Jump to content

Checkatrade Trophy 2016/17


Gazz

Recommended Posts

The announcement of the revamped tournament sort of flew under the radar as in typical FA incompetent fashion, they announced it on the opening day of Euro 2016.

The tournament has now been restructured to feature 64 teams, the 48 teams from League One and Two and 16 U21 teams from teams with Category One academies, which are:

  • Arsenal
  • Chelsea
  • Everton
  • Leicester
  • Liverpool
  • Man City
  • Middlesborough
  • Newcastle
  • Southampton
  • Stoke City
  • Sunderland
  • Swansea
  • Spurs
  • WBA
  • West Ham
  • TBC (since Man Utd declined to participate)

These teams will have to play six U21 players in their teams throughout the tournament.

Group Stage rules

  • Sixteen groups of 4 teams will be organised on a regionalised basis.
  • All groups will include one invited club and at least one club from each of Leagues One and Two.
  • All clubs will play each other once, either home or away.
  • Invited clubs will play one home game at the club's first team stadium.
  • Clubs will be awarded 3 points for a win and 1 point for a draw.
  • In the event of a drawn game (after 90 minutes), a penalty shootout will be held with the winning team earning an additional point.
  • The top two teams will progress to the Knockout Stage.

I've been saying for years that the League Cup should have been U21 or U23 for PL teams for years, so I'm quite interested to see how this format works out and whether it opens up any opportunities for academy players to force their way into first team contention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We haven't confirmed if we are going to enter. There's some issues that the club aren't exactly thrilled about. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see what the problem is with trying it for 1-2 seasons as a trial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, DFF said:

I don't see what the problem is with trying it for 1-2 seasons as a trial.

Primarily the concern is that it is a 'backdoor' way for them to force 'B Teams' upon us and enact their 'League 3' plan. At which point the game at this level will diminish rapidly, because I'm afraid people are not going to want to see their club duke it out with Everton U21s, Stoke U21s and Newcastle U21s in league competition. It will not aid the development of the national team like they claim it will, and it will not work like it does in Spain because the English football league system is unlike any other in the world.

In the more immediate term, it messes with a competition that didn't really need it. This is clubs of Doncaster Rovers' level only realistic chance for a trophy and a cup final day out at Wembley. I was one of 60,000 people who saw us play Bristol Rovers in the 2007 Final, but there is no way that kind of attendance would happen if it was, say, Oxford vs Chelsea U23s. It just wouldn't be the same. And if it's two U23 teams playing each other, as is more than possible you would think, then it would be something nobody cares about at all. I don't want to see my team put on a level playing field with a 'big' club's academy team. I'm not going to pay to sit in a mostly empty Keepmoat Stadium watching us play Stoke's U23 team, why would I? They have also brought up 'fixture congestion' as pretty much the main reason why they want to re-jig the league system (even though the real reason is commercialism) then come up with a trophy format that involves giving every single team in Leagues 1 and 2 extra matches by way of this group stage, all in midweek which is also something they said they aim to reduce with the new league system proposed.

It's all well and good saying it doesn't hurt for a one year trial, but the fact is it could very easily lead to wholesale changes to the leagues that in my opinion (and the opinion of many others) would completely wreck English football below the top division.

In addition, the new format was apparently passed by way of a show of hands at the league AGM after a brief, hasty discussion, and any who opposed it (which was just under a third apparently) had no chance to say anything in response. No proper consultation process with clubs, and absolutely no consultation whatsoever with the fans, who continue to be ignored by the governing bodies of the game despite being the most important sector of the sport.

  • Like 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been told by a source of a source they had to do this or else the competition would have been scrapped due to the lack of sponsorship (they were told this point blank at the AGM meeting just before voting).

I'd rather they scrapped it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, GA! said:

I've been told by a source of a source they had to do this or else the competition would have been scrapped due to the lack of sponsorship (they were told this point blank at the AGM mee4ting just before voting).

I'd rather they scrapped it.

#gaintheknow is the better version of #nerfintheknow

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 07/07/2016 at 15:39, GA! said:

I've been told by a source of a source they had to do this or else the competition would have been scrapped due to the lack of sponsorship (they were told this point blank at the AGM meeting just before voting).

I'd rather they scrapped it.

Bullshit. Why do they need sponsors? Obviously they want sponsors but they don't need them, they'd just have to reduce prize money. Besides that I don't believe that no one would want to sponsor it, perhaps they weren't offering the money they asked for but they'd have got something 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Matt said:

Bullshit. Why do they need sponsors? Obviously they want sponsors but they don't need them, they'd just have to reduce prize money. Besides that I don't believe that no one would want to sponsor it, perhaps they weren't offering the money they asked for but they'd have got something 

The sponsors contribute to the 'prize pot', which is what the B-teams are supposedly doing this year.

I believe that because of the competition's extremely low attendances other than the Wembley day out, which still remains an attractive prospect as League 1 and 2 teams only get said day out through the Play-Offs otherwise, teams would lose money putting those games on without a sponsor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, MDK said:

Went to old Wembley, lost 1-0 to sCunthorpe. Went to new Wembley lost on pens to Rotherham.

Not even Cardiff was good to me, we lost 4-2 to Blackpool. 

 

Lost 1-0 to Halifax a few weeks back.

Lost against those cunts Bristol Rovers last year.

Lost the Johnstone's Piss Pot cup against MK Dons in 2008.

 

Lost in Cardiff against our old friends Cheltenham in the League 2 play-off final in 2006.

 

 

But we've also won 3 times at Wembley. So it's all good.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, GA! said:

 

Lost 1-0 to Halifax a few weeks back.

Lost against those cunts Bristol Rovers last year.

Lost the Johnstone's Piss Pot cup against MK Dons in 2008.

 

Lost in Cardiff against our old friends Cheltenham in the League 2 play-off final in 2006.

 

 

But we've also won 3 times at Wembley. So it's all good.

I'll never forget that save Ashley Bayes made in that Blackpool game. It was such a TV save, he flew thru the air, hung in the blue sky of Cardiff like Gods Bollock, and plucked it out the air. Then punched it away because it looks cooler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. To learn more, see our Privacy Policy