Last nights blackpool team.

racso1975

The team had 10 changes to it compared to the team that lined up at the weekend. The manager has stated that any investigation or backlash from the f.a. and he'll resign.

I feel he is completely right. As a manager he has the right to field whatever team he wish's and to rest whatever players he wants. Added to this it's not as though villa ran amuck on Blackpool they were actually lucky to get the win.

Would be interested to hear other peoples views on this.

FutureGuy

racso1975 wrote: »

The team had 10 changes to it compared to the team that lined up at the weekend. The manager has stated that any investigation or backlash from the f.a. and he'll resign.

I feel he is completely right. As a manager he has the right to field whatever team he wish's and to rest whatever players he wants. Added to this it's not as though villa ran amuck on Blackpool they were actually lucky to get the win.

Would be interested to hear other peoples views on this.

Mick McCarthy was fined for doing it last season, and I can see the FA getting involved again.

It's a fcuking disgrace to be honest that a manager cannot use his squad in whatever way he so chooses.

Mitch Connor

I didn't think Wolves should have been fined last season, and I do not feel Blackpool should be fined this season.

What makes me feel even more that no action should be taken now as opposed to last season, is the new 25 man squad rule.

Here is the list of registered Blackpool players (senior registered)

Charlie Adam,
Alex John-Baptiste,
Christopher Basham,
Stephen Crainey,
Malaury Martin,
Daniel Coid,
Ishmel Demontagnac,
Neal Eardley,
Robert Edwards,
Jason Euell,
Ian Evatt,
Matthew Gilks,
Elliot Grandin,
Marlon Harewood,
Dekel Keinan,
Brett Ormerod,
Keith Southern,
Ludovic Sylvestre,
Gary Taylor-Fletcher,
Luke Varney,
David Vaughan,
DJ Campbell,
David Carney,
Richard Kingson,

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1308137/Blackpool-25-man-Premier-League-squad-2010-11.html#ixzz14xwIYyWT

Here is their line up from last night:

28 Kingson
17 Bashamyellow card
24 Edwards
31 Keinanyellow card (Evatt 75)
04 Southern
19 Sylvestre
23 Phillips
29 Carney
09 Harewood (Campbell 77)
10 Ormerod
18 Euellyellow card (Adam 71)
_________

So only one of the players to involved at any stage of the game was not on their senior registered list. What is the point in being made to name a 25man squad if you are not allowed to make full use of it? Also, a number of the players starting last night have started a decent number of other games.

gimmick

Whats the point in having a squad if you cannot use it?

Bullshít controvery IMO.

kippy

I totally agree with what has been said so far, there was a fairly sizeable topic on this last year when wolves got fined - double standards etc.
However the issue with McCarthy was he stated openly why he had changed his team selection from the previous week and this statement was ultimately what got them fined.

ctrl-alt-delete

Nothing should be done, but it going to have to be because of what happened with Wolves last season,

What a joke of a precedent that was - so they ask you to name a squad, but you have to play a certain amount of what others perceive to be your strongest squad in order to avoid a fine! Cop on.

Those lads went out and gave their all last night, so nearly coming away with a point!

Would be utterly stupid to punish the club, but as I've said they will have to, either that or give Wolves back their money.

Fair play to Holloway for his comments on the matter, himself and Blackpool as a whole have been a great addition to the League.

Dont be at yourself

They were close to getting a result with the field they put out. Don't see what the issue is. Are the FA now arbiters of which players suit which match, moreso than the manager who coaches them? Why doesn't the FA just pick each team's XI every weekend?

Will we see Spurs or United fined if they rest players for a CL game? We will in my hole.

racso1975

ctrl-alt-delete wrote: »

Fair play to Holloway for his comments on the matter, himself and Blackpool as a whole have been a great addition to the League.

I would really support that statement. They take to the pitch each week and play as a team that just want to really enjoy their football. They are not intimadated by big names or by being the underdogs. I think a lot of teams could really learn from this attitude.

