[Archived] Mick Mccarthy

[Baz]

You still don't see the difference between putting out a weakened team - yet still with the intentions of competing and hopefully winning, and McCarthy putting out a team that he decidedly knows will lose? It wasn't a case of resting a few players, it was a case of giving the game to Man Utd. There can be no other interpretation Mellison.

Problem is that he knew his first team was nearly as likely to win as his reserves - and that's the sad fact on the current state of the Premier League. Doesn't make what MM did right though, especially to the Wolves fans - they deserve an apology, their ticket money and expenses back.It reminds me of Rovers selling season tickets on the back of us being in Europe, then saying they weren't interested in it because they made no money (how about glory / winning things?).

As for Wenger whinging about it...really beggars belief, this guy has been playing the (very good & very expensive) kids for years in the cups.

[thenodrog]

Can't find a link but Simon Garner defends McArthy's actions fully in his column in the LT.

[mellison24]

You still don't see the difference between putting out a weakened team - yet still with the intentions of competing and hopefully winning, and McCarthy putting out a team that he decidedly knows will lose? It wasn't a case of resting a few players, it was a case of giving the game to Man Utd. There can be no other interpretation Mellison.

What has got into you?

Can't you tell that if splash a jug of water over you or shove you into seven foot of freezing water, there is a difference?

No doubt you'd say it was all water and just the same.

I understand that they are different circumstances. But I just feel he is being punished for having a weaker team. If Big Sam did what Mick McCarthy did, I'd be outraged. I HATE for our team to apparently 'give up'. But in no way would I think he should be punished for it. Yes, 10 changes is a bit drastic and THAT part I understand fine. But my issue isn't with the circumstances of this particular game. My issue is with the general idea of punishing someone for doing what he feels is the best for his club. I just feel that the rule is a stupid rule (indeed I will admit I only heard of this rule on Tuesday night). I'm not trying to undermine anybodies argument or anything. I just think punishing him for essentially doing his job is too far.

[Amo]

No official action should be taken against McCarthy. The issue is entirely subjective for any matter of factness. Yes, he let the supporters down, but if they wish to express their disapproval then they should spend their money elsewhere. That's the beauty of consumerism.

[Paul]

Disagree philipl, Mick MaCarthy has shown up the premier league for being the non competitive league it has become.

Hats off to MaCarthy, fully hope Scudamore and co. are utterly embarrassed by this action and that other managers with weaker sides follow suit in the near future.

Good point but sadly it won't make a blind bit of difference to our friends at the PL headquarters

[Majiball]

You can't punish Wolves or Mick McCarthy, they have not broken any rules. Just as United can change their first team from one game to another so can wolves, its a squad game and all the players who played are part of the squad.

I do sympathise with the fans and if rovers did I would also be livid, but for me all its shows is that now current premiership managers are beginning to view the league as we do. Grossly biased due to funds won over the years, it proves our league has become un-competitive. We've all know that games against the big 4/5/6 are perceived as right-offs by lower premiership managers (ours included) but now we have proof.

The new 25 man squads from next season will help matters or at least that what they'll say.

[thenodrog]

I do sympathise with the fans and if rovers did I would also be livid,

Really Majiball? Please note we are playing Chelsea the week before we go t'Turf!

...... but for me all its shows is that now current premiership managers are beginning to view the league as we do. Grossly biased due to funds won over the years, it proves our league has become un-competitive. We've all know that games against the big 4/5/6 are perceived as right-offs by lower premiership managers (ours included) but now we have proof.

An easily predicted consequence of the evil Champions League format. Rest assured there will be more and much much worse than this relatively inconsequential storm in the Premier League teacup.

[philipl]

The Champs League has been worth around E35m each to the Prem clubs that have survived into the KO stages- so far...

[DaveyB]

Good point but sadly it won't make a blind bit of difference to our friends at the PL headquarters

Maybe not as a one off, but if this became a regular occurance with 12/13 teams all doing this in away games at the Big 4 then maybe they would have to sit up and take notice

[Majiball]

Really Majiball? Please note we are playing Chelsea the week before we go t'Turf!

An easily predicted consequence of the evil Champions League format. Rest assured there will be more and much much worse than this relatively inconsequential storm in the Premier League teacup.

There's 7 days in between Chelsea and Burnley so the same team should easily be able to play both games.

It will get worse a lot worse, its already a two league format in reality and the gulf will only get bigger.

[den]

So many people think McCarthy was right, yet they would be angry if rovers did it. How does that work then?

