Care to reply to the rest of the post

not at all. I may agree with the rest of it but have proven you wrong on that issue which is why i replied to that bit.

So how many of them are regular 1st teamers? Do you know or are you off to google it?

that is irrelevant, you said we havent produced or developed any youth and I have proven that we have. To answer your irrelevant question anyway most of those players have played in 50% or more of our games.

I will put this very simply for you so you can understand it. How many of your developed youth are 1st team regulars. Its very irrelevent if you develope your youth but still buy expensive players who push them out.

and i have fooking told you that most of the players i listed have played in more than half the games.

Does that class them as regular 1st teamers? Why the language?

well given that they have played more often than not then yes

They are hardly 1st team regular then are they? Not seeing your games i don't know if they have covered for injuries/suspensions etc but the fact they have not played in nearly all games, like ours or Saints youth that we have produced then my original point stands. They are not 1st team regulars.

they are regulars. They play more regularly than they dont. You can not deny that.

I can't deny that i dont see them play that often, however they are not 1st team regulars otherwise they would play a lot more than about half of the season. 1st team regular player in all teams play more than half the season.

regulars mean that they play regularly. If they play more games than they dont then they play regularly. Its what it says on the tin.

If you went to work 50% of the time would you boss think you were a regular employee?

Regular would suggest more often than not and not half of the time.

8,000 what is going on - do you have so few season ticket holders?