It's not about ego's etc and in fairness their transfer budget is the equivelant of sonme players wages.

patmac

Says a lot about the state of the current Villa team that they needed a last minute wimmer to beat Blackpool's reserves, Houllier should be fined for incompetance.

JerryHandbag

FutureGuy wrote: »

Mick McCarthy was fined for doing it last season, and I can see the FA getting involved again.

It's a fcuking disgrace to be honest that a manager cannot use his squad in whatever way he so chooses.

Totally agree, the FA should keep their noses out of this one and concentrate on more pressing matters within the game.

Holloway doesnt mince his words, I get the impression he WILL quit if the **** hits the fan

SlickRic

this issue is complete and utter bollocks.

i said it last year with Mick, and i'll say the same about last night's Blackpool.

it's up to the manager, end of.

and the media seem to be conveniently ignoring the fact they were a couple of minutes away from a valuable draw at Villa Park.

possibly the biggest non-issue in football IMO.

Moneymaker

Quality rant from Holloway to be fair.

Will buy again.

ShooterSF

Last year I said no chance should Wolves be fined so this year I say Blackpool have to be. Unless the FA are willing to return the money with apology to Wolves.

Neil3030

Sorry - just read Holloway's comments from last night and I reckon he'll be ok. He didn't once admit to fielding a weakened team, he said he was there to win, which in my mind would imply that he had picked his strongest side - he could at least make that argument. Apologies to Mr. Holloway, he is not an idiot.

fkiely

Will probably get fined as small clubs aren't allowed to rest players like that.

cson

I do wonder if by chance Chelsea, Manchester United, Arsenal or Tottenham were to reach say the Champions League Final [whilst at the same time having no hope of winning the league] and not putting out their strongest team for matches before the Final; would they be fined?

I think not.

Neil3030

cson wrote: »

I do wonder if by chance Chelsea, Manchester United, Arsenal or Tottenham were to reach say the Champions League Final [whilst at the same time having no hope of winning the league] and not putting out their strongest team for matches before the Final; would they be fined?

I think not.

It's a convenient grey area for the big clubs but all the other clubs should now know of its existence and how to avoid being punished.

Basically, knowingly fielding a weakened side is failing to fulfil obligations to the league and other clubs in the utmost good faith.

Big clubs are insulated from this accusation on the basis that their squads are so strong, resting good players in lieu of fielding other good players is not considered fielding a weakened side.

So any manager from a smaller club who does rest players, in my mind, need only assert that he genuinely believes that, based on observations in training, fatigue, form or otherwise, the team on the sheet is the strongest available and in such an event the FA will have nothing to charge them on (even though the dogs in the street will know it's a steaming pile of bollocks).

However, admitting to resting players with a view to having better players available for a future fixture is giving the FA enough rope to hang you.

So its not the practice, but how they justify it, that will get managers in trouble.

Looking at Holloway's comments, I would imagine he'll be o.k., as nowhere did he admit to fielding a weakened side with a view to a future league fixture.

Kiith

I think it's a bull**** decision if the FA if they do decide to fine him, and i hope he does follow through. Would be a horrible shame for Blackpool, their fans and the premier league as a whole, but it needs to be done if the FA follow through.

If he's allowed to pick players for the squad, he's allowed to play any of that squad, whenever he chooses.

Neil3030 wrote: »

Big clubs are insulated from this accusation on the basis that their squads are so strong, resting good players in lieu of fielding other good players is not considered fielding a weakened side.

So the FA are allowed to pass judgement on players, and say they aren't good enough for the Premier League? (i'm not saying that's what you think btw).

Neil3030

Kiith wrote: »

I think it's a bull**** decision if the FA if they do decide to fine him, and i hope he does follow through. Would be a horrible shame for Blackpool, their fans and the premier league as a whole, but it needs to be done if the FA follow through.

