Squad numbers

[CumbrianRam]

Don't really get the point of these changes?

[Bristol Ram]

Nor me, unless it really is a way of making it clear that Bailey really doesn't have a future?

Or maybe it's a way of separating out the first-team squad (those with numbers) and the U21 squad (those without), so explaining why Hoganson has no number etc.

[Hucknall Ram]

Why change Davies' number?

[Bristol Ram]

Hmmm... could be as simple as Savies wanting something with a 9 in it?

Or, more optimistically, a brand-new striker in the pipeline that has requested 24? We can but dream.

[Ambitious]

So I can't wear my Bailey 25 shirt anymore? 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/angry' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':angry:' /> ********!

in all seriousness though, makes absolutely no sense not to give him a squad number - don't like the way these things are handled sometimes, if he is not going anywhere then why not give him number 31,32...etc do we have to pay for registration on a person having a squad number? that is a serious question.

It just seems daft to me 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/unsure' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':unsure:' />

[Albert]

So I can't wear my Bailey 25 shirt anymore? 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/angry' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':angry:' /> ********!

in all seriousness though, makes absolutely no sense not to give him a squad number - don't like the way these things are handled sometimes, if he is not going anywhere then why not give him number 31,32...etc do we have to pay for registration on a person having a squad number? that is a serious question.

It just seems daft to me 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/unsure' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':unsure:' />

Just to confirm, changes to the squad numbers:

23. Saul Deeney => 30

24. Steven Davies => 29

25. James Bailey => Numberless

26. Mats Morch => Numberless

27. Stefan Galinski => Numbersless

28. Kane Richards => Numberless

Josh Lelan => 28

Others without numbers named: Alex Witham, Michael Hoganson, Shaun Barker

I would read literally nothing into this. Looks like they've shuffled the numbers to make room for other potential players so they can have numbers under 30. Not sure why, but the fact that Galinski, Richards and Morch have also lost their number of the list suggests that they just were shuffling it and just didn't give them any now that preseason is coming to an end. Of the players who have been moved, only Deeney and Davies are likely to play, so its understandable why they have been given numbers whilst Bailey and the youngsters haven't. By not announcing the numbers it gives them a chance to change them in the future. Of course, this seems to mean that someone actually cares enough about the numbers to want to freedom to assign them later...

[Gary Teale]

This just proves the rumours as far as Im concerned that Bailey has fallen out with Clough.

its fine Clough saying that bailey might not start with hendrick and Bryson infront of him.

But he'd still be my choice as next in line as soon as injuries and suspensions kick in.

I think this just prooves that Clough is ready to give bailey the maguire treatment.

I think Hughes is in front of him now as is Coutts so he is off

[Albert]

I think Hughes is in front of him now as is Coutts so he is off

Agreed, people are far to quick to jump to the ol' jewel of "[such and such] isn't playing because Clough fell out with him for [wild unsubstantiated rumour]". Players aren't allowed to fall out of favour and not be good enough anymore, its always a falling out. I mean sure, we might have one of the best young talents in the division in front of him even after the first choice pair, and sure there are other players who can play there, but no, him not playing means that it must be a falling out with the manager, no other option is even considered on here.

Its a self replicating rumour that itself is based on circular logic, starting with a seed rumour:

• Player θ has not played recently
  
• Player θ has been okay in the past
  
• Player θ is not injured
  
• Rumour suggests that Player θ has had a falling out with Manager χ
  
• Manager χ has a potentially negative interaction with the player in the past (criticism, rejected contract, bad reaction to substitution)
  
• Rumour taken as good enough explanation by some
  
  Later:
  • Player ξ has not played recently
    
  • Player ξ has been okay in the past
    
  • Player ξ is not injured
    
  • Rumour suggests that player ξ has had a falling out with Manager χ
    
  • Manager χ has a potentially negative interaction with the player in the past (criticism, rejected contract, bad reaction to substitution)
    
  • Manager χ has a history of "falling out", he was rumoured to have fallen out with Player θ
    
  • Some use this as evidence and the rumour becomes stronger
    

  This of course then repeats ad infinitum. Suddenly we have Players θ, ξ, σ, η & φ all having "fallen out" with manager χ using the previous incidents as evidence for the following ones. Its a house built on sand, but we seem to like using it. The obvious flaw is of course that we can't even be certain of the initial incident, nor whether it even makes sense to use it as evidence that it could happen again.

