|
Post by headingtonoldboy on Jan 28, 2011 9:36:26 GMT
Once again we see the FA picking on the small clubs by fining Blackpool for fielding a weaker team(in their opinion) unyet the likes of Man Utd Arsenal, Chelsea and even Spurs do it and nothing is done whatsoever. Whatever your opinion of Holloway, he has a point when he says he should be entitled to pick whatever team he chooses like everybody else. And whose to say what his best team is? It is now a squad game so theoretically every player is good enough to play in the first team.This to me is just another example of the weakness of the FA. They are scared of the so-called big clubs and daren't do anything to upset them. Its the same with Ferguson at Man Utd; he refuses point blank to talk to the BBC after games, which is in direct contravention of FA rules. So what happens? They issue punitive fines which are merely loose change to him but even then the club end up paying them!! The FA needed to make an example of Ferguson and Man Utd by docking points everytime Ferguson refused to talk to the BBC and the BBC should refuse to show any of their games on TV. Quite frankly, the FA are useless and kow-tow to the big clubs. Its sickening.
|
|
|
Post by junior1 on Jan 28, 2011 9:44:09 GMT
Good post but let down by the childish 'manure' bits...
|
|
|
Post by moobs on Jan 28, 2011 9:52:31 GMT
I don't understand this decision by the FA, the Wolves one is justified but I don't quite get this?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2011 10:11:58 GMT
I agree with Holloway, you should be able to pick whatever team you like from the registered squad.
|
|
|
Post by tatabanya on Jan 28, 2011 10:23:09 GMT
Why is wolves justified??
|
|
|
Post by baldy on Jan 28, 2011 10:28:07 GMT
I don't understand this decision by the FA, the Wolves one is justified but I don't quite get this? How does this differ ? Each team made ten changes. Arsenal also made ten changes at Wigan and handed Wigan, what could be, a vital point. That was unfair on the other teams battling relegation. Ten changes is ten changes and unless a manager comes out and effectively says 'we're concedeing this' then I fail to see how ten changes by one team can differ from ten changes by another.
|
|
|
Post by Hicko on Jan 28, 2011 10:28:24 GMT
Once again we see the FA picking on the small clubs by fining Blackpool for fielding a weaker team(in their opinion) unyet the likes of Manure, Arsenal, Chelsea and even Spurs do it and nothing is done whatsoever. Whatever your opinion of Holloway, he has a point when he says he should be entitled to pick whatever team he chooses like everybody else. And whose to say what his best team is? It is now a squad game so theoretically every player is good enough to play in the first team.This to me is just another example of the weakness of the FA. They are scared of the so-called big clubs and daren't do anything to upset them. Its the same with Ferguson at Manure; he refuses point blank to talk to the BBC after games, which is in direct contravention of FA rules. So what happens? They issue punitive fines which are merely loose change to him but even then the club end up paying them!! The FA needed to make an example of Ferguson and Manure by docking points everytime Ferguson refused to talk to the BBC and the BBC should refuse to show any of their games on TV. Quite frankly, the FA are useless and kow-tow to the big clubs. Its sickening. Best post i've read for ages, completely agree
|
|
|
Post by moobs on Jan 28, 2011 10:36:09 GMT
Why is wolves justified?? Well as we know Wolves effectively forfeited the game in advance to keep their players fit for a match with Burnley so they deserved their punishment. You don't play Man U at Old Trafford with a reserve team and hope to get anything. I can't believe what Blackpool did was the same, they almost got a point
|
|
|
Post by baldy on Jan 28, 2011 10:46:10 GMT
Why is wolves justified?? Well as we know Wolves effectively forfeited the game in advance to keep their players fit for a match with Burnley so they deserved their punishment. You don't play Man U at Old Trafford with a reserve team and hope to get anything. I can't believe what Blackpool did was the same, they almost got a point That is just nonsense. While Aston Villa are no Man United they would still represent a significant hurdle for a newly promoted club and that game was way back in September when nobody, not even Blackpool, could have forseen the impact they might make *. Would Arsenal, Chelsea or Man U send a reserve side to Villa Park ? Not a chance because they know its a tough venue whatever league position Villa might be in. * Apart from me, who predicted a comfortable mid table finish for Blackpool way back in the summer .
|
|
|
Post by tatabanya on Jan 28, 2011 10:46:11 GMT
Has to be one rule for all though. You can't give any circumstantial thought.
|
|
|
Post by moobs on Jan 28, 2011 10:52:49 GMT
Well as we know Wolves effectively forfeited the game in advance to keep their players fit for a match with Burnley so they deserved their punishment. You don't play Man U at Old Trafford with a reserve team and hope to get anything. I can't believe what Blackpool did was the same, they almost got a point That is just nonsense. While Aston Villa are no Man United they would still represent a significant hurdle for a newly promoted club and that game was way back in September when nobody, not even Blackpool, could have forseen the impact they might make *. Would Arsenal, Chelsea or Man U send a reserve side to Villa Park ? Not a chance because they know its a tough venue whatever league position Villa might be in. * Apart from me, who predicted a comfortable mid table finish for Blackpool way back in the summer . Blackpool were above a struggling Villa side so why would they not even try? They nearly grabbed a point.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2011 10:56:51 GMT
Has to be one rule for all though. You can't give any circumstantial thought. Spot on.
