costs but for different purposes including fairness across the board, etc. There are numerous interests and reasons. BTW, FIFA does not stop any one from carrying 100 players if they choose to. However, FIFA insists that only 23 of those can be registered and FIFA has agreed to fund only those. FIFA is also flexible by allowing injured players, conditionally, to be replaceable. Nigeria has infact taken more than 23 players to tournaments and the NFF paid for those who were not in the registered squad.

Enugu II wrote:

The YeyeMan wrote:

Bell wrote:THANKS FOR YOUR RESPONSES


To summarize the responses you've all kindly provided, there are two reasons why FIFA limits squad size:

1) The cost
2) Level the playing field

The cost factor doesn't make sense to me because FIFA can stipulate that all costs over and above 23 should be borne by individual countries. Furthermore, those outside the 23 cannot be considered in official activities, winners medals or accorded rights given to the others (except, of course, as some have pointed out, in cases where a country petitions for an extra player).

Since both sides are allowed only 11 players at a time, that's all the leveling that's needed. In practice, a country would want to use its best 11 most of the time and would not go down too far into its national pool and risk losing. If a country can go deep to bring in new players that's proof of its superiority. Which is what the tournament is all about.

So I say, limiting squad size is a relic from the past that should be scrapped.
Bell

So the richer countries/FAs who can carry the cost burden of larger squads ultimately benefit? Yes, give the richer nations a further leg up. Bell, it's the FIFA World Cup not the GDP World Cup.

TheYeyeman,

Am not sure Bell has fully evaluated the impact of what he thinks ought to be policy. Squad limits are indeed necessary not just in terms of FIFA costs but for different purposes including fairness across the board, etc. There are numerous interests and reasons. BTW, FIFA does not stop any one from carrying 100 players if they choose to. However, FIFA insists that only 23 of those can be registered and FIFA has agreed to fund only those. FIFA is also flexible by allowing injured players, conditionally, to be replaceable. Nigeria has infact taken more than 23 players to tournaments and the NFF paid for those who were not in the registered squad.

Enugu ii & theyeyeman,

Please refer to my hilite above. I wholeheartedly agree with it and if it's the case, which I'm sure it is, my question has been answered. But I don't buy this rich vs poor/leveling the playing field argument.
Bell

danfo driver wrote:

Odas wrote:

Gotti wrote:Oga Bell, because no host country can afford Nigerian-sized squads...
A few years ago we took a delegation of over 500 persons to the UN General Assembly.

Wow ! What reason did we - as a nation - give exactly for such a number?

Bro, have you not attended village meeting at the neighboring village? Or attended a traditional wedding ceremony? The more people in your entourage, the more it is seen that you have taken the mission seriously! As a groom, take only 4 people to your in laws house and they will ask the gateman to show you the way out!

This man. Kai! you guys will make a good stand up comedians