Manchester United Women | Silly Season | Summer/winter 2025

[Damien]

After what happened with Kelly, I figured the interest in Park was tied to Clinton's future as no way City would entertain selling her to us otherwise.

Lauren James was always going back to Chelsea. Think even when we signed her it was thought that was always going to be the case if she progressed as planned.

Zelem and Russo are the two that 'hurt' most to me. Zelem for the United connection, Russo for the sheer talent and going directly to Arsenal.

I hope a day does come when it doesn't happen as frequently, but that seems some way off, especially with the level of investment/interest INEOS are currently showing.

 

[DomesticTadpole]

Yes, but I'm not sure I understand the relevance of your question.

People moaning about losing big players, yes I can understand Russo etc, but James would always be likely to leave, that it wasn't down to club ambitions at that moment. We had only just got up and running then.

 

[DomesticTadpole]

After what happened with Kelly, I figured the interest in Park was tied to Clinton's future as no way City would entertain selling her to us otherwise.

Lauren James was always going back to Chelsea. Think even when we signed her it was thought that was always going to be the case if she progressed as planned.

Zelem and Russo are the two that 'hurt' most to me. Zelem for the United connection, Russo for the sheer talent and going directly to Arsenal.

I hope a day does come when it doesn't happen as frequently, but that seems some way off, especially with the level of investment/interest INEOS are currently showing.

Could London City Lionesses be big competition for players now as well as City, Arsenal and Chelsea. It is like until the men get their act together the women will always be an afterthought. Any budget is focused on the men, the women get the scraps that are left. The men really need to wake up.

 

[Grande]

You missed out Garcia! And James.

I'm not happy with the way our women's team is run, but I also think it is unfair to lay the blame on Skinner. I'm not his biggest fan, but he has done exceptionally well given the loss of so many quality.players. He is also the longest serving manager in the WSL.

You could make a similar list for the Men's team!

A lot of different situations in that list and some I wasn't bothered to see leave

For Clinton I'm assuming it's about game time and her place in the squad but obviously we don't know if there is more to it

I think tbh if you made a similar list for the men’s team in the same amount of time, it would make for a lot less impressive reading!

But to be fair, I agree it’s not something to be pinned on Skinner. There are a lot of different situations on the list, yeah. The worry for me, however, is the length of it. But it’s more a worry than a clear cut case of anything in particular.

I remember well Ferguson phasing out the most scintillating winger pair I’d seen (Sharpe/Kantchelskis) along with my favorite player (Mark Hughes, still a very good player then) and our best midfielder at the time (Ince), after previously having provided our two most recent rivals with their best players (Strachan - Leeds and McGrath - Aston Villa). But as long as it worked, it was deemed genious. When it doesn’t work, people say stuff like ‘squandered a generation’ and ‘how the mighty have fallen’.

It’s a shame, though, whenever it doesn’t work out for a young talented player at United.

 

[Lobster11]

Obviously I do not want to lose Clinton, but she would end up being another player to leave on a free next year, so I do understand the deal. Park is a good player and will be good cover/competition for Bizet.

Agreed on both points. I suspect the club knew that they wouldn't be able to afford Clinton's next contract, and/or that she would want to move to a bigger pond anyway, and they learned a lesson from the Russo fiasco. IMHO getting Park plus a tidy sum of cash is a pretty good deal. As you say, Park can be a like-for-like replacement/competitor for Bizet, and can also play at the 10 when needed.

 

[Lightbringer]

If Russo has been heavily booed at LSV, which treatment is Grace Clinton going to get leaving for Man Shitty while we are playing champions league football and they are not?

I will not have any love left for Clinton thats for sure! I dont buy any excuse of Skinner not handing her enough game time either as I dont think Clinton has impressed much with the playing time she has been given. She needs to earn it and not just ride with the hype around her.

 

[Lightbringer]

I think it is a cause for concern if we lose our biggest potentials because Skinner doesn’t favour massive talents.

If Skinner gets improved results with lesser names, it won’t matter so much. So far he’s done well. If our form dips again, and Lionesses pass us, it’s gonna be hard potentially watching a team worth of lost players doing well at clubs higher placed than us (Earps - Batlle - Greenwood - Zelem - Bø Risa - Groenen - Guerrero - Clinton - Geyse - Parris - Russo)

If we break this down for you:

James - left Man United when we were a rookie team to return home to family and offered a massive contract at the biggest club in english football
Earps - left Man United as she felt the new ownership of Man United would not immediately go massively all in on the womens team and she felt she was too old to stick around and wait
Batlle - left Man United to return home and join the best team in womens football Barcelona.
Greenwood - left Man United when we were a rookie club in the WSL for one of the biggest clubs in the world - and then Casey Stoney allegedly did not want her back and she ended up joining City.
Zelem - left Man United to go to the WSL and was dumped from there after having a lackluster season.
Bø Risa - a mediocre player than United wanted to get rid of to get better players in her place.
Groenen - She left a rookie United team to join one of the biggest womens team in the world
Guerrero - A highly overrated player that did not do much when she played for United and has not regained her place back in the Spanish team where she once used to sit on the bench and play aprox 1% of the game time.

