Top 100 Rules - Do They Need Changing?

It's more than two years since we last looked at and changed some of the rules governing fair play in Top 100.

Please have your say below on whether or not you think the rules are working fine as they are, or whether they need changing.

We voted on a number of issues, a couple of which it's worth looking at again here:

  1. Squad Cap

  2. Sanctions for going over squad cap limit

1. Squad Cap *

Some managers feel strongly that reducing the squad cap will force some clubs to sell players that other clubs will then want to and be able to buy.

Others feel that it will only free up players that most managers have little interest in, especially if they have a smaller squad to work with.

Others feel that increasing the squad cap (especially for lower division clubs) could give them more room to develop young talent and/or have a competitive first team.

2. Sanctions for going over squad cap limit *

Up until two years ago, the only sanction for going over the squad limit, even for a minute, was a one month transfer ban.

Some people felt that a transfer ban alone was too lenient, and that it encouraged some managers to game the system by taking a ban in order to win one of the almost daily 'new player lotteries'.

A new sanction was voted in - that anyone going over the squad limit has to sell the player that took them over the limit.

As you can see from the number of managers banned since then (almost one every two weeks), I'm not sure it's made much difference (I don't have a record of how many or how often managers were banned before).

What it has done is to ensure that no one can possibly gain any benefit from going over the squad limit.

But in doing so, it has punished pretty much every manager for honest, genuine mistakes, including some who were not bidding on new players at all.