If he's allowed to pick players for the squad, he's allowed to play any of that squad, whenever he chooses.

So the FA are allowed to pass judgement on players, and say they aren't good enough for the Premier League? (i'm not saying that's what you think btw).

It is a woeful double standard. But the FA would justify any fine on the basis that this weekend West Ham will face a stronger Blackpool side for them having rested good players in a league fixture, which they don't want.

It's a crock of s*** though, because sport is about strategy, tactics and gamesmanship, as much as it is about anything that goes on on the pitch. Strategic planning for fixtures is entirely the manager's perogative.

So with that in mind, I would like to see smaller club's continue to do what Blackpool and Wolves did, but just that they be careful enough not to admit to what they're doing, so as to avoid punishment.

Dempsey

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/b/blackpool/9178229.stm

I'll quit if I'm fined - Blackpool boss Ian Holloway

We deserved at least a point and how dare anybody tell me the players I've been working with, I can't treat them with respect and give them a chance.

"I'm manager of Blackpool and I manage the players how I want. If some bright spark from the Premier League wants to tell me who I can pick then come and have a cup of coffee and you'll probably get it chucked in your lap.

"Let them try and fine me, it's an absolute disgrace. I'll show the Premier League. We were a credit to football, and let the Premier League try to tell me otherwise.

He's dead right and the suspended fine that Wolves got is still a disgrace.

dfx-

Well I hope he resigns and I hoped Redknapp never talks after the game again.

I thought his attitude with the Sky interviewer after the game was appalling. Enough is enough with the manager threats. You play by the rules or you get the fcuk out. Deal with it.

In order to stamp it out, they have to get even tougher, fine him and ban him from the touchline.

Kiith

dfx- wrote: »

You play by the rules or you get the fcuk out. Deal with it.

So you're ok with the rules applying to Blackpool and Wolves, but not Utd or Spurs?

Moneymaker

dfx- wrote: »

Well I hope he resigns and I hoped Redknapp never talks after the game again.

I thought his attitude with the Sky interviewer after the game was appalling. Enough is enough with the manager threats. You play by the rules or you get the fcuk out. Deal with it.

In order to stamp it out, they have to get even tougher, fine him and ban him from the touchline.

Seriously?

OhNoYouDidn't

This all fundementally comes down to WHY you field a weakened team.

This whole pallaver stems from Boro under Robson a few years ago sending kids out against Arsenal and Man Utd to lose to rest players for the games he felt he could win, and stated this was the case. That is a clear violation of the rules and rightfully the English FA can and should clamp down on it. You have to field the strongest side available, but obviously in modern squad based football that is a grey area.

As was said earlier, Holloway can argue that players were fatigued, he made tactical changes and there is should be no problem.

But if there is no rule there its wide open to corruption and abuse. Last day of the season and Chelsea are a point clear of Man United and Man City play Chelsea. Man City play a team with 11 debutants and an average age of 17. Fair?

OhNoYouDidn't

Moneymaker wrote: »

Seriously?

"Ive broken the rules, but if I'm investigated I quit"?

Can't have managers with that attitude. I like Holloway, but what was the point of this rant other than to raise the EFA's backs.

Mitch Connor

cson wrote: »

I do wonder if by chance Chelsea, Manchester United, Arsenal or Tottenham were to reach say the Champions League Final [whilst at the same time having no hope of winning the league] and not putting out their strongest team for matches before the Final; would they be fined?

I think not.

United fielded a weakend side vs Hull on the last day of the season with a CL game looming, no fine.

United fielded a weakend side vs West Ham on the final day of the season. West Ham won and stayed up, no fine.

Liverpool rested players vs Fulham with the CL final a few weeks away, lost - which was a big help to Fulham staying up, no fine.

Moneymaker

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

"Ive broken the rules, but if I'm investigated I quit"?

Can't have managers with that attitude. I like Holloway, but what was the point of this rant other than to raise the EFA's backs.