Geyse - An overrated player with attitude problems that United dodged a bullet not having to deal with anymore.
Parris - An aging player leaving with younger replacements of the same quality taking her place

Russo - United blew this one by poor negotiations by all indications, that was a big mistake by the club to not immediately give her a big contract and even overpay for her as she is a lioness PR goldmine, good young player and claimed to be a United fan.

Garcia - Said she loved it at United and was going to stay until Mexicos biggest club offered maybe twice or triple the salary United could afford

Clinton, unknown why she left as of today!

Conclusion, not much United could have done to prevent these players from leaving (the ones United wanted to keep on that list), and on 95% of them it has nothing to do with Marc Skinner not favouring massive talents

I know the most commons answer to all of United problems usually is that Skinner is the devil but I dont think that is true!

 

[Grande]

If we break this down for you:

James - left Man United when we were a rookie team to return home to family and offered a massive contract at the biggest club in english football
Earps - left Man United as she felt the new ownership of Man United would not immediately go massively all in on the womens team and she felt she was too old to stick around and wait
Batlle - left Man United to return home and join the best team in womens football Barcelona.
Greenwood - left Man United when we were a rookie club in the WSL for one of the biggest clubs in the world - and then Casey Stoney allegedly did not want her back and she ended up joining City.
Zelem - left Man United to go to the WSL and was dumped from there after having a lackluster season.
Bø Risa - a mediocre player than United wanted to get rid of to get better players in her place.
Groenen - She left a rookie United team to join one of the biggest womens team in the world
Guerrero - A highly overrated player that did not do much when she played for United and has not regained her place back in the Spanish team where she once used to sit on the bench and play aprox 1% of the game time.

Geyse - An overrated player with attitude problems that United dodged a bullet not having to deal with anymore.
Parris - An aging player leaving with younger replacements of the same quality taking her place

Russo - United blew this one by poor negotiations by all indications, that was a big mistake by the club to not immediately give her a big contract and even overpay for her as she is a lioness PR goldmine, good young player and claimed to be a United fan.

Garcia - Said she loved it at United and was going to stay until Mexicos biggest club offered maybe twice or triple the salary United could afford

Clinton, unknown why she left as of today!

Conclusion, not much United could have done to prevent these players from leaving (the ones United wanted to keep on that list), and on 95% of them it has nothing to do with Marc Skinner not favouring massive talents

I know the most commons answer to all of United problems usually is that Skinner is the devil but I dont think that is true!

I agree with most of your points, as you can see from my post a few posts above yours (and below). Forgot about James, and Casey and Martin Ho really should be in the reckonning as well.

I think tbh if you made a similar list for the men’s team in the same amount of time, it would make for a lot less impressive reading!

But to be fair, I agree it’s not something to be pinned on Skinner. There are a lot of different situations on the list, yeah. The worry for me, however, is the length of it. But it’s more a worry than a clear cut case of anything in particular.

I remember well Ferguson phasing out the most scintillating winger pair I’d seen (Sharpe/Kantchelskis) along with my favorite player (Mark Hughes, still a very good player then) and our best midfielder at the time (Ince), after previously having provided our two most recent rivals with their best players (Strachan - Leeds and McGrath - Aston Villa). But as long as it worked, it was deemed genious. When it doesn’t work, people say stuff like ‘squandered a generation’ and ‘how the mighty have fallen’.

It’s a shame, though, whenever it doesn’t work out for a young talented player at United.

 

[Lightbringer]

Steph Houghton is surprised Jess Park is leaving City after 8 years and says she thought Park was massively invested in City I guess we got ourselves a player that is a true City blue and now had to work our magic to convert her to a red! Its like if Ella Toone had joined City just from the blue!

 

[Ekeke]

Steph Houghton is surprised Jess Park is leaving City after 8 years and says she thought Park was massively invested in City I guess we got ourselves a player that is a true City blue and now had to work our magic to convert her to a red! Its like if Ella Toone had joined City just from the blue!

If they signed Toone at the cost of trading Mary Fowler yeah

Unfortunately we're losing our 2nd top goalscorer last season despite being played out of position

 

[Lobster11]

Its like if Ella Toone had joined City just from the blue!

These are words that should never be uttered, even in jest.

 

[Ayush_reddevil]

Moving on from all the Grace Clinton stuff I think Jess Park is a very good signing. What do people think of our overall squad now? Could we have done more this summer?

 

[AmarilloMike]

Moving on from all the Grace Clinton stuff I think Jess Park is a very good signing. What do people think of our overall squad now? Could we have done more this summer?

