Blackpool fined £25,000 for fielding weakened team against Viall

[kevtherev]

This rule is total bollocks, end of..A manager gets paid to pick a football team however he sees fit. Whatever the outcome of the result, the manager should answer to his own chairman and supporters. I dont belive it is in any clubs interest to actually lose a game on purpose, but if you lose in the process of looking at frindge players, so be it. It is still only the clubs business. As for other clubs crying its not fair on them in the long run. Win your own f***ing games and stop looking at what others are doing. If a player is employed by a club, then he is avalible for the manager to pick!

 

[Barrel of Fun]

But the rules ARE clear that the FA states every team must be competitive in each fixture.

They were. They went down by a single goal and that was scored once their three best performing players arrived on the pitch.

 

[TS90]

But the rules ARE clear that the FA states every team must be competitive in each fixture.

That is weighted so much in favour of the top clubs, that it makes it a completely ridiculous rule.

 

[nicko31]

Something else for Holloway to whine about now. Who will it be next not showing you respect?

 

[Robski]

At that rate, if a team were to decide to rest a regular first-teamer and give a youth prospect a chance, they will be fined £25,000?

 

[Easy 10]

No don't be daft. Every team makes a few changes from game to game, hell didn't Benitez go something like 2 years without naming the same XI in consecutive games at Liverpool ? On Tuesday Gus made 3 changes from Saturdays starting lineup. Thats just normal par for the course.

Its when there's 8,9,10+ changes from one league game to the next that an eyebrow has to be raised.

 

[Sussex Nomad]

Didn't Gus say he was going to play a youth team against Woking or FSCUM? He said it on TV did he not?

 

[Easy 10]

Gus made a load of changes for the Woking game and it certainly seemed to derail our form for a few weeks. And as I mentioned earlier, I was none too impressed with the 8 changes made from the team that won at Swindon on the opening day for that cup tie at Northampton.

I suppose I'm just old fashioned and like to see a settled side playing week-in week-out with minimal disruption if they're going well. A few changes sure, but any more than 5 or 6 and it gets a bit silly.

Except for the Paintpot mind, Gus could play his mum in that for all I care. Christ I won't miss that next season if we go up.

 

[keaton]

Same as the Wolves and similarly stupid. If big teams can rest a whole team small teams should be able to.

If the big organisations were so keen on things being competive, they'd share out the prize money more, stop clubs spending more than thier means and create a spending cap

 

[beorhthelm]

Sorry, them's the rules.

But the rules ARE clear that the FA states every team must be competitive in each fixture.

yes, but who are the FA to judge if the 11 fielded players are competitive? what are the best 11 players for a given fixture? different opponents, different tactics, different players suit. if you switch from 4-3-3 to 4-5-1 you have a couple of changes straightaway, then injuries/suspensions in and out. who says the previous 11 team was the strongest possible, the new changed one might be better. by having to name a restricive 25 man squad (which is good imo) in effect the clubs are forced to elect their best 25 players, its for the manager to decide which is best team for a given fixture.

if the FA want to pursue this, they need to make a rule stating a maximum number of changes from the previous game.

 

[Hotchilidog]

The rule is ridiculous, the manager should be entitled to pick whoever he likes from his first team squad. By being in the squad the players are deemed good enough to play, it shouldn't be up to the authorities to pick the teams. Utter rubbish, and as has been noted this has never been applied to champ league clubs resting players before big ties.

 

[KZNSeagull]

But the rules ARE clear that the FA states every team must be competitive in each fixture.

Stupid rule. Why weren't they fined for losing 6-0 to Arsenal? That was rather uncompetitive.

 

[Peever]

if the FA want to pursue this, they need to make a rule stating a maximum number of changes from the previous game.

And manure will still find a way around it

 

[sten_super]

Stupid rule. Why weren't they fined for losing 6-0 to Arsenal? That was rather uncompetitive.

The rule doesn't say "competitive". According to the version I've just downloaded, E.20 is the sole rule in a section called "Full Strength Teams";

20. In every League Match each participating Club shall field a full strength team.

Almost every team in the Premier League is flagrently breaking this rule many, many times a season. As I said at the time of the decision, the only way this could be enforced is by asking teams to nominate their 'first choice XI' at the start of the season and fining them every time any player from this side is given an unenforced absence. Truly, truly ridiculous.

 

[Peever]

Almost every team in the Premier League is flagrently breaking this rule many, many times a season. As I said at the time of the decision, the only way this could be enforced is by asking teams to nominate their 'first choice XI' at the start of the season and fining them every time any player from this side is given an unenforced absence. Truly, truly ridiculous.

If thats the case mines well get rid of the managers and coaches and just let the FA run the prem league with no input and their words only. I think I know of a bloke who used to do this back in about the 1930's with a whole country. They might want to take some notes from his speeches.