It's a really ridicolous rule, to be fair.

kippy

The issue that I can see only arrises when managers make the declaration that they fielded a weakened team. Its the only thing that appears to differentiate what heppens when Man U do it at the end of the season or when Wolves do it anytime.
As such the managers probably shouldnt be so liberal with the truth.


I can see why such a rule/exists - fielding weakened teams can be akin to throwing a game for whatever reason, however the facts are it is up to the manager to decide what team to play and not the FA or anyone else.

OhNoYouDidn't

Moneymaker wrote: »

It's a really ridicolous rule, to be fair.

Its not. The interpretation in terms of Wolves wasn't the best, but its a needed and important rule.

dfx-

Kiith wrote: »

So you're ok with the rules applying to Blackpool and Wolves, but not Utd or Spurs?

I don't particularly care about weakened teams, I'm on about the attitude and bluster and threats.

If the Premier League want to enforce their rules and you don't like it, then please do us a favour and resign Holloway. Field a weakened team, then tough cheddar if a Sky reporter asks about it. It's not a democracy.

If they let these threats work, it's a farcical precedent.

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

"Ive broken the rules, but if I'm investigated I quit"?

Can't have managers with that attitude. I like Holloway, but what was the point of this rant other than to raise the EFA's backs.

Exactly.

smokedeels

I thought the 25 man squad rule would prevent this happening again.

My understanding: You pick a pool of players you've deemed good enough to represent you in the PL, and the order or combinations they're played in is a tactical decision to be made by the clubs manager.

Holloway's position would be undermined by a fine and imo he would be brave and correct to resign if it happend.

kippy

dfx- wrote: »

If they let these threats work, it's a farcical precedent.

No,
A farcical precident is fining a club 40 odd K for fielding a "weakened" team without clarifying the reason why a lot of clubs do this and get away with it, yet in this instance the club doesnt get away with it.


The FA should just come out and say -
Right, managers who admit to intentionally fielding a weaker team than they could possibly have put out will be fined for fielding a weakened team, as within the rules of the sport.
Managers should never admit to doing this or the FA dont have much of a choice (all that being said, I suspect top 4 managers do admit to doing this but it doesnt get picked up on)

Its a very necessary rule however it is one that technically is probably broken week in/week out in the premiership by teams however it is only when the managers admit to it, can the FA do anything about it.

Dempsey

A newly promoted team is always going to have trouble with midweek matches because they dont have the quality of players to play midweek games without considerable fatigue.

The EPL are effectively deciding how much rotation a manager can do which is wrong.

smokedeels

kippy wrote: »

No,
A farcical precident is fining a club 40 odd K for fielding a "weakened" team without clarifying the reason why a lot of clubs do this and get away with it, yet in this instance the club doesnt get away with it.


The FA should just come out and say -
Right, managers who admit to intentionally fielding a weaker team than they could possibly have put out will be fined for fielding a weakened team, as within the rules of the sport.
Managers should never admit to doing this or the FA dont have much of a choice (all that being said, I suspect top 4 managers do admit to doing this but it doesnt get picked up on)

Its a very necessary rule however it is one that technically is probably broken week in/week out in the premiership by teams however it is only when the managers admit to it, can the FA do anything about it.

How do could they define a weakened team?

International Caps, Age, Club appearances, transfer fee?

Holloway, like all Premier League managers picked 25 players he deemed “strong” enough to play at PL level.

I’m having trouble with this concept of a “wakened team”.

kippy

Dempsey wrote: »

A newly promoted team is always going to have trouble with midweek matches because they dont have the quality of players to play midweek games without considerable fatigue.

The EPL are effectively deciding how much rotation a manager can do which is wrong.

Effectively they are telling the managers not to admit to fielding teams that are weaker than they could have fielded.

Theres a lot worng with that in itself, but ultimately that is what they are doing.

kippy

smokedeels wrote: »

How do could they define a weakened team?