We could have done more, but all in all we are in better shape than this time last year for certain.

 

[Maestro14]

Moving on from all the Grace Clinton stuff I think Jess Park is a very good signing. What do people think of our overall squad now? Could we have done more this summer?

I do think we have a very good set of players. And I really like the signings we've made. I have high hopes for Rolfo, I think if we can get her fit and playing regularly she'll be exceptional for us. Zigiotti has run the show in midfield in the games we've seen so far against strong opposition in Europe so I'm excited to see what she can do in the league. Zigiotti, Hini and Toone already looks like a very strong midfield - she could be a game changer for us. Park gives us good depth in attacking midfield and on the wing, and she could potentially be someone who forces her way into the starting XI regularly. And to be quite honest, I don't think we lose out too much swapping Clinton for Park. I might be in the minority of United fans who think this, but while Clinton was good for us last season and is a promising player, I didn't see someone who was the "future" of Manchester United, or someone who should have been starting every game for us. I think Toone and Hini are better players in her best positions. I'm hopeful that when Park settles in, we'll forget about Clinton pretty quickly.

Having said all that, there's one big question I have: what happened to all the prize money we won from the 7-a-side tournament we played in? Not including the money the players and coaches earned for themselves, the club should have took about £400k in prize money from that tournament, but we don't seem to have spent any of it. Rolfo was a free signing. Zigiotti had a year on her contract so she wouldn't have cost that much I don't think. And the Clinton transfer will be more expensive than the Park one. Obviously we know the owners don't want to spend any money on our women's team, but what's baffling is that they didn't even need to invest to improve the squad, the money was already there!

We've already seen in the European games that when we have a few injuries our squad becomes threadbare. That could be the biggest difference between success and failure this season, both in Europe and in the league.

 

[Lightbringer]

Moving on from all the Grace Clinton stuff I think Jess Park is a very good signing. What do people think of our overall squad now? Could we have done more this summer?

Hear it directly from Skinner, he says United wanted to bring in 2 more players but that they failed to do so partially because the market prices has risen so much because of London, Arsenal and Chelsea spending crazy money! And then other clubs selling expect United to pay the same kind of transfer fees. Skinner had to spend half of the press conference discussing why United can not spend that much money even when the mens team can spend 200£ million etc. I honestly feel for the guy, these questions should be asked to Ratcliffe or people up the chain that refuses to invest more in the womens team.

My own answer is that with champions league qualifiers we should have done more than bringing in 2 players, especially as we won some cash in world 7 tournament as well or whatever its called. I was hoping we would push on to get into the champions league and get some benefits from that but instead we signed a free agent and of course bought Zigiotti, not sure how much that cost, but overall I expected a bit more!

But I guess its the same as always, the mens team are so fecked that nothing will happen with the womens team until the means team are a dominant force again if ever and by then the other clubs will have built an even bigger gap to us. I just think its something we have accept and live with for our own peace of mind - rather than headbutting the wall hoping for change that probably wont come anytime soon!

All valid points from @Maestro14 above as well, well summarized!

​

 

[jojojo]

It's one thing us not wanting to spend Chelsea, Arsenal, London money - it's a different thing that we're going into the season with a squad that's weak on numbers as well as on starters.

The rumours at the start of the window said we were chasing some free agents but got rejected even by the ones we thought were good bets. Wages? Ambition? Reputation? I don't know what the problems were but when we're going into a season with a good chance of some kind of European football, we ought to have a good offer to sell.

I go back to the basics - you can buy players and you can develop them. Where's the spirit of development in our setup? We aren't bringing through our Academy kids, we aren't looking like a good bet for up and coming youngsters. Who's making the convincing argument to new players that United is a great place to grow up, or to make that next step up?

One thing is for sure, it's not coming from the United name any more. We have to try harder than that, even just to stand still.

 

[Lightbringer]

It's one thing us not wanting to spend Chelsea, Arsenal, London money - it's a different thing that we're going into the season with a squad that's weak on numbers as well as on starters.

The rumours at the start of the window said we were chasing some free agents but got rejected even by the ones we thought were good bets. Wages? Ambition? Reputation? I don't know what the problems were but when we're going into a season with a good chance of some kind of European football, we ought to have a good offer to sell.

I go back to the basics - you can buy players and you can develop them. Where's the spirit of development in our setup? We aren't bringing through our Academy kids, we aren't looking like a good bet for up and coming youngsters. Who's making the convincing argument to new players that United is a great place to grow up, or to make that next step up?

One thing is for sure, it's not coming from the United name any more. We have to try harder than that, even just to stand still.