|
|
|
Post by baldy on Jan 28, 2011 11:10:45 GMT
That is just nonsense. While Aston Villa are no Man United they would still represent a significant hurdle for a newly promoted club and that game was way back in September when nobody, not even Blackpool, could have forseen the impact they might make *. Would Arsenal, Chelsea or Man U send a reserve side to Villa Park ? Not a chance because they know its a tough venue whatever league position Villa might be in. * Apart from me, who predicted a comfortable mid table finish for Blackpool way back in the summer . Blackpool were above a struggling Villa side so why would they not even try? They nearly grabbed a point. Like I said, would the top boys make 10 changes for a trip to Villa Park ? Not a chance. The result is irrespective. You could equally argue that a different Wolves eleven would have been unlikely to have fared any better than a 3-0 defeat at OT. In one off games any result can occur, this is not about the outcome its about the validity of making ten changes and all teams being treated equally.
|
|
|
Post by marstonox on Jan 28, 2011 11:20:41 GMT
The bottom line is that if you are made to choose a 25 man squad, you should be free to choose whoever from that squad that you think will give you the best chance of winning. If Holloway thinks that Harewood would give the Villa defence a tougher time than Taylor-Fletcher, who are the FA to argue? It's not as if he sent a team of youth team players up there. Pathetic from the FA.
|
|
|
Post by moobs on Jan 28, 2011 11:25:37 GMT
Has to be one rule for all though. You can't give any circumstantial thought. Spot on. But different clubs have different priorities, the top teams have to play much more fixtures in the champions league etc. There is one rule as far as I see it. If a team plays a reserve side in a league match because they think they won't win they should be fined. Wolves did that but I don't think Blackpool did.
|
|
|
Post by Boogaloo on Jan 28, 2011 11:31:17 GMT
I don't really but this bit about Blackpool 'throwing away the game'. That is absolute Baloney! Yes they were reserve players, but do you seriously think they went out there saying "Don't worry lads, this is just a casual kickaround"? Of course they didn't - a lot of those players are on the fringes of first team football and are chomping at the bit, looking for the opportunity to break into the first team and displace some of the regulars in the process.
That is why teams have squads of players. I understand the argument that it's unfair on the opponents, but if you're going to implement a rule on playing a full strength team then that should apply to all twenty Premier League teams and not fifteen of them.
My personal opinion is that teams should be forced to play at least five players from their top XI of fit player in terms of games started for that season.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2011 11:35:06 GMT
But different clubs have different priorities, the top teams have to play much more fixtures in the champions league etc. There is one rule as far as I see it. If a team plays a reserve side in a league match because they think they won't win they should be fined. Wolves did that but I don't think Blackpool did. It becomes very subjective if you analyse each situation individually. The only difference between the Blackpool and Wolves situations was that Blackpools reserves almost got a draw. They still rested the entire first team.
|
|
|
Post by yellowhoods on Jan 28, 2011 11:36:10 GMT
Interesting that Fergie has spoken out in support of Holloway this morning. If he's big enough to do so ....
|
|
|
Post by Best Mate on Jan 28, 2011 11:36:39 GMT
In my view the major difference between the two incidents is the adjustments of the laws of the game.
Following the Wolves game the FA brought in the 25 player rule.
This should imply that all 25 players are 'potential' first teamers and hence by limiting the squads of clubs.
So, Holloway, has selected 25 players - and selects from them - he should be fully entitled to.
The FA can not have it both ways.
I agree entirely that the result is irrelevant. If the FA are stating that you should play your best team, they should make some silly rule, such as the Sentata Shield where you can only make 5 changes etc so it is official and everyone knows where they stand. The big clubs regularly make 8 or more changes and are not punished and that cannot be seen as fair.
If I was Blackpool - I would fight the fine as I think they have a stronger standpoint then Wolves did last year as they worked within the perimeters the FA have
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2011 11:38:46 GMT
My personal opinion is that teams should be forced to play at least five players from their top XI of fit player in terms of games started for that season. But how can you possibly judge what the top XI is? Clubs don't have a set first XI, it changes depending on tactics, form etc.
|
|
|
Post by headingtonoldboy on Jan 28, 2011 12:06:12 GMT
But different clubs have different priorities, the top teams have to play much more fixtures in the champions league etc. There is one rule as far as I see it. If a team plays a reserve side in a league match because they think they won't win they should be fined. Wolves did that but I don't think Blackpool did. It becomes very subjective if you analyse each situation individually. The only difference between the Blackpool and Wolves situations was that Blackpools reserves almost got a draw. They still rested the entire first team. But that is my point; there is no such thing as a first team or reserves if you use a 25 man squad. It is a squad of players all of which are potentially capable of playing in the first team. We are no different at our club. We have a squad of 20+ players and if CW wants to play any of them and he thinks they are good enough, then he should have the right to pick them.