International Caps, Age, Club appearances, transfer fee?

Holloway, like all Premier League managers picked 25 players he deemed “strong” enough to play at PL level.


I’m having trouble with this concept of a “wakened team”.

They dont have to define weakened team.
Once the manager admits that the team was a weaker team than one which he could have put out, the manager/club is breaking the rules.
The manager admits he knows this is not the strongest team he could have fielded.

Again, its not perfect and exceptionally "two-faced" but once the manager makes that admission the FA have no choice but to charge him.

Dempsey

kippy wrote: »

Effectively they are telling the managers not to admit to fielding teams that are weaker than they could have fielded.

Theres a lot worng with that in itself, but ultimately that is what they are doing.

Why isnt any manager getting warned/fined when they clearly drop players for a weaker player so he'll have his better player for another competition like Man U, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool usually do when in the UCL?

Currently its one set of rules for small club and another for the top ones.

OhNoYouDidn't

kippy wrote: »

They dont have to define weakened team.
Once the manager admits that the team was a weaker team than one which he could have put out, the manager/club is breaking the rules.
The manager admits he knows this is not the strongest team he could have fielded.

Again, its not perfect and exceptionally "two-faced" but once the manager makes that admission the FA have no choice but to charge him.

Nail on head.

Holloway has brought this upon himself. If he said to Sky "it was the best team I had available", would we be having this conversation?

Its a needed rule to stop shenanigans. As it happens, there were no shenanigans here, but Holloway has defied the EFA to not investigate him, which is in practice admitting he is at least potentially in the wrong. They have to now.

OhNoYouDidn't

smokedeels wrote: »

I thought the 25 man squad rule would prevent this happening again.

My understanding: You pick a pool of players you've deemed good enough to represent you in the PL, and the order or combinations they're played in is a tactical decision to be made by the clubs manager.

Holloway's position would be undermined by a fine and imo he would be brave and correct to resign if it happend.

But hypothetically, you can play none of those 25 and field kids.

If a team did that on the last day of the season and a rival lost out as a result of the tanking dished out, would the FA be entitled to act then?

kippy

Dempsey wrote: »

Why isnt any manager getting warned/fined when they clearly drop players for a weaker player so he'll have his better player for another competition like Man U, Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool usually do when in the UCL?

Currently its one set of rules for small club and another for the top ones.

Its not really, if you read my last few posts.

I can see the logic with what is going on but I dont especially agree with it.

The topic we had on Wolves last season pretty much clarified it for me, despite me starting out with the same attitude you have shown in that post (one rule for big club, one for small)

Dempsey

kippy wrote: »

Its not really, if you read my last few posts.

I can see the logic with what is going on but I dont especially agree with it.

The topic we had on Wolves last season pretty much clarified it for me, despite me starting out with the same attitude you have shown in that post (one rule for big club, one for small)

So, for example, Ferguson stating that he's resting players for the midweek Champions League match isnt the same as another manger like Holloway saying I'm fielding a weaker team because they are wrecked from playing 3-4 days ago?

If Blackpool's weakened team beat Villa last night or a situation where the 'weakened' team wins, should the FA fine them? Its because the big clubs can afford quality backup, win matches despite not playing their best 11 is the reason they dont get fined. Its a double standard.

smokedeels

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

But hypothetically, you can play none of those 25 and field kids.

If a team did that on the last day of the season and a rival lost out as a result of the tanking dished out, would the FA be entitled to act then?

No manager would send out a team of 11 under 21's in the league with the knowledge that they would most likely lose the match. At least there's no precedent for it. But I do think a team is entitled to do it.

Holloway picked a team last night for tactical reasons as did McCarty last year, I hate to see rules in place that punish mangers for doing their jobs.

kippy

Dempsey wrote: »

So, for example, Ferguson stating that he's resting players for the midweek Champions League match isnt the same as another manger like Holloway saying I'm fielding a weaker team because they are wrecked from playing 3-4 days ago?

