Tuesday Tin-pot Trophy

[clarkey1974]

The way I view this trophy is this, even if I’m in a minority of 1.

When it started as the Associate members cup and for all the time it was only for L1 and L2 (or their equivalent) teams I was all for it. For many seasons I was frustrated that we never got anywhere in it, and in 96 I was as joyous at Wembley as any of the 20k that went to watch us.

When they talked of “expanding the competition” I thought ‘great, get the conference clubs in it as well’. But no, they went the other way and added Premier League juniors to it.

In the 80’s our reserves competed with the likes of Liverpool and Man Utd reserves in the Central League and used to do well. These days our FIRST team is expected to play against their JUNIORS! not even reserves. If that’s not a massive insult to a whole swathe of professional clubs, I don’t know what is.

A century ago County played in the Midland League and won it 4 times on the trot. Also in that league were Wednesday and Sheff Utd Reserves. Through sweat, toil and near bankruptcy RUFC earned the right to compete with these clubs as equals. Why the hell should any league club be deemed worthy of only facing an U21 side? As soon as this change was brought about, my interest in this competition was dead.

They did try with the top half of the conference clubs in mid 2000”s to fill the shortfall at least it was straight knock out and no byes or groups…but clubs said they was losing money by just hosting night games Against even less supported teams so they disbanded that idea…

Clubs had a vote on 3 options for future format the other year….the u21”s idea,keep it as it was with 8 byes both north and south to second round and the rest playing in first round.or disband the completion altogether….it was close until they suggested 10k a win with the u21”s included and that what they voted for…

[Beaufighter]

It’s just my belief that first teams are allowed to play in first team comps and U21’s play in U21 comps and so on. It’s nothing more than a ‘reserve cup’ anyway,( introducing U21 sides made it that, whatever the intention may have been) so they should allow all teams to pick any side they like.

[MillersTime]

How would anyone know if they are good enough to play in the lower leagues if they don't compete in cups like these. Thats prob why most are not going out on loan as league 1 and 2 can only have 5 loan players and why should they take a chance on a player they can't see play or a player who only plays against kids. Playing the under 23s from prem clubs imo could help the lower league clubs by putting these players on show. Let's be honest, they are not sending the players and staff to away days in this cup for the cash.

Thank you for the droppings oh masterful premier league. Thank you for the honour of allowing us to share the pitch with prodigies and if you could possibly allow us one or two we would be most grateful. Thank you eternally.

The majority of these youngsters aren't going out on loan because why would you go and play on loan at S****horpe when you can stay at a Man City say, pick up 10k a week or more, plush surroundings and have a half arsed kick about in the youth games. Some are evidently good enough but why bother when life is so comfortable.

[MillersTime]

I get your point beau. I remember it being introduced for the poor teams who didn't have a chance of winning the other cups to then stand a chance of winning sumat. Was that patronising?
Why do non league teams have to qualify to join the fa cup? Why not just stick every team in the hat and if ebsfleet draw man u then that's the draw. Why do people object to the big teams breaking away from the premier League and forming a super League.

Stick them all in a draw, no issue. Still insulting, as Beau put wonderfully, to play the youngsters of a prem team. The difference between the haves and the have nots.

[clarkey1974]

I agree about a revamp. How about teams in this competition having a Quarterback and scoring through touchdowns and field goals, now that's an idea!

only as long as the linesman get to throw yellow dusters on the pitch for offsides I am in..😜..

[Scum-Triumphant]

Waney’s son on the bench.

[Scum-Triumphant]

Johansson; Hull, Wood (C), Bola; Gratton, Sadlier, Durose, Odoffin, Miller; Kayode, Ladapo.

SUBS | Vickers, Harding, Greenhouse, Warne, Greaves, Grigg, McGuckin.

[CAMiller]

Johansson; Hull, Wood (C), Bola; Gratton, Sadlier, Durose, Odoffin, Miller; Kayode, Ladapo.

SUBS | Vickers, Harding, Greenhouse, Warne, Greaves, Grigg, McGuckin.

I can't see how that team meets the EFL criteria? 4 of those did not start last Saturday nor are in the top 10 players with most first team appearances so in essence it means they must start next Saturday or we'll be fined?

[Beaufighter]

I can't see how that team meets the EFL criteria? 4 of those did not start last Saturday nor are in the top 10 players with most first team appearances so in essence it means they must start next Saturday or we'll be fined?

I believe they have to meet one of the criteria, not all of them. Vickers, Grigg, Miller and Ladapo all played on Saturday, and so is enough under the “must have started, or subsequently started the clubs last league match” or however it’s worded.

[clarkey1974]

Waney’s son on the bench.

Now gru,thats a warney boy..!.