|
|
|
Post by moobs on Jan 28, 2011 12:07:14 GMT
But different clubs have different priorities, the top teams have to play much more fixtures in the champions league etc. There is one rule as far as I see it. If a team plays a reserve side in a league match because they think they won't win they should be fined. Wolves did that but I don't think Blackpool did. It becomes very subjective if you analyse each situation individually. The only difference between the Blackpool and Wolves situations was that Blackpools reserves almost got a draw. They still rested the entire first team. Not really. You cannot tell me Wolves thought their reserve side could get something at Old Trafford ? Come On. Even their best side would have lost. But Blackpool were above Villa, they had a good away record, 2 teams on about the same level and it seems to me like Blackpool still played a team trying to get a result from that fixture whereas Wolves were not.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2011 12:31:30 GMT
Not really. You cannot tell me Wolves thought their reserve side could get something at Old Trafford ? Come On. Even their best side would have lost. But Blackpool were above Villa, they had a good away record, 2 teams on about the same level and it seems to me like Blackpool still played a team trying to get a result from that fixture whereas Wolves were not. It is slightly different I agree. But I still don't think its fair to have a rule which is defined by whether you think the team picked can win or not. I think either you can use your whole squad or you have to pick the best from it. There will always be disputes if it comes down to a judgment of whether they thought they could get a result. In fact there will be disputes if you have to pick the best team as well, which is why I think you should be able to use the whole squad!
|
|
|
Post by sihath on Jan 28, 2011 12:35:21 GMT
Clubs should be allowed to choose any team they want from within their first team squad.
|
|
|
Post by sihath on Jan 28, 2011 12:37:30 GMT
Good post but let down by the childish 'manure' bits... Junior, are you on "the staff" for this forum? If so in the admin settings you can have a list of words that are not allowed, and change them allowed words.. So "Manure" becomes "Man Utd"
|
|
|
Post by baldy on Jan 28, 2011 12:39:12 GMT
It becomes very subjective if you analyse each situation individually. The only difference between the Blackpool and Wolves situations was that Blackpools reserves almost got a draw. They still rested the entire first team. Not really. You cannot tell me Wolves thought their reserve side could get something at Old Trafford ? Come On. Even their best side would have lost. But Blackpool were above Villa, they had a good away record, 2 teams on about the same level and it seems to me like Blackpool still played a team trying to get a result from that fixture whereas Wolves were not. OK, Moobs, put it another way. Do you think Holloway did everything in his power to maximise his teams chances of getting a result at Villa ? Do you think he could possibly have done anything else, however minor, that would have given him a better chance of a positive result ? Managers talk relentlessly about attention to detail in match preparation and how everything, from training to selection, is finely tuned for it to come together on a match day. You genuinely think this was the case in this instance or did Holloway have just half an eye on the Saturday fixture ?
|
|
|
Post by sihath on Jan 28, 2011 12:45:15 GMT
Not really. You cannot tell me Wolves thought their reserve side could get something at Old Trafford ? Come On. Even their best side would have lost. But Blackpool were above Villa, they had a good away record, 2 teams on about the same level and it seems to me like Blackpool still played a team trying to get a result from that fixture whereas Wolves were not. OK, Moobs, put it another way. Do you think Holloway did everything in his power to maximise his teams chances of getting a result at Villa ? Do you think he could possibly have done anything else, however minor, that would have given him a better chance of a positive result ? Managers talk relentlessly about attention to detail in match preparation and how everything, from training to selection, is finely tuned for it to come together on a match day. You genuinely think this was the case in this instance or did Holloway have just half an eye on the Saturday fixture ? If that's the case then surely you pick the same best 11 players week in week out. No resting players because you have a big European game in midweek and you're only playing Wigan/WBA/etc. The "big 4" are guilty of resting players around European games, but that surely isn't maximising the team's chance of getting a result.
|
|
|
Post by junior1 on Jan 28, 2011 12:47:15 GMT
I'll put that to ESB
|
|
|
Post by headingtonoldboy on Jan 28, 2011 13:39:16 GMT
Good post but let down by the childish 'manure' bits... You are quite right junior, so I have modified my post accordingly.
|
|
|
Post by moobs on Jan 28, 2011 13:40:18 GMT
Not really. You cannot tell me Wolves thought their reserve side could get something at Old Trafford ? Come On. Even their best side would have lost. But Blackpool were above Villa, they had a good away record, 2 teams on about the same level and it seems to me like Blackpool still played a team trying to get a result from that fixture whereas Wolves were not. OK, Moobs, put it another way. Do you think Holloway did everything in his power to maximise his teams chances of getting a result at Villa ? Do you think he could possibly have done anything else, however minor, that would have given him a better chance of a positive result ? Managers talk relentlessly about attention to detail in match preparation and how everything, from training to selection, is finely tuned for it to come together on a match day. You genuinely think this was the case in this instance or did Holloway have just half an eye on the Saturday fixture ? I think Holloway looked at the fixtures and rotated his squad to get the best result from both matches whereas MacArthy looked at maximising results only against relegation rivals
|
|