If Blackpool's weakened team beat Villa last night or a situation where the 'weakened' team wins, should the FA fine them? Its because the big clubs can afford quality backup, win matches despite not playing their best 11 is the reason they dont get fined. Its a double standard.

Look,
I understand your anger - however it really does depend on how the manager phrases it.
I didnt hear the Halloway press conference last night. From what I hear I suspect the media commentator asked him a question, Halloway didnt react too well but didnt actually say he fielded a weakened team.
If you look at what McCarthy said last year he said outright he fielded a weakened team.

Its not a double standard as such, it appear to be pretty clear cut.
Whats double standard about it is that to "protect fairness within the game" managers are better off not telling the truth.

kippy

smokedeels wrote: »

No manager would send out a team of 11 under 21's in the league with the knowledge that they would most likely lose the match. At least there's no precedent for it. But I do think a team is entitled to do it.

Holloway picked a team last night for tactical reasons as did McCarty last year, I hate to see rules in place that punish mangers for doing their jobs.

The rules are in place to protect the percieved integrity of the game in a very roundabout way.
Ultimately as long as every one of that 11 that are picked goes out there with the intention of winning the game (which they probably do) then there shouldnt be an issue, the manager admitting he broke the rules however is something the FA cannot let go.

dfx-

kippy wrote: »

No,
A farcical precident is fining a club 40 odd K for fielding a "weakened" team without clarifying the reason why a lot of clubs do this and get away with it,

It doesn't matter to me whether it was a weakened team, if the FA say it is, then it is and the managers should shut up and put up with it.

Dempsey

kippy wrote: »

Look,
I understand your anger - however it really does depend on how the manager phrases it.
I didnt hear the Halloway press conference last night. From what I hear I suspect the media commentator asked him a question, Halloway didnt react too well but didnt actually say he fielded a weakened team.
If you look at what McCarthy said last year he said outright he fielded a weakened team.

Its not a double standard as such, it appear to be pretty clear cut.
Whats double standard about it is that to "protect fairness within the game" managers are better off not telling the truth.

Its farcical if the fine is based on the manager's use of the English language.

Saying the words "weakened team" or words to that effect depends on the context in which it is meant. Neither him or McCarthy set out to deliberately loose their matches but give their clubs the best chance of getting points to stay in the league. What's the objective a league season again?

OhNoYouDidn't

Dempsey wrote: »

So, for example, Ferguson stating that he's resting players for the midweek Champions League match isnt the same as another manger like Holloway saying I'm fielding a weaker team because they are wrecked from playing 3-4 days ago?

You have answered your own question. Its semantics.

Resting players is fine. Fielding a weaker team is against the rules. The difference is hair splitting, but when you say you have done the latter as opposed to the former, you are pushing the envelope when it comes to the rules.

smokedeels

dfx- wrote: »

It doesn't matter to me whether it was a weakened team, if the FA say it is, then it is and the managers should shut up and put up with it.

I like when managers question the FA. Like any job, the people who make the rules rarely experience them in practice, constructive criticism of the hierarchy can be beneficial.

OhNoYouDidn't

Dempsey wrote: »

Its farcical if the fine is based on the manager's use of the English language.

But that's across the board.

Manager A says "the referee made a few bad calls that cost us". Manager B says "the ref is a disgrace, is corrupt and should never get another game". Which one gets the fine?

OhNoYouDidn't

smokedeels wrote: »

I like when managers question the FA. Like any job, the people who make the rules rarely experience them in practice, constructive criticism of the hierarchy can be beneficial.

... and a direct challenge to their authority can be suicidal....

That_Guy

Listened to the rant there. Hilarious.

But tbh, it's a joke if the FA steps in. Who are they to decide what a weakened team is. FFS, they were so close to getting a draw against Villa yet the main issue is that they narrowly lost with a "weakened" squad.

Joke.