Marc Skinner says in the press conference that he is great at nurturing young talent and that United is a tremendous place for young players to be :- ) I am not sure if you watched it or not. But Skinner is convinced we are in good hands in terms on young player development with his steady ways of coaching! He did not get any follow up questions on that by the journalists, so I guess that must mean they kind of agree Skinner is good at developing youngsters

I think the higher ups saw us beating out City for 3rd and then finishing 2nd in that 7 women tournament and somehow felt that if we just keep the same player and they have a year in the bag together we kick on from there! As an excuse of not investing heavily. Whether the people above Skinner really believes that I dont know. But clearly we abandoned the german striker as well at the end of the window even as we have a laundry long injury list and almost got eliminated by Hammarby with a very thin squad for those games. If we make it past Brann with all the injuries we got lucky!

 

[jojojo]

Marc Skinner says in the press conference that is great at nurturing young talent and that United is a tremendous place for young players to be :- ) I am not sure if you watched it or not. But Skinner is convinced we are in good hands in terms on young player development with his steady ways of coaching!

He means someone at the club is good at getting them loan deals.

 

[Lightbringer]

He means someone at the club is good at getting them loan deals.

Haha, how long is Skinner contract? Is it 1+1 with an option year? Or is 2 seasons + option year? Or 2 years without option?

I think Skinner will run out of energy tbh, he is often having to defend or explain things that the leadership of the club decides. And as you know the SKINNER OUT signs will arrive in short order if we drop some points. He has the expectations of a top 3 club without the resources and its only going to get worse as the top 3 invests even more with London and Liverpool probably up there soon as well.

It would be natural if he would kind of fade out as it must be a draining on him! The constant bashing of the club by the media, neutral fans and our own fans - all these distractions will take its toll sooner or later! If we lose vs Brann I fear things could snowball quickly!

 

[Demon Barber]

It's been an interesting discussion to read on here so far. I've not really joined in much because the two or three of you were doing so well.

However, just to broaden it a little - I do not think that the massive investment is good for the growth of the women's game at all. Okay, maybe it is in terms of revenue streams, but my concern is for the development of British players. We've had the Clinton/Park "swap", but because of the huge influx of talented foreign players (and yes, we are guilty of that too) I worry that the pathways are simply not going to be there for home-grown/academy players.

At best you will get the likes of Keira Barry, Jess Simpson, Lucy Newell and Emma Watson seeking playing time outside of the WSL. I find it quite depressing really. Clinton got a good loan deal at Spurs, and Agyemang seems to have got a good one at Brighton, but I fear for the home-grown players at all WSL clubs unless they are already established internationals.

 

[jojojo]

Interesting article on United's recruitment and last minute deals. It also looks at staff turnover amongst the coaching and support staff - a lot of people working on a day to day basis with the team have gone.

Looks like the players ability to stick together and look after each other is going to be more important than ever.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6601568/2025/09/06/manchester-united-women-transfers-skinner/

 

[jojojo]

Incidentally there is at least one cheering bit from that article. I'd heard that the women's training centre had been handed back better than it was before they moved out. A few more details:

They have now returned permanently to their building which has been upgraded further with expanded gym space, an enlarged and modernised dressing room, a mother and baby room for Blundell, a refreshed player games room including a table tennis table and women’s team specific imagery and messages, replacing men’s team branding.

 

[Demon Barber]

Interesting article on United's recruitment and last minute deals. It also looks at staff turnover amongst the coaching and support staff - a lot of people working on a day to day basis with the team have gone.

Looks like the players ability to stick together and look after each other is going to be more important than ever.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6601568/2025/09/06/manchester-united-women-transfers-skinner/

Interesting, if somewhat depressing read. It's also interesting that it is the NYT reporting this rather than the Britiish press.

Most of the article rehashes what is already in the public domain, such as the Clinton/Park deal, the signing of Zigiotti and Rolfo, and Skinner's excellent press-conference - restrained but with an undercurrent of frustration and implicit criticism of the hierarchy.

The "new" stuff in the article, although again the information is already out there but has been tidily brought together, concerns all the staff who have left and the disruption that this must cause the team. The kit man leaving for the same job at Liverpool ffs.

As for the baby-changing room - it's probably just a pull down table that you get in the bogs at the Arndale.

 

[Rood]

Interesting, if somewhat depressing read. It's also interesting that it is the NYT reporting this rather than the Britiish press.

Most of the article rehashes what is already in the public domain, such as the Clinton/Park deal, the signing of Zigiotti and Rolfo, and Skinner's excellent press-conference - restrained but with an undercurrent of frustration and implicit criticism of the hierarchy.

The "new" stuff in the article, although again the information is already out there but has been tidily brought together, concerns all the staff who have left and the disruption that this must cause the team. The kit man leaving for the same job at Liverpool ffs.

As for the baby-changing room - it's probably just a pull down table that you get in the bogs at the Arndale.

