15 a side

[Arenache]

Post "other " comments here.

[stanman]

Not massiverly bothered but at my age prefer space and passing game more inherent in 7-a-side on a smaller pitch.

[mphamill]

I think some of the scrappiness of the match last night was caused by such high numbers. I think we should revert to two smaller games.

[Mark B]

Thanks Peter for your text. I was going to add your thoughts, but see you have beaten me to it.

Another Lymm Dad has made further suggestions:

1. If there are more than 24 players present (i.e. > 12 a side) we automatically split (i.e. no discussion/argument involved) into two 6/7/8 a side matches across the pitch; or
2. We adopt the two smaller games as our standard arrangement but with a full match say once a month – 80 minutes with subs ; or
3. We play a full game every week with no more than 12 a side but with ‘rolling’ subs at say 10 minute intervals.

Personally, as the pitch is big, and we are all slow (Danny and Richard G excepted), I think up to 13-a-side is workable, so would consider two games when we reach 27 players. The automatic thing isn't so easy unless we all routinely arrive no later than 8.55pm.

If we went back to playing across, we could expand numbers and have three games. This would be the end of the full size game though.

I personally like the idea of staying on the big pitch, but having rolling substitutions. The most subs per side would be 2, so the maximum time on the sidelines would be 10 minutes per player.

With two games, we would need four goalkeepers. It's difficult enough getting two to volunteer each week!

[Mr T]

With the option of two games p/Wed, we cld have 4 teams set up on a listed basis and play each other once over 3 weeks then a "Big" game every 4th (and 5th to cover the "longer" months).

Option 3 would work if we could play 80 something minutes each week.

[Arenache]

Personally I think, like every growing family, we should extend. I'd suggest knocking through into the cricket pitch and car park. Let's face it our strikers usually do! With added length we could play 4442

[Mr T]

Play with no outs (after pushing the little goals down past the byline)?

[harriek]

Prefer to play one game on the full pitch - and have subs if we really have to!

[Mr T]

Can anyone say what the chances are of playing past 10pm/more than an hour?

[Moggy]

I can see the potential of 4 games. There could be 4 captains and have a mini-league. The league could include each team playing each other 3 times. It would be fun.

[Moggy]

sorry, 2 games, 4 teams

[ianhodges]

I would rather have 15 a side even if busy because my knees really suffer when the pitch is smaller. happy to go with flow though.

[Mr T]

[£20 new season: £20 new season]

If we're not going to shoot players, try keeping the 15 a side and see if we can play differently: pass square or backwards to create space, make a run or two to rid your marker etc. It's crowded but you'll get that in 11 a side: we just have it nearly all the time in each third of the pitch.

I'd love more space and an opportunity to run with the ball but, b4 changing the format altogether, shall we see if we can improve what we've got first?

[£20: £20: £20]

[Arenache]

Looks like 15 a side is going to win. Any new format would have to have a clear majority.

[Arenache]

Come on Galaxy! Good luck to all the team. I've spoken to Jonny Marsh, who would be kean to redress the balance from last week.