Another shocking example of double standards........

kippy

http://www.breakingnews.ie/sport/suspended-fine-for-wolves-446701.html

Wolves have been handed a £25,000 (€29,000) suspended fine for fielding a below-strength side in the clash with Manchester United at Old Trafford in December.

Manager Mick McCarthy made 10 changes from the side which had triumphed 1-0 at Tottenham three days earlier.

Wolves then responded by recalling nine of the players that had been in action at White Hart Lane for the next league game at home to fellow strugglers Burnley - and won 2-0.

Okay, this probably wont raise any major interest as it wasnt one of the more well supported clubs by people in this country that got the fine but nonethe less it's another prime example about how the odds are intentionally stacked against the "smaller" clubs in the game. Nothing will be done about it, fans dont seem to care, but its a disgrace.
Its the first time I can remember (and I could be incorrect on this) that a club has been reprimanded in the PL for fielding an "below strength" team.
1. The issue of "below strength" - what exactle is this and isnt fining teams for this a very grey and objective area?
2. Havent teams, particularily those playing in multiple competitions in the later stages of the season, done this for years? Even teams who've had their positions sown up on the last day of the season tend to field teams that arent "strength".
3. Why are Wolves the ones to pay?
4. Does this set a precident or is it just another attempt to knock the smaller team?

Anyway, for me it's just another example of the incompetence of the footballing powers that be and the power of the big club in the rule/law making corridors of football in the UK.

Kippy

Liam O

that's ridiculous but the big teams get some fines/bans that if it was a smaller team wouldn't happen either as well.

GLaDOS

Ridiculous, a manager should be able to play whatever side he wants. Unless there's evidence of match fixing or something along those lines the FA shouldn't be involved.

kippy

Liam O wrote: »

that's ridiculous but the big teams get some fines/bans that if it was a smaller team wouldn't happen either as well.

Like what?

SlickRic

a joke.

i look forward to seeing fines handed to every team in the Premier League bar Birmingham City.

SantryRed

Hilarious, what really gets me is this is a game United were going to win either way, what about the year Sheffield United went down and Benitez played a second string side in the second last game against Fulham, Fulham won one nil and stayed up because of that result. I thought these ridiculous decisions only happened in Ireland.

TheDoc

That is a shocking decision.

This will undoubtably kick up stink coming into next seasons token trophy competitions.

How could they even come to that decision? its un-judgeable, thats absolutely unreal :O

By that margin of thought, Arsenal should be fined every FA and Carling cup match, yet their second string are better then half the premier league..so whats the ruling.

CR 7

How can you even define a second string team officially? Do they just go by their ratings in Fifa 10 or something?

Trampas

may as well stop subs been made also.

since you are taking off a stronger player for a weaker one

everdead.ie

I fully expect a fine for spurs now after Harry rested half the team for the game against wolves which directly helped them win 1-0

pickarooney

Did McCarthy not specifically say beforehand that he was going to play an under-strength team? It's the only reason I can think of that would make this make sense.

On the other hand, whether technically legitimate or not, I'm delighted Wolves got fined for this kind of knob-jockery. It's an insult to fans to not try to win games.

SantryRed

pickarooney wrote: »

On the other hand, whether technically legitimate or not, I'm delighted Wolves got fined for this kind of knob-jockery. It's an insult to fans to not try to win games.

Stupid statement, do you think the fans would have rathered them to go out and lose 1nil after breaking their bollocks and then lost three days later in a big game at home to Burnley?

Fair play to Mick. He knew exactly what he was doing and it worked as they beat Burnley 2-0 four days later.

chopperbyrne

Has John Delaney moved to England????

Terrible decision.

I hope Wolves seek retrospective fines for every other club who has done the same over the years and provides video evidence.

Didn't Rafa make a minimum of five changes for something like eight games straight a few years back?

Spiritoftheseventies

McCarthy reckoned he had no chance of getting a result of United and fielded a weak team. It was more or less throwing the game. Regardless of what other managers do, if managers did that week in week out league would become a joke.

SantryRed

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

McCarthy reckoned he had no chance of getting a result of United and fielded a weak team. It was more or less throwing the game. Regardless of what other managers do, if managers did that week in week out league would become a joke.

So what do you think of Benitez ''throwing the game'' against Fulham a few years ago which relegated Sheffield United?

