[Archived] Don't know where to put this

[Mike E]

Just now, den said:

For the posters who believe that clubs should be able to field whatever line up they like, - would you be happy for managers of all the teams who simply see avoiding relegation as a success - to regularly field entire second elevens, or under 23 teams against the Chelseas, man U's, spurs etc, while just targeting the games they see as winnable?

TECHNICALLY yes, but practically no. I'd sooner see reserves played or youngsters blooded vs the division's weaker teams in order to build their confidence and give them a chance to prove they can cut it for future games.

A bit like Huddersfield did, I guess

But returning to seriousness, if a team is allowed a 23 or 25-man squad, I believe the manager should be allowed to field whatever side he chooses from those players (plus youth) without being told from outside influences.

[speeeeeeedie]

24 minutes ago, blueboy3333 said:

Did Wagner break the rules. Yes or No?

No.

 

[blueboy3333]

Just now, speeeeeeedie said:

No.

 

Read the rules and try again.  They're quoted in the first post in this topic.

[den]

Just now, Mike E said:

TECHNICALLY yes, but practically no. I'd sooner see reserves played or youngsters blooded vs the division's weaker teams in order to build their confidence and give them a chance to prove they can cut it for future games.

A bit like Huddersfield did, I guess

But returning to seriousness, if a team is allowed a 23 or 25-man squad, I believe the manager should be allowed to field whatever side he chooses from those players (plus youth) without being told from outside influences.

So you accept managers conceding games then? You accept them not contesting certain games, because that's the obvious conclusion.

[speeeeeeedie]

Just now, blueboy3333 said:

Read the rules and try again.  They're quoted in the first post in this topic.

Still no.

Here's the rule;

24 Requirement to Play Full Strength Sides in League Matches

24.1 Each Club shall play its full strength in all Matches played under the auspices of The League unless some satisfactory reason is given. In the event of the explanation not being deemed satisfactory the Board shall refer the matter to a Disciplinary Commission which has the power to impose such penalties as it shall think fit.

Define "full strength".

 

[blueboy3333]

Just now, speeeeeeedie said:

Still no.

Here's the rule;

24 Requirement to Play Full Strength Sides in League Matches

24.1 Each Club shall play its full strength in all Matches played under the auspices of The League unless some satisfactory reason is given. In the event of the explanation not being deemed satisfactory the Board shall refer the matter to a Disciplinary Commission which has the power to impose such penalties as it shall think fit.

Define "full strength".

 

1st team not 2nd team.

[Mike E]

Just now, den said:

So you accept managers conceding games then? You accept them not contesting certain games, because that's the obvious conclusion.

To a degree, yes. I accepted that Sam chose particular games to go for the result.

My expectation is that the manager choses the strategy by which the club wins games or gets the most points. If that means resting your best players when needed (as every club across the land does) then fine. Unfortunately, it opens the game up to being 'thrown', but far less so than the EFL telling clubs and their managers who they can pick.

[den]

Just now, Mike E said:

To a degree, yes. I accepted that Sam chose particular games to go for the result.

My expectation is that the manager choses the strategy by which the club wins games or gets the most points. If that means resting your best players when needed (as every club across the land does) then fine. Unfortunately, it opens the game up to being 'thrown', but far less so than the EFL telling clubs and their managers who they can pick.

Mike, they're not telling clubs who they can pick.

if you're happy to see the game moving to a position whereby clubs can forfeit certain games in order to compete more so in others, then fair enough, but I'm not.

[Stuart]

3 hours ago, arbitro said:

There is a precedent albeit in the PL.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/w/wolverhampton_wanderers/8521603.stm

Peanuts for Redknapp Huddersfield.

[Oldgregg86]

3 hours ago, speeeeeeedie said:

Firstly, Rovers are in trouble through Rovers ineptness both on and off the pitch. Nobody else is to blame.

In reply to the specific topic, I still think Wagner did nothing wrong. He's the manager and he does as he sees fit. He wants to get to the Premier League, he is doing what is best for his team. Their toughest opponent this season was Man City in the FA cup. They drew 0-0 and took them to a replay. That team contained 9 of the 11 who played against Birmingham. That team drew with City.

v City	v Birmingham
Coleman	Coleman
Cranie	Cranie
Hudson	Hudson
Stankovic	Smith
Holmes-Dennis	Holmes-Dennis
Whitehead	Whitehead
Billing	Billing
Lolley	Lolley
Payne	Payne
van La Parra	Bunn
Quaner	Quaner

Redknapp didn't coerce anyone to change a team. He was giving his opinion on what he might do in similar circumstances. How that can be construed as somehow forcing Huddersfield's hand is laughable.

The EFL rule exists, in my view, to create some notion of fair play so that the integrity of the league cannot be called into question.

It is enforceable; with fines, and a slap on the wrist. The EFL should tweak it's rule to match that of the Premier League's 25 man squad rule, with exceptions for younger players.