NYT have taken over The Athletic - it's Charlotte Harpur writing so it is British press

The reality is that INEOS are still not willing to put much money into the Women's team - I guess they are consistent at least on the staffing side with massive cuts throughout the club and not just Women's

 

[Demon Barber]

NYT have taken over The Athletic - it's Charlotte Harpur writing so it is British press

Ahh, thanks. I did not know that.

 

[Lightbringer]

Interesting, if somewhat depressing read. It's also interesting that it is the NYT reporting this rather than the Britiish press.

Charlotte Harpur is possessed in her United bashing, the quote below is a joke:

"The team started the season with wins in the Champions League second qualifying round against PSV (4-0) and Hammarby (1-0), although those results were tainted by the fact the club chose, for performance and financial sustainability reasons, not to charter a plane home from Sweden."

Holy cow, the only reason that was an issue was because Harpur and Kathryn Batte decided to make clickbait articles about it

With Batte even not including any comments from United or having the correct facts on the table! And she did not even bother to add it Uniteds statement to her article afterwards either, typical trash so called "journalism"!

Also it turned out some of Battes claims was untrue in Harpurs follow up article about the "travel disaster"
---
These two are constantly driving an agenda towards United, I would call them activists rather than journalists. When you use propaganda to influence your readers what you do is you insert factually correct stuff to gain the viewers trust and then you insert your own opinion or agenda and the reader laps it up.

I dont doubt the United womens has its issues, but when time and time again the same journalists are the sources and more often than they use clickbait or hyperbole they undermine their own credibility.

Every time one of these articles are released you have certain fans having a meltdown creating a new "skinner out campaign" or threatening to not go to games anymore etc. The overall damage to Uniteds reputation from these "unknown sources" is pretty big. Most neutral fans hate the Man United womens team because all that has been written, part of it is on the higher ups at United and part of it all the doomsday talk and exaggerations.

For me I get emotionally exhausted having the same stuff repeated again and again, its just a constant barrage of anti-United in the press! If Batte and Harpur keeps this up and fans to spread it then it will hurt our chances of recruiting players in the end!

 

[croadyman]

NYT have taken over The Athletic - it's Charlotte Harpur writing so it is British press

The reality is that INEOS are still not willing to put much money into the Women's team - I guess they are consistent at least on the staffing side with massive cuts throughout the club and not just Women's

Yeah we won't be able to compete with the top 3 unless INEOS start giving a crap about Women's team

 

[Ubik]

Interesting article on United's recruitment and last minute deals. It also looks at staff turnover amongst the coaching and support staff - a lot of people working on a day to day basis with the team have gone.

Looks like the players ability to stick together and look after each other is going to be more important than ever.

https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/6601568/2025/09/06/manchester-united-women-transfers-skinner/

Completely passed me by that Matt Johnson had been given the job permanently. He also looks like the third brother in the Lee Mack and Jason Wilcox family.

 

[Lightbringer]

As Sky Sports had a short video on youtube about United only having a 5 player bench I looked into it.

Arsenal has 20 players + 3 goaltenders on their website. United has 20 players + 3 goaltenders.

I assume Mared Griffiths was playing with some other team this weekend to get playing time instead of being on the bench?

Here was our 5 player bench today:

Gabby George
Celin Bizet
Lisa Naalsund
Rachel Williams
Safia Middleton-Patel (GK)

And these are the players missing:
Anna Sandberg (sickness)
Simi Awujo (back in training)
Leah Galton (back shortly)
Hannah Blundell (back shortly)

Millie Turner (long term?)

In 10 days we could have the following 9 player bench (if we used the same starting 11 as of today)

Anna Sandberg
Gabby George
Celin Bizet
Lisa Naalsund
Rachel Williams
Simi Awujo
Leah Galton
Hannah Blundell
Safia Middleton-Patel (GK)

With Kayla Rendell (GK) not making the bench.

Sky Sports suggested United should have bought 2 or 3 more players before this season which would mean that that Rachel Williams, Naalsund, Galton and Mared Griffiths would not even make the squad for games and sit in the stands when healthy. (just took 3 players randomly that could miss out) Is it really realistic to carry 23 players in the squad which would be 3 more than Arsenal? If everyone would be healthy including Millie Turner 5-6 players would sit and watch games from the stands not having a place on the bench in that scenario.

 

[Demon Barber]

As Sky Sports had a short video on youtube about United only having a 5 player bench I looked into it.

Arsenal has 20 players + 3 goaltenders on their website. United has 20 players + 3 goaltenders.

I assume Mared Griffiths was playing with some other team this weekend to get playing time instead of being on the bench?

Here was our 5 player bench today:

Gabby George
Celin Bizet
Lisa Naalsund
Rachel Williams
Safia Middleton-Patel (GK)

And these are the players missing:
Anna Sandberg (sickness)
Simi Awujo (back in training)
Leah Galton (back shortly)
Hannah Blundell (back shortly)

Millie Turner (long term?)