The bottom line is, if Wolves aren't found guilty, then it will be open for any/all PL clubs to give up on winning games. They will be able to play the youth lads even though they charge top prices and allow the fans to pay a ransom to watch games home and away, when they wont inform them beforehand of their intentions of not competing.

If that happens just the once with Rovers, watch the reaction.

[mellison24]

So many people think McCarthy was right, yet they would be angry if rovers did it. How does that work then?

The bottom line is, if Wolves aren't found guilty, then it will be open for any/all PL clubs to give up on winning games. They will be able to play the youth lads even though they charge top prices and allow the fans to pay a ransom to watch games home and away, when they wont inform them beforehand of their intentions of not competing.

If that happens just the once with Rovers, watch the reaction.

It's very simple. We wouldn't like it. But it is the right decision in the long run and we'd put up with it. Simples. The only reason this is in the media is cos it's wolves. It would also be in the media if it was us, Bolton, Hull or Wigan. Otherwise, nobody would give a flying F***.

[Majiball]

So many people think McCarthy was right, yet they would be angry if rovers did it. How does that work then?

The bottom line is, if Wolves aren't found guilty, then it will be open for any/all PL clubs to give up on winning games. They will be able to play the youth lads even though they charge top prices and allow the fans to pay a ransom to watch games home and away, when they wont inform them beforehand of their intentions of not competing.

If that happens just the once with Rovers, watch the reaction.

I wouldn't say he was right, but that I understand why he did it. He hasn't broken any rules so cannot be punished its a load of bullshit. If a player is contracted to Wolves then they are eligible to play in any game for Wolves. So why not against United?

I can remember a couple of times where I had felt we had done the same, we just got different results. Everton away in a cup a few years ago under Hughes we won 3-0 and that was most definitely our reserves. Wasn't the same said of Liverpool away last season? Perhaps he should have said something before the match, but thats giving a lot away tactically. I'll wager Fergie was a bit surprised when he saw their team sheet, 11 players with a point to prove you never know? I really do sympathise with their fans and perhaps what the club should have done is offered them some money back announced directly at the end say the difference between an A game & a B game. That way its pre-arranged and you anticipate that it maybe an issue and cover your ass.

But its done all the time, by the big clubs so why can't the little ones, I think its ludicrous that its being investigated. Arsenal played there kids in the champions league the other week, but yet they are not punished. United, Chelsea have all rested big names for the league when an important champions league game is coming up, no difference. Didn't Liverpool field a weakened team once that affected the relegation standings that season, punishment? You can say that the big teams reserves are comparable to smaller clubs first 11, but its meant to be your best 11, their reserves are not their strongest 11 available. Why should I a fan of a small club pay the highest fee possible for a cat A game when they come along and field their reserves and rest their best players. Surely thats a huge part of the reason I pay more for those particular games? If wolves where any of the big four this wouldn't even be news.

As far as I'm concerned this is just another example of how differently the big clubs get treated compared to the smaller clubs. One rule for them one rule for us!

[den]

I wouldn't say he was right, but that I understand why he did it. He hasn't broken any rules so cannot be punished its a load of bullshit.

I say again, if Wolves aren't found guilty, then the doors are open for clubs to willingly lose games. The day that's allowed is the day I, and I suggest many others, quit.

I can remember a couple of times where I had felt we had done the same, we just got different results. Everton away in a cup a few years ago under Hughes we won 3-0 and that was most definitely our reserves. Wasn't the same said of Liverpool away last season?

Rovers made 10 outfield changes just 2 or 3 days after their last PL game? Think you're wrong there Maj.

[mellison24]

I say again, if Wolves aren't found guilty, then the doors are open for clubs to willingly lose games. The day that's allowed is the day I, and I suggest many others, quit.

You won't be on your own, but there won't be many following you either.

[mellison24]

If the subject is 10 changes, then where do we stop? Is 9 changes bad? 8? 7? 6? 5? 4? 3? 2? 1? That's why I don't like it. He was well within his right to do what he did. Look at it from a results basis on this scenario: We have won against a top side away (say Spurs) and have another top side away within 3 days (say ManYoo). Would you not rest your first team from one game which you are more likely to lose if it gives them a higher chance of being fit for the next few winnable games (which are potentially 6-pointers)?

[philipl]

Lets see how many changes to face the dingles today.

The other instances cited were not followed immediately by another Prem game. This one is- another 10 changes today and I'd suggest Wolves are in deep poo.

[Miker]

The real issue here is that he's cheated the fans who came to see their best team challenge United. He's cheated other teams by gifting United a team. And he's cheated the betting man by virtually throwing the game.

