Squad sizes capped??

[PeteK]

Anyone read this at all..
How do Bath have that many players....

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/rugby-union ... egulation/

Incase of paywall..

Maximum squad sizes will be imposed upon Premiership clubs as part of the new Professional Game Partnership with the Rugby Football Union, Telegraph Sport can reveal.

While discussions are continuing, the leading proposal will limit clubs to a maximum senior squad of 35 players with a further 12 players in a ‘transition’ group from their academy.

Capping the number of senior and academy players a club can carry was understood to be a key recommendation of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport advisers, Ralph Rimmer and Chris Pilling, who were appointed last summer by the government to create a more sustainable league after the loss of three Premiership clubs to administration last season.

The reduction from 13 to 10 teams means that there is no longer an overlap with the regular international windows so there is less need for teams to carry bloated squads to compensate for club v country clashes. The purpose of imposing an upper limit is designed to not only control costs but to encourage teams to put more faith in their academy players rather than relying on journeymen to fill holes. Young English players’ lack of game time has been cited as a key concern by Bill Sweeney, the RFU chief executive, heading into the PGP negotiations with the Premiership which are unlikely to conclude this year.

While some clubs who have traditionally carried small squads such as Sale Sharks and Northampton Saints would be unaffected by such a change, teams such as Bath, who have a total of 73 senior and academy players, and Harlequins, who have 47 senior players, would need to make significant cuts in the coming seasons.

“You need to hit that sweet spot,” a source close to the negotiations said. “You don’t want your squad to be too small where players are playing too much but you don’t want your squad to be too big where players never play. There are squads of 70 and there will be 10-15 players in that who play less than five games a season. That just does not help anyone.”

The transition group would have its own salary cap while clubs would carry a further “rookie” class for Under-20 and Under-19 up to a maximum of 15 players.

The controversial development of Premiership 2 in the place of the Championship and streamlining numbers within academies together with the introduction of a draft system are also means to ensure younger players receive more game time. There is a recognition that certain clubs benefit disproportionately from the current academy catchment system which leads to them hoarding talented young players with only the narrowest path to regular first-team rugby which is the single most critical ingredient to their development.

“Clubs need to identify the prospects who are really likely to break through,” the source added. “Also if you restrict those numbers then it allows other clubs to pick up some of those other talents who would otherwise be stockpiled. We would not want a load of young fly-halves to be queued up behind Marcus Smith at Harlequins because he will be there for the foreseeable future and they simply will not be playing.”

[Rugbygramps]

Going on the Tigers app which I appreciate may not have been updated we currently have 42 senior players and 33 in the senior academy squad

[CrumblingTerrace]

A.k.a. A Premiership-wide round of player redundancies

[Wayne Richardson Fan Club]

A.k.a. A Premiership-wide round of player redundancies

Well something has to happen or there will be even more people looking for work.

[TigerFeetSteve]

Sk 88 has put this on Twitter how it would affect us at Tigers.

https://twitter.com/spkeene/status/1734 ... 9Xd8w&s=19

So in reality it's only a reduction on the Senior Academy size but a brutal one.

Though I suspect that it may be dealt with more by long term loans (season long rather than dual registrations to the likes of Nottingham, Leicester Lions & Loughborough)

[AViewFromLe2]

For reference, these are the rules for the Premier League, where clubs are limited to registering 25 players.

"The 25-man squads have eight places reserved for homegrown players while the remaining 17 places can be used by either homegrown or foreign players. Clubs are able to use as many players under 21 (born on or after January 1, 2002) as they like, with those players not counting towards the 25 player limit"

The PL have a better way of doing it than these proposals. As a result IMO, a cap of 35 senior players would be sensible, but there should either be unlimited amounts of under 24's or a sensible cap of say 20-25 under 24's.

[Tiglon]

Won't any surplus just be moved to Nottingham, and loaned back when needed?

It does kinda make sense to cap squads, something needs to give (although I'm not sure cutting a bunch of players on £30k per year is going to suddenly make pro rugby financially viable, it might help). It also frees up more players to create a better standard 2nd tier - if there are any clubs there that can afford to pay anyone.

Personally, I think the easy solution is just to pay the bigger names less, but what do I know?

[peteD]

It would be interesting to know how loans to other squads will would work.
if the aim is to stop premiership teams hogging young talent that might need time to develop,
will they say that loans can happen but only out of the 12 ‘senior academy’ or will it be that you can have 30 under 24’s with 18 loaned out on a semi permanent basis? The latter still restricts the movement of those players

[markharbtiger]

This seems a little bit silly in my opinion. More restrictions will drive good players away from playing in England. There are already more players than clubs can accommodate, so thinking of a scheme whereby MORE not FEWER can play should be the aim.

[Yorkshire man]

Reports in todays press suggest that ourselves Sale, Quins, and Saints already comply with this new ruling. Apparently Bath have the highest squad number at 70 which does seem a little ridiculous despite the deep pockets of their benefactor. As has been suggested earlier it might simply come down to the end of dual registrations.

What is a little concerning is the potential for injuries in specialist positions, prop, hooker etc, although there will probably be allowances for injury signings.

[ourla]

As mentioned above the number 73 for Bath includes both senior and academy players.

Still quite high and at the top end but likely no worse than Quins in terms of senior squad.

Proposal seems reasonable to me and surprised it wasn't a thing already.

[johnthegriff]

A squad of 35 of whom probably 9 will need to be front row players allowance will have to be made for about 8 players unavailable through injury each week . I forsee games being cancelled as teams struggle to field a team. It is a concern that players over eighteen having left college struggle to get game time, one solution might be if RFU got off its back side and funded an under 23 competition with provision for say 3 over age players or mentors in the team. They could call it an A league or Premier Cup, play it on Monday nights, I think fans might like it.