In 10 days we could have the following 9 player bench (if we used the same starting 11 as of today)

Anna Sandberg
Gabby George
Celin Bizet
Lisa Naalsund
Rachel Williams
Simi Awujo
Leah Galton
Hannah Blundell
Safia Middleton-Patel (GK)

With Kayla Rendell (GK) not making the bench.

Sky Sports suggested United should have bought 2 or 3 more players before this season which would mean that that Rachel Williams, Naalsund, Galton and Mared Griffiths would not even make the squad for games and sit in the stands when healthy. (just took 3 players randomly that could miss out) Is it really realistic to carry 23 players in the squad which would be 3 more than Arsenal? If everyone would be healthy including Millie Turner 5-6 players would sit and watch games from the stands not having a place on the bench in that scenario.

These are interesting points you raise, but I still think we are a couple of players light, but it is not just about numbers. That said, Chelsea have a squad of 29 players, plus 9 on loan.

Of course, only 20 players can be named in each matchday squad, which means players inevitably do have to miss out - or take the Ladd, Evans, Mannion option to move for game time. But that said, we have Millie Turner injured. An injury to Le Tissier and/or Janssen would leave us seriously struggling. We need another CB.

Similarly I think we need another striker. We are currently playing with only Williams as cover.

The remaining positions we are well blessed with. So, I would not have an issue with adding two more players to the squad in January.

 

[Lightbringer]

These are interesting points you raise, but I still think we are a couple of players light, but it is not just about numbers. That said, Chelsea have a squad of 29 players, plus 9 on loan.

Of course, only 20 players can be named in each matchday squad, which means players inevitably do have to miss out - or take the Ladd, Evans, Mannion option to move for game time. But that said, we have Millie Turner injured. An injury to Le Tissier and/or Janssen would leave us seriously struggling. We need another CB.

Similarly I think we need another striker. We are currently playing with only Williams as cover.

The remaining positions we are well blessed with. So, I would not have an issue with adding two more players to the squad in January.

Yeah, Chelsea has 26 players + 3 goaltenders on their website. I have no idea how they are keeping 7-8 players in the stands happy. Although they did know that Kerr is a question mark and that Ramirez would be gone til after christmas + when they bought their latest diamond player from USA who I cant recall the name atm of but who was pulled in her hair yesterday I believe. + Lauren James can never stay fit!

I agreed that Uniteds squad has less quality than Arsenal, but from some of the commentary it sounded like United had like saved so much money that they barely could keep any players on the bench.

And yes, you are correct we should have had one more CB, but its always easy to say when somebody goes down long term, but thats right. But if we have the same amount of players as Arsenal it cant be that much of a disaster especially as Griffith is the only player on our roster that you immediately thing "we dont know if she is up to standard". Unless Arsenal also are thin on players.

I mean we have constantly people accuse Skinner of bully players and making them leave the club because they dont get enough playing time, imagine if we would have another 3 players there would be even more problems to find playing time.

Also I dont too see the huge alarm about only having 4 outfield players on the bench yesterday as thats 4 of 5 subs and Skinner barely uses 4 or 5 subs at any time, so it does not help us if we have 9 subs or 5, it wont make much of a difference!

Overall, fingers cross - we dodged the bullet getting through the Hammarby and Brann games with Clinton fecking about and making us one quality player short on top of the other injuries.

Now it seems more promising with players returning and Rolfö and George getting more and more game time and fitness in! *KNOCK ON WOOD that you we dont get a new injury spree as I am sure I am jinxing things

Final note: With regards to loans, we have 6 players out and they way things stands atm if any of these players would have stated they would barely have seen any action til the winter window, so I think the club got it right with those decisions as well!

Is Kayle Rendell playing with Uniteds reserve team or where does she get game time? I thought she looked like a decent keeper, so I hope she is not rottening away!

 

[jojojo]

I think part of it is that we encouraged young players to leave in anticipation of recruiting more experienced players. Some of them released on permanent moves, some sent out on loans including some very late loans.

We knew we had to start early because of the WCL qualifiers. We were lucky that Toone in particular arrived back ready to go after the Euros - though I do worry her lack of a proper summer break may catch up with her later. But several players had long tough summers even if they didn't play as many minutes as Ella and we really have been lucky that players like MLT and Zigiotti were not only fit but ready to hit form immediately.

How much did we know in advance - well we knew a lot about the Euros. We also knew that we can't really expect Rachel Williams to start many games, even if she hadn't got injured. We knew Hannah Blundell realistically wasn't going to be a starter in September - she only got permission to start running in July - she needed time and I suspect will still need careful handling if she's going to come return without setbacks. That's been the story with other football and tennis mums as well.

I think if you run your squad with minimal contingency then you need to be confident that you can switch to your U21s. Arsenal are. I really don't think we are.