His reasons for doing so highlight what football has become: a business. Managers are trying their hardest to keep the club in the league and run it at a profit. It's now more a business than a sport, so managers can no longer just plan for the game ahead to try and win it, they have to plan for the club's long term future financially instead.

[den]

If the subject is 10 changes, then where do we stop? Is 9 changes bad? 8? 7? 6? 5? 4? 3? 2? 1? That's why I don't like it. He was well within his right to do what he did. Look at it from a results basis on this scenario: We have won against a top side away (say Spurs) and have another top side away within 3 days (say ManYoo). Would you not rest your first team from one game which you are more likely to lose if it gives them a higher chance of being fit for the next few winnable games (which are potentially 6-pointers)?

Squad rotation isn't a problem. You can rotate a squad and still attempt to win the game. It was the fact of Wolves making 10 outfield changes that alerted the league and everyone else to the suggestion that they had simply opted out of competing for the three points.

The PL has to rule one way or the other. They have to allow all clubs to do what Wolves did whenever they like, or they have to charge them. I don't want my club not to compete, in any league match, ever.

[sambo]

Good point by that t0sser Mark Lawrenson..

Mick McCarthy did at Manchester United what other Premier League managers have done for years. He rested his players for particular game.

Did it bring the league into disrepute like Arsene Wenger said? No. But Wolves do need to beat Burnley to justify the decision.

But here’s a thought: Wenger rested his first team for Arsenal’s final Group match in the Champions League when his team were already qualified and yet second place was still up for grabs.

So did that then bring the Champions League into disrepute?

[S15]

It's very simple. We wouldn't like it. But it is the right decision in the long run and we'd put up with it. Simples.

If Wolves don't beat Burnley tomorrow it's the wrong decision. 'Simples.'

If Wolves go down by 3 or less points it's a catastrophic decision, as they didn't play for 3 of the points on offer. And this against a club who lost at home to Villa and away to Fulham in the two fixtures either side of the said fixture.

[Majiball]

I say again, if Wolves aren't found guilty, then the doors are open for clubs to willingly lose games. The day that's allowed is the day I, and I suggest many others, quit.

Rovers made 10 outfield changes just 2 or 3 days after their last PL game? Think you're wrong there Maj.

Wolves are guilty of nothing, the 11 they put out did not walk out there to lose to united they went out to try and win. They just weren't good enough. Unless the rules say you can't do it, which they don't there is nothing to investigate except why its allowed and how to prevent it happening again.

Wolves fielded a weakened team as did we against everton was the point I was making. I don't see the distinction between resting 3-4 players and 10 since there are none in the rules of the game.

As has been said before now what is the difference between Arsenal doing it in the champions league and Wolves in the premier league? I also have a feeling Jose did it once with Chelsea. Watch the world cup this summer the teams that win there first two group matches will most probably rest the majority of their big name players, but thats OK? Hasn't Sven even managed to make 11 changes in 90 minutes? thats better than micks was he investigated?

Willingly losing games is a slant on the players professionalism and Micks, I'm more than positive he did not tell his players to go out and lose the game. Nor do I think the players went out there with the intent of losing the game. All that happened was the already small chance of wolves beating United got smaller, but still possible.

As I said its a farce.

[philipl]

Based on the thumping Fulham gave the Mancs and Wolves smash and grab at spuds, I'd say a full strength wolves would have caused the mancs problems midweek.

McCarthy instead decided to throw the towel in.

[den]

Willingly losing games is a slant on the players professionalism and Micks, I'm more than positive he did not tell his players to go out and lose the game. Nor do I think the players went out there with the intent of losing the game. All that happened was the already small chance of wolves beating United got smaller, but still possible.

No one has said that the players went out to lose the game, so that point is invalid Maj. The suspicion is that Wolves's manager didn't compete for the three points. He gave up the three points before they kicked off. Difficult to argue against that.

Wolves cheated their supporters - even their own fans say that.

I say that if Wolves are allowed to get away with this it will be bad for the fans of all clubs. That's all. You don't think so

[American]

No one has said that the players went out to lose the game, so that point is invalid Maj. The suspicion is that Wolves's manager didn't compete for the three points. He gave up the three points before they kicked off. Difficult to argue against that.

Wolves cheated their supporters - even their own fans say that.

I say that if Wolves are allowed to get away with this it will be bad for the fans of all clubs. That's all. You don't think so

They should be allowed to get away with it. United got away with it at Hull at the end of last season, but the difference is that they won. No difference in what they did though, putting out a severely weakened team not caring if they won or not.