2017/18 Bench Size Confirmed...
- Thread starter august04
- Start date
Strictly speaking it is a policy which is discriminatory. However, if it is objectively justifiable and that justification is of public interest in nature, it could be permitted.
For those bored enough to read about it, have a look at http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2012/16.html Seldon v Clarkson Wright & Jakes, which considered retirement age of Partners to promote staff retention of younger members and also dignity (not performance managing)
I wouldn't want to have to argue that the development of u23 UK hockey players was justifiable grounds...
For those bored enough to read about it, have a look at http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKSC/2012/16.html Seldon v Clarkson Wright & Jakes, which considered retirement age of Partners to promote staff retention of younger members and also dignity (not performance managing)
I wouldn't want to have to argue that the development of u23 UK hockey players was justifiable grounds...
The rule should be more about training than age. In football I believe some competitions have a rule that you have to have so many home grown players in your team. Homegrown is defined as a player that has been on a British team for at least 3 years prior to the age of 21.
The homegrown rule encourages bringing talent up. the current rule is very shortsighted and as people have said means potentially talented players will waste away on the bench for a year or so before being dumped when they turn 24.
The homegrown rule encourages bringing talent up. the current rule is very shortsighted and as people have said means potentially talented players will waste away on the bench for a year or so before being dumped when they turn 24.