We started the season with injuries. The remarkable thing is that we haven't actually added more to the list despite the tough schedule. It's hard to avoid the feeling that we've been lucky rather than prepared.

Skinner feels it as well. He might not use his bench as much as I'd like, but he knows that he needs one.

 

[Demon Barber]

By the 17th December when we play Juventus we will have played 21 competitive matches - and that's after a Euros summer.

I expect us to progress in the CL, so that's more games. We are automatically in the quarters of the League Cup, and no doubt will be wanting to make it four FA Cup finals in a row.

We are potentially looking at 40+ United games, plus England games against Brazil, Australia, China and Ghana (all before Dec 2nd), plus matches for our other internationals - managing all that with a thin squad is clearly problematic. And, as @jojojo said, we'd have to be very fortunate to not pick up injuries, especially as we know Skinner does not like to rotate/rest players. Maya has played every minute of every game since she joined us. That is unsustainable.

I said I'd take a CB and a striker in Jan. I'd happily take more - experienced players like Rolfö and Janssen. If we can progress in the CL I think someone like Rachel Daly would be an excellent January signing.

 

[Lightbringer]

Honest question. What are Chelsea and City doing with sometimes 6 to 8 players not making the squad for games and up to 10-12 players that might make it to the bench but almost never play any minutes? Do these players just get paid to train or are they playing elsewhere with Chelsea/Citys junior/youth teams? (thats not including their loaned out players at other clubs)

No wonder these two clubs are bleeding money when they are just hoarding so much dead weight players just sitting around.

 

[Lightbringer]

Mared Griffiths played for the U21 team instead of traveling to Liverpool. So we could have had 5 outfield subs if we had wanted to, but the club obviously preferred to give her playing time even if it meant some doomsday reactions online for only having 5 of 9 subs

 

[Lobster11]

Honest question. What are Chelsea and City doing with sometimes 6 to 8 players not making the squad for games and up to 10-12 players that might make it to the bench but almost never play any minutes? Do these players just get paid to train or are they playing elsewhere with Chelsea/Citys junior/youth teams? (thats not including their loaned out players at other clubs)

No wonder these two clubs are bleeding money when they are just hoarding so much dead weight players just sitting around.

Well, the cynic in me has long thought that they're just snatching up all the good available players so nobody else can have them, but I don't really think that's it.

I think the key is to realize that all of the players are salaried employees working a (usually) 6-day work week, and only a small proportion of the time they're being paid (for some of them) is when they are on the field or bench for a competitive match. In a sense, all of the players mainly "get paid to train," only some of whom also play on match day. And any coach will tell you that the outcome of the competitive match depends on the contributions of everyone on the roster. (This was a big talking point among the Lionesses during and after the Euros.)

That said, I can think of several reasons why it is worth having a lot of great players on the roster, even if they rarely or never play on match day. First, of course, it provides insurance against an unexpected injury plague which can happen at any time. Second, having players on the roster that are almost good enough to start keeps pressure on the starters by providing serious competition for their spots in the lineup. And third, the "A team" needs a "B team" to practice against in training that simulates the top-level competition they will face on match day.

 

[Lightbringer]

Well, the cynic in me has long thought that they're just snatching up all the good available players so nobody else can have them, but I don't really think that's it.

I think the key is to realize that all of the players are salaried employees working a (usually) 6-day work week, and only a small proportion of the time they're being paid (for some of them) is when they are on the field or bench for a competitive match. In a sense, all of the players mainly "get paid to train," only some of whom also play on match day. And any coach will tell you that the outcome of the competitive match depends on the contributions of everyone on the roster. (This was a big talking point among the Lionesses during and after the Euros.)

That said, I can think of several reasons why it is worth having a lot of great players on the roster, even if they rarely or never play on match day. First, of course, it provides insurance against an unexpected injury plague which can happen at any time. Second, having players on the roster that are almost good enough to start keeps pressure on the starters by providing serious competition for their spots in the lineup. And third, the "A team" needs a "B team" to practice against in training that simulates the top-level competition they will face on match day.

Thats a very intelligent reply. I suppose that explains it from a Chelsea point of view. But I do not get why many players that wants to compete agrees to be reserve number 3 or 4 instead of actually playing in the WSL with another team. Probably they must be well paid because most players want to get game time and challenge themselves.

On the subject of keeping pressure on other players I think its sufficient to use the bench players, which Skinner hesitates to do. When we played Brann in the UCL Q round and lead 4-0 the commentary was like: Why not take of players as we have a game in 3 days vs Hammarby? And Skinner did not do it, which I thought was hilarious

I would say Skinner needs to sub or not start both Park and Toone as well to keep them fresh and also keep them on their toes. I love Toone but I disagree with her having to play 90 minutes every game when we have fresh legs on the bench. Zelem had a similar role with Skinner playing her 3 games x 95+ minutes in 6 days once. All of this talk about the bench and depth is some what contradicted when very little trust is being put on the players not starting just to begin with. And to be fair our bench does not look to bad, so its not like Skinner can say the players are not good enough to play.