  This all said, whilst I tend to side with the idea that Bailey has been transfer listed so he can go and be first choice elsewhere and not take up a spot in the squad when he's not really needed, it is completely possible that what some claim is true. Of course, aliens could have landed at Roswell and man may never have landed on the moon, anything is possible, the key is whether it is the best answer to the question.

[Duracell]

I would guess, as much as anything, it's a move to stop people getting Bailey on their shirts and then complaining if we sell him.

We do mention we'll give him a number if he plays.

We love to speculate on forums, but you can read into things too much. I've no doubt Bailey has bigger admirers than Clough, but all the same....

[Ambitious]

I feel that Bailey is an established championship performer - no doubt about that, he can play at this level, consistently and confidently!

I also notice we're not exactly stacked with numbers in midfield, with only 4 other recognised centre midfielders before you start putting square pegs in circle holes... One of them has just hit puberty, literally... I'm just surprised, just hope when we inevitability fall short, and if he is still here, we don't shoot our selves in the foot, so we don't play him!

With Hendrick out, he should be in the team tomorrow... No doubt! Even if not the 11 the 18 but my guess is that Doyle will be the back up striker/winger/centre mid on the bench whilst Bailey watches from the stands - daft one really!

[Stedcfc]

I feel that Bailey is an established championship performer - no doubt about that, he can play at this level, consistently and confidently!

I also notice we're not exactly stacked with numbers in midfield, with only 4 other recognised centre midfielders before you start putting square pegs in circle holes... One of them has just hit puberty, literally... I'm just surprised, just hope when we inevitability fall short, and if he is still here, we don't shoot our selves in the foot, so we don't play him!

With Hendrick out, he should be in the team tomorrow... No doubt! Even if not the 11 the 18 but my guess is that Doyle will be the back up striker/winger/centre mid on the bench whilst Bailey watches from the stands - daft one really!

I'm a Bailey fan but the fact Clough is pushing him out and nobody seems interested in him seems mad to me. Maybe he has really gone downhill? When I saw him before he was dropped he was playing well but that was a good 8 months ago now. I'm not saying he's become a bad player overnight but something doesn't add up.

Doesn't seem he played very well against Chesterfield either.

[Leicester Ram]

I heard Tevez is getting no.23.

[CumbrianRam]

I feel that Bailey is an established championship performer - no doubt about that, he can play at this level, consistently and confidently!

I also notice we're not exactly stacked with numbers in midfield, with only 4 other recognised centre midfielders before you start putting square pegs in circle holes... One of them has just hit puberty, literally... I'm just surprised, just hope when we inevitability fall short, and if he is still here, we don't shoot our selves in the foot, so we don't play him!

With Hendrick out, he should be in the team tomorrow... No doubt! Even if not the 11 the 18 but my guess is that Doyle will be the back up striker/winger/centre mid on the bench whilst Bailey watches from the stands - daft one really!

Bailey to e has an attitude, spent too much time with S*****. Dont all of this fake tan stuff he does, he's a footballer not a fecking model!

[davenportram]

Hate to go back to the 1-11 being first choice players lets look at today's team if Hebdrick and Ward were available I think Jacobs and Hughes would be on the bench with numbers 1-11 starting

I think for Saturday we will see

Ward replace Jacobs (Coutts did more in open play and put some good crosses in and had a better game for me)

I think Hughes will keep his place based on tonights performance ( but Hendrick was first choice at start of pre-season)

Tyson and Robinson had decent games

Team for Saturday

1.Fielding

2.Brayford

3.Roberts

4.Bryson

5.Buxton

6.Keogh

7.Coutts

9.Tyson

10.Ward

11.Robinson

19.Hughes

[Bristol Ram]

Hoganson is number 22.