Spiritoftheseventies

SantryRed wrote: »

So what do you think of Benitez ''throwing the game'' against Fulham a few years ago which relegated Sheffield United?

FA obviously examines each case on its merits. Can only comment on this one. McCarthy put out a weakened team and he must have known it was going to get in trouble. He took a risk and it didnt pay off. End of the day Wolves weren't docked any points. Other teams though may suffer from their actions later on in season.

Fratton Fred

I have a lot of sympathy for Wolves over this. There are three leagues in the premiership, the big four, those chasing euro spots and those battling relegation. Wolves took the decision that playing Man U was a nothing game as every other team in their "league" would lose there as well, which is understandable.

I do think McArthy extracted the urine a bit too much though by changing every player bar the keeper, which is why they attracted the attention of the FA.

It will be interesting to see how many changes United make this saturday though, that could highlight possible double standards.

CHD

It worked, I'd say Wolves are delighted.

SantryRed

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

FA obviously examines each case on its merits. Can only comment on this one. McCarthy put out a weakened team and he must have known it was going to get in trouble. He took a risk and it didnt pay off. End of the day Wolves weren't docked any points. Other teams though may suffer from their actions later on in season.

You didn't answer my question. What do you think of Benitez's decision?

Spiritoftheseventies

SantryRed wrote: »

You didn't answer my question. What do you think of Benitez's decision?

Thats in the past. If you want a seperate thread on it I have no problems with it.

SantryRed

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Thats in the past. If you want a seperate thread on it I have no problems with it.

:pac:

You are unreal. You say the league would be a joke if teams did it week in week out. I bring up your team's manager's decision to, the biggest ''joke'' because he caused a team to be relegated and you decline to comment. :pac: Hilarious.

jaykay74

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Thats in the past. If you want a seperate thread on it I have no problems with it.

How many changes should be allowed do you think ? We need an exact figure obviously so clubs know the limits.

magma69

This is bollocks of the highest order. Wolves should appeal this. The F.A have opened a can of worms by making this silly decision. Squad rotation and the resting of senior players is necessary for teams to be successful. Every single week there are teams that don't play their best eleven. :mad:

Spiritoftheseventies

SantryRed wrote: »

:pac:

You are unreal. You say the league would be a joke if teams did it week in week out. I bring up your team's manager's decision to, the biggest ''joke'' because he caused a team to be relegated and you decline to comment. :pac: Hilarious.

Listen you can debate pool any time you like but we are talking about Wolves here on this thread.

Mr. Presentable

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

McCarthy reckoned he had no chance of getting a result of United and fielded a weak team. It was more or less throwing the game. Regardless of what other managers do, if managers did that week in week out league would become a joke.

How is it "throwing the game"? The manager considered he would lose anyway.

So, what now? Will the FA be picking the players a club will put onto the field from here on in? Is team selection going to have to be pre-approved?

Mr. Presentable

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Listen you can debate pool any time you like but we are talking about Wolves here on this thread.

Actually, no, "pool" can be discussed here as the discussion is about the double standard of applying rules to one side (Wolves) and not to a bigger ("pool", for example).

Dublin_Gunner

SantryRed wrote: »

:pac:

You are unreal. You say the league would be a joke if teams did it week in week out. I bring up your team's manager's decision to, the biggest ''joke'' because he caused a team to be relegated and you decline to comment. :pac: Hilarious.

Benitez didn't put out a completely different team.

Anyway, its not for here.

McCarthy did something completely different. He knew that in all probability they were going to lose, no matter who he played. So he rested his starting 11 and gave some of the second string some game time.

His strategy worked - his competition are the teams around him, beating/drawing with United would have been pointless (pardon the pun) had he then gone out and lost to Burnley.

I don't understand the fine at all. You have players signed and registered to the first team - its up to the manager NOT the FA to decide who plays.

SantryRed

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Listen you can debate pool any time you like but we are talking about Wolves here on this thread.

You listen. We're debating a team ''throwing'' a game. You said it would become a joke if teams were to do it. I'd asked for your opinion on Liverpool doing in and relegating a team and you decline to comment. CLEARLY on topic.

~Rebel~

Retarded decision, he has a squad, he used it. very dangerous precedent and impossible to know where to draw the line. I can't see this sticking frankly, as surely even the most basic logic shows its a complete joke of a decision.