Maybe he will rotate the whole starting lineup rather than making many subs at minute 60 for example. I would kind of prefer taking 3-4 players off in minute 60 and have more players play some decent minutes in every single game which also results in more fresh legs overall for the team in the game. I guess we will see how it unfolds, but there will be no easy games in the UCL, nor the league cup to kind of rest stars as could be done last season in the league cup. Meaning tough decisions needs to be made from Skinner on when to rest his preferred starters!

 

[Lobster11]

Thats a very intelligent reply. I suppose that explains it from a Chelsea point of view. But I do not get why many players that wants to compete agrees to be reserve number 3 or 4 instead of actually playing in the WSL with another team. Probably they must be well paid because most players want to get game time and challenge themselves.

First, thanks for the compliment.

Your question about why players would want to be the #3 or #4 for Chelsea is a totally different issue, but I think the answer probably involves the same factors. That is, even if you don't play (or even suit up) on match day, you spend the rest of the week training with some of the best players and coaches in the world. For a young player especially, it provides the opportunity to up your game in order to impress, say, your national-team coaches.

A specific example dear to my heart is (American) Jenna Nighswonger's signing with Arsenal. She has played only a few total minutes in matches there, and often doesn't even make the match-day roster. But in her case, she had made her way into the USWNT a couple of years ago but then seems to have subsequently fallen out of favor. I think her goal at Chelsea is to improve various aspects of her game by training with Arsenal so she is better able to compete for a spot on the U.S. national team.

 

[AmarilloMike]

Thats a very intelligent reply. I suppose that explains it from a Chelsea point of view. But I do not get why many players that wants to compete agrees to be reserve number 3 or 4 instead of actually playing in the WSL with another team. Probably they must be well paid because most players want to get game time and challenge themselves.

Don't underestimate a player's desire to be part of a winning squad, even if only on the fringes of it. For Man Utd men, Alexander Buttner (remember him? Not many do...) will never hesitate to remind people that he has more Premier League winners medals than an actual legend of the game like Steven Gerrard (1-0!).

 

[jojojo]

Thats a very intelligent reply. I suppose that explains it from a Chelsea point of view. But I do not get why many players that wants to compete agrees to be reserve number 3 or 4 instead of actually playing in the WSL with another team. Probably they must be well paid because most players want to get game time and challenge themselves.

On the subject of keeping pressure on other players I think its sufficient to use the bench players, which Skinner hesitates to do. When we played Brann in the UCL Q round and lead 4-0 the commentary was like: Why not take of players as we have a game in 3 days vs Hammarby? And Skinner did not do it, which I thought was hilarious

I would say Skinner needs to sub or not start both Park and Toone as well to keep them fresh and also keep them on their toes. I love Toone but I disagree with her having to play 90 minutes every game when we have fresh legs on the bench. Zelem had a similar role with Skinner playing her 3 games x 95+ minutes in 6 days once. All of this talk about the bench and depth is some what contradicted when very little trust is being put on the players not starting just to begin with. And to be fair our bench does not look to bad, so its not like Skinner can say the players are not good enough to play.

Maybe he will rotate the whole starting lineup rather than making many subs at minute 60 for example. I would kind of prefer taking 3-4 players off in minute 60 and have more players play some decent minutes in every single game which also results in more fresh legs overall for the team in the game. I guess we will see how it unfolds, but there will be no easy games in the UCL, nor the league cup to kind of rest stars as could be done last season in the league cup. Meaning tough decisions needs to be made from Skinner on when to rest his preferred starters!

When Chelsea recruit top players they also recruit the mentality that goes with that billing - their players all think they can start and that it's only a matter of time before they prove it. For the younger ones there's a combination of kudos, money and a manager who can sell the dream to help them wait for their time.

Emma Hayes built a culture of rotation and ever ready subs. A core of maybe 17 players starting regularly - as opposed to the 13/14 typical of most teams. Subs getting real minutes - 20 minutes plus, more if the team is misfiring or a player looks mentally or physically tired, not just 5 minutes at the end. Equally though that means regulars get better recovery options and get used to being subbed.

Novice subs coming in straight from the youth team has long been a characteristic of multiple United men's teams. Not just as a gesture once a match is already won, sometimes when the team is hunting an equaliser or a winner and the normal route isn't working. Chelsea have also offered that possibility both to their own youngsters and to their fringe players.

I'm sure it's a juggling act and a constant source of frustration to players who aren't part of the core 17 - but that's a big chunk of the job for managers like Hayes, Bompastor and Wiegman.