Contacting the EFL, although admirable, is a fools errand, and smells of desperation. Birmingham won't be punished, they won't lose points, the game will not be mandated to be replayed.

 

 

What he said

[Mike E]

45 minutes ago, den said:

Mike, they're not telling clubs who they can pick.

if you're happy to see the game moving to a position whereby clubs can forfeit certain games in order to compete more so in others, then fair enough, but I'm not.

Of course they are! They've said 'You decided to change your team within the boundaries of your squad, but we don't like it. Pay us, and we'll not bother you again.'

I completely agree with the rule if a pattern emerges (in which case the sanction should be point deductions), but not for one-off games. Otherwise it is taking part of the manager's job and rendering it a crime.

What about manager's who rotate teams, so are by definition breaking the rule every game?

[speeeeeeedie]

What about the use of substitutes? If they can't crack the starting XI every week they must be weaker? Therefore every time a sub comes on fine the club.

The league would get tripped up again and again by not being able to defend its own rule. Not only is "full strength" interpretable, but they'd then have to litigate what constitutes a "satisfactory reason".

As Redknapp pointed out, it was Huddersfield's 3rd game in a week. The lads who played in the other 2 games might have been knackered, carrying knocks, low blood sugar, stiff, who knows what. Half fit players aren't full strength either. The EFL has no idea what goes on at training or how club medical teams looks after the players, they cannot judge based on their perception alone.  

I only saw Chris Brown live once. That was enough to tell me that he was pants. Every time he played in games ahead of other strikers - Rhodes, Gestede, and King were all here at some point during Brown's time - Rovers, according to the letter of the rule, should have been fined every time. Having Brown playing, a striker who never scored a goal for the club, weakened a side that had proven goal scorers available.

[AllRoverAsia]

As Redknapp pointed out.........

PMSL 

 

[Mike Graham]

7 hours ago, Batman. said:

Huddersfield can do as they please. I would expect us to look after ourselves were we in the same situation. Your fate is in your own hands over 46 games.

This screams of pathetic desperation.

Yes, and what about Villa failing to 'turn up' at Ewood on Saturday.

Some fans are grasping straws, look at 46 games, not one.

[AllRoverAsia]

What happened has nothing to do with the previous games. Nothing at all.

Blaming it on those games or indeed any of the clubs owners is totally missing the point.

 

[Cherry Blue]

Fascinating debate on this one but hope verdict soon. Mother of all games on Sunday and Blues Bar is showing!

[Hasta]

3 hours ago, speeeeeeedie said:

Still no.

Here's the rule;

24 Requirement to Play Full Strength Sides in League Matches

24.1 Each Club shall play its full strength in all Matches played under the auspices of The League unless some satisfactory reason is given. In the event of the explanation not being deemed satisfactory the Board shall refer the matter to a Disciplinary Commission which has the power to impose such penalties as it shall think fit.

Define "full strength".

 

Satisfactory reason - we want as many players fit for our future games in order to finish as successfully as we can  this season, especially as we are in with a chance of a £100m windfall. 

[punerover]

While I agree to the "Its not about just one game, its about our whole season", can someone please do a dirty arry and "coerce" Dean Smith to field their under 19 squad so that their future stars can get a good first team match day experience? They have nothing to play for anyway. [Of course we do not want to win and of course we do not want to improve on our goal difference]

[Batman.]

On the subject of "unfair advantages," Birmingham have had their red card rescinded from the game vs Huddersfield...

[Dunnfc]

7 minutes ago, punerover said:

While I agree to the "Its not about just one game, its about our whole season", can someone please do a dirty arry and "coerce" Dean Smith to field their under 19 squad so that their future stars can get a good first team match day experience? They have nothing to play for anyway. [Of course we do not want to win and of course we do not want to improve on our goal difference]

Tell your country men and hermaphrodite to F.O 

[punerover]

Just now, Dunnfc said:

Tell your country men and hermaphrodite to F.O 

I did but they did not listen to me. I do not have the necessary persuasion or coercive skills.

[AllRoverAsia]

Just now, punerover said:

I did but they did not listen to me. I do not have the necessary persuasion or coercive skills.

Send it via Pasha, Pasha.

[blueboy3333]

Please let this be true 

[speeeeeeedie]

1 hour ago, AllRoverAsia said:

As Redknapp pointed out.........

PMSL 

 

I think that the irony of me using Redknapp's words to point out the futility of the rule is lost on you.

I am still not wavering. I think that what Wagner and Huddersfield did was within the rules. It's their squad and they chose to rest players.

[AllRoverAsia]

Just now, speeeeeeedie said:

I think that the irony of me using Redknapp's words to point out the futility of the rule is lost on you.

I am still not wavering. I think that what Wagner and Huddersfield did was within the rules. It's their squad and they chose to rest players.

Not on me matey. Took you a while to make up that limp effort.