Incidentally, I dont see why anyone would have a problem with what Liverpool did a few years ago. Every team is entitled to put out whatever team they choose. Why risk players unnecessarily when there is nothing whatsoever to be gained from it?

Now, who I imagine would have rightly been a bit pissed off with Mick over this is the Wolves fans themselves, as they effectively gave up the opportunity of points in one competition for the potential gaining of points in the same competition. It's not like with liverpool where the result did not matter to them, Wolves need points so If I was a fan, I'd be wanting the lads to at least try and take the opportunities each of the 38 games present.

Dublin_Gunner

SantryRed wrote: »

You listen. We're debating a team ''throwing'' a game. You said it would become a joke if teams were to do it. I'd asked for your opinion on Liverpool doing in and relegating a team and you decline to comment. CLEARLY on topic.

Liverpool didn't 'throw' any of those games. They rested players as they and other teams have the luxury of doing.

Benitez didn't change the entire 10 outfield players form one game to the next. Its a different scenario - but I still don't agree about the fine.

As I stated above, its up to the manager to decide who he plays - and if that means resting your best players in a game you think you will lose anyway, well then I believe the manager is well within their rights to do so. Its a strategic decision.

Fizman

Jesus. Shocking decision and it's going to come back to haunt the FA (I hope anyway). I can't honestly believe that a group of people sat down and analysed the situation, only to decide that this is the best outcome. These people haven't got a fcuking clue.

Where do you draw the line when it comes to team selection? Who the fcuk are the FA to question McCarthy when his livelihood depends entirely on producing results. Numpties.

SantryRed

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Benitez didn't put out a completely different team.

Checked there. Made nine changes from the match against Chelsea 4 days before. Reina and Pennant being the only players to start both.

SantryRed

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Liverpool didn't 'throw' any of those games. They rested players as they and other teams have the luxury of doing.

Benitez didn't change the entire 10 outfield players form one game to the next. Its a different scenario - but I still don't agree about the fine.

As I stated above, its up to the manager to decide who he plays - and if that means resting your best players in a game you think you will lose anyway, well then I believe the manager is well within their rights to do so. Its a strategic decision.

Yes they did. They would have won with a full side. They made 9 changes anyways. So you're wrong.

SlickRic

Dublin_Gunner wrote: »

Benitez didn't change the entire 10 outfield players form one game to the next.

he pretty much did.

it's all a joke.

any manager can do whatever the f*ck he likes with his squad.

it won't stand.

there's no way it can.

_blank_

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Can only comment on this one.

Why?

Because it doesn't suit you to comment on the Liverpool scenario?

Because you don't have an answer for it.

leninbenjamin

It's a suspended fine... not the end of the world. I was afraid they'd have points deducted tbh.

SantryRed

SlickRic wrote: »

he pretty much did.

it's all a joke.

any manager can do whatever the f*ck he likes with his squad.

it won't stand.

there's no way it can.

Completely agree! The decision is a joke. Even though it was only a suspended fine if I was the CE of Wolves I'd be appealing.

JimsAlterEgo

appeal to CAS - fa are a joke

Dublin_Gunner

SantryRed wrote: »

Checked there. Made nine changes from the match against Chelsea 4 days before. Reina and Pennant being the only players to start both.

Thats still 2 less outfield players than McCarthy chose :P

Either way, I still don't believe it should be sanctioned. Its up to the manager, noone else, to chose the side that plays.

If its a strategic decision to field a weakened side, then so be it. The managers are looking at the bigger picture, not just the next match.
(though in a sort of contradictive manner, I do believe managers should be at least trying to win EVERY game).

Spiritoftheseventies

Des wrote: »

Why?

Because it doesn't suit you to comment on the Liverpool scenario?

Because you don't have an answer for it.

Des you and I both know if we start talking about Liverpool we will be here all the day. A wolves weakened team and a Liverpool weakened team are two different things entirely. And as Lenin Benjamin rightly pointed out its a suspended fine. Wolves weren't deducted any points at the end of the day.

JimsAlterEgo

Des wrote: »

Why?

Because it doesn't suit you to comment on the Liverpool scenario?

Because you don't have an answer for it.

would imagine it more that this happened vs United

_blank_

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Des you and I both know if we start talking about Liverpool we will be here all the day. A wolves weakened team and a Liverpool weakened team are two different things entirely. And as Lenin Benjamin rightly pointed out its a suspended fine. Wolves weren't deducted any points at the end of the day.

