[ColoradoTree]

1. The official press releases about the expansion state that the number of players on each roster have been increased from 18 to 22 players, implying that all 22 players now have the same status. Each match will have an 18 player team sheet, which is a different issue.

That's what I'm saying, though--the only official statement I've seen on this from either FIFA or the IOC only said that all four alternates would be available for selection for any match and the 18-player matchday roster could be reconstituted before each match. From that narrow statement, press accounts have inferred something broader--i.e., that the four alternates are all part of the full roster now. Because those accounts are taking a step that the FIFA statement doesn't require, I want to see some sort of official statement resolving that ambiguity. It's not a meaningful difference for how Vlatko prepares the team for each match, but it could affect matchday roster construction if Vlatko also has the desire to get the four alternates onto at least one matchday roster (or get on the field) to formally make them Olympians and medal-eligible, or if they already have that status. It's a meaningful difference for those four players' status--particularly Jane Campbell, the least likely of the four alternates to see the field. 

Basically, the story played out like this: (1) a round of stories based on sources saying the IOC was going to allow roster expansion to 22 for this year's Olympics; (2) the FIFA statement saying coaches could select the 18-player matchday roster from the 18 players on the roster as well as the 4 alternates; and (3) another round of stories on the FIFA statement concluding, "yep, 22-player rosters it is!" Because (1) and (3) don't necessarily follow from (2), I remain curious. Having 22-player full rosters here is the sensible and simplest thing to do, but it would be very much on brand for the IOC to choose the weird, byzantine approach of "alternates, now just more available to you" rather than just saying "expanded rosters to 22."

Apologies for being pedantic here, but heck, if we can't be pedantic about sports on this board, then who even are we?

[ColoradoTree]

1. The official press releases about the expansion state that the number of players on each roster have been increased from 18 to 22 players, implying that all 22 players now have the same status. Each match will have an 18 player team sheet, which is a different issue.

That's what I'm saying, though--the only official statement I've seen on this from either FIFA or the IOC only said that all four alternates would be available for selection for any match and the 18-player matchday roster could be reconstituted before each match. From that narrow statement, press accounts have inferred something broader--i.e., that the four alternates are all part of the full roster now. Because those accounts are taking a step that the FIFA statement doesn't require, I want to see some sort of official statement resolving that ambiguity. It's not a meaningful difference for how Vlatko prepares the team for each match, but it could affect matchday roster construction if Vlatko also has the desire to get the four alternates onto at least one matchday roster (or get on the field) to formally make them Olympians and medal-eligible, or if they already have that status. It's a meaningful difference for those four players' status--particularly Jane Campbell, the least likely of the four alternates to see the field. 

Basically, the story played out like this: (1) a round of stories based on sources saying the IOC was going to allow roster expansion to 22 for this year's Olympics; (2) the FIFA statement saying coaches could select the 18-player matchday roster from the 18 players on the roster as well as the 4 alternates; and (3) another round of stories on the FIFA statement concluding, "yep, 22-player rosters it is!" Because (1) and (3) don't necessarily follow from (2), I remain curious. Having 22-player full rosters here is the sensible and simplest thing to do, but it would be very much on brand for the IOC to choose the weird, byzantine approach of "alternates, now just more available to you" rather than just saying "expanded rosters to 22."

Apologies for being pedantic here, but heck, if we can't be pedantic about sports on this board, then who even are we?