You should be in politics, you question dodgery is astounding.

SantryRed

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Des you and I both know if we start talking about Liverpool we will be here all the day. A wolves weakened team and a Liverpool weakened team are two different things entirely. And as Lenin Benjamin rightly pointed out its a suspended fine. Wolves weren't deducted any points at the end of the day.

How are they because they both lost?

But why should they even accept the suspended fine? They haven't done anything out of the ordinary.

Spiritoftheseventies

Des wrote: »

You should be in politics, you question dodgery is astounding.

Ill talk about Liverpool till the cows come home but not on this thread. You want to set up a general thread on the issue and I have no problem with it at all.

jaykay74

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Des you and I both know if we start talking about Liverpool we will be here all the day. A wolves weakened team and a Liverpool weakened team are two different things entirely. And as Lenin Benjamin rightly pointed out its a suspended fine. Wolves weren't deducted any points at the end of the day.

Utd and Liverpool can play weakened teams but wolves can't. Is that your point ? We have decided your wolves 2nd string is crap therefore you can't use it, sorry mick.

Dublin_Gunner

Lets just take Liverpool and Wolves out of this argument for a minute.


Surely the bigger picture here is that a Football Club have been reprimanded for doing exactly as they're entitled to - change their starting line-up from one game to the next - whatever the managers reasons may be.

A manager has EVERY right to chose whatever starting 11 he wishes from his squad. If its to field a weakened side to rest players, so be it - thats the managers perogative.

NO team should be getting a fine / suspended fine / punished for doing that. It was a strategic decision, and it worked for the manager / club in question in this instance.

Are every club gonna get fined now for changing their line-ups each game?

Its a fcuking joke.

Gillington

Every team in the league has a "squad" and should be allowed to do what they want with it.They spend enough money as it is assembling and training these players and should be able to do what they see fit.Is their a difference in players like Kevin Foley(who played against United) and Matt Jarvis(who was dropped)? An example I know,but United fans and players probably wouldnt care who they were facing.

First of all,I reckon a full strength United would have a good chance of beating a full strength Wolves 3-0 anyways,United could rue their slackness if Goal Difference comes into it come the end of the season.Also would have been said or what the action have been had Wolves had beaten them that night? None I would imagine.

Before United's Champs league final last seson they beat Hull 1-0 and heres their line-up

29 Tomasz Kuszczak (G)
2 Gary Neville (CD-L)
6 Wes Brown (CD-R)
44 Ritchie De Laet (LB)
21 Rafael (RB)
24 Darren Fletcher (CM-L)
28 Darron Gibson (CM-R)
19 Danny Welbeck (LM)
17 Nani (RM)
41 Federico Macheda (CF-L)
30 Lee Martin


10 changes from the team that drew against Arsenal in the league a week before hand.Whats the difference in the 2 cases? United faced no action for this.

_blank_

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

Ill talk about Liverpool till the cows come home but not on this thread. You want to set up a general thread on the issue and I have no problem with it at all.

This thread can be evolved into talking about the general, and move from the specific.

Spiritoftheseventies

Des wrote: »

This thread can be evolved into talking about the general, and move from the specific.

If any other pool posters want to join in thats fine. But I don't make any claim to being spokesperson here for the club. Like I said McCarthy took a risk, club got a suspended fine. Could have been a whole lot worse.

SantryRed

Spiritoftheseventies wrote: »

If any other pool posters want to join in thats fine. But I don't make any claim to being spokesperson here for the club. Like I said McCarthy took a risk, club got a suspended fine. Could have been a whole lot worse.

Why should they have been fined in the first place? That's like saying if I was charged with assault even though I was no where near where this assault took place, and I was given a suspended sentence, I should just leave it be?

kippy

Spiritoftheseventies,
This is a general thread about double standards in the game, specificilly in the cases of teams fielding "under strength" teams.
I specificilly said that fans of the bigger clubs (such as Liverpool and Man U) would prefer to gloss over this topic as it is something that their clubs are well known for doing, yet dont get punished for by the rule/lawmakers.

The plain reason that this hasnt been highlighted more in the media is that its not a big team involved.

Its typical that fans of clubs will defend their clubs, but lets be fair, the smaller clubs are getting hammered enough without having one rule from them and one for the bigger club.

That said, a lot of people on this thread have shown that they are shocked at the decision.