Clubs we must look to finish above

[1066familyman]

That's right. The idea of the league is that it is supposed to be as fair as possible, as you hope the luck evens out over the course of a season and generally the better teams rise to the top and the worse teams to the bottom. But it does rely on integrity from the participants, of which Huddersfield showed they had none.

Blackburn had to play 46 games against full strength teams. Birmingham only had to play 45 against full strength teams and in one game they might reasonably have expected to get only a point or none at all, they were handed a crucial 3 points because Huddersfield chose to play their stiffs and kids as soon as automatic promotion was beyond them. It was utterly shameful and what is worse is the the FA didn't throw the book at them for it.

The FA didn't throw the book at them because they did nothing wrong.

They earned the right to field that side. Good luck to them.

Blackburn should have earned the right not to depend on other results. They didn't. That's their problem, not Huddersfield's.

 

[jaghebby]

Not bothered. Any three from nineteen will be fine by me!

I will be happy with that! No point speculating if you ask me. As long as we are fourth from bottom or higher I don't give a monkeys who is below us!

 

[origigull]

Not sure I saw it coming from back in June, but amazed that nothing got over the line in the striking dept. Only, the eternal optimists among us would hope for survival now.

It is what it is concerning the transfer window and we can do nothing about it now and have to wait until January to improve. It feels doom and gloom to most people but there is no law saying we can't win every game. Improbable but not impossible.

 

[Murray 17]

That's right. The idea of the league is that it is supposed to be as fair as possible, as you hope the luck evens out over the course of a season and generally the better teams rise to the top and the worse teams to the bottom. But it does rely on integrity from the participants, of which Huddersfield showed they had none.

Blackburn had to play 46 games against full strength teams. Birmingham only had to play 45 against full strength teams and in one game they might reasonably have expected to get only a point or none at all, they were handed a crucial 3 points because Huddersfield chose to play their stiffs and kids as soon as automatic promotion was beyond them. It was utterly shameful and what is worse is the the FA didn't throw the book at them for it.

Well said [emoji122]

I really feel for Blackburn, and hope they come straight back.

 

[Murray 17]

blimey. ok.

did our last three games after promotion where we played whilst having been on the piss not affect anything...I cant remember...of course we always send out our strongest team against everyone...all teams do...you know, like every top team in the various cup games? Teams in the Europa league that realise that to stay in the circus they cant be arsed with it and send out reserve teams,....

In cup games, if you send out a weaker team another team doesn't suffer. We didn't play our first team against Barnet. If we had lost, nobody would have lost out.

We played our best team for the last 3 games - yes, we didn't play well, but it was our first team. What Huddersfield did was very unprofessional, and the league should have done something about it.

 

[Weststander]

All of these clubs have far better striking options unfortunately. I think we have sealed our place in the championship for next season.

Bet365 now have us at 10/11 for the drop. That price will not get any better, its practically buying money.

Best on oddschecker is currently 5/4.

Worth £250 to more than double your money?

 

[1066familyman]

In cup games, if you send out a weaker team another team doesn't suffer. We didn't play our first team against Barnet. If we had lost, nobody would have lost out.

We played our best team for the last 3 games - yes, we didn't play well, but it was our first team. What Huddersfield did was very unprofessional, and the league should have done something about it.

Reverse the roles.

If we were in their position, fielded our strongest team when we didn't need to and a key player or two got injured in the game, how would you feel?

I really can't see what they've done wrong. Almost any other team would have done the same. They earned the right to be able to do that over the course of the season.

 

[Murray 17]

Reverse the roles.

If we were in their position, fielded our strongest team when we didn't need to and a key player or two got injured in the game, how would you feel?

I really can't see what they've done wrong. Almost any other team would have done the same. They earned the right to be able to do that over the course of the season.

Because Birmingham played 45 full strength teams, and Blackburn 46. I know why Huddersfield did it, but you can't have a league system unless there is a level playing field. What would you say if Huddersfield had played their youth team?

Also, consider the possibility of betting fraud. Before the line ups were announced, you could probably have got 2-1 on a Birmingham win. With the side Huddersfield put out, Birmingham should have been odds-on.

 

[sir albion]

Goals keep you up.

We failed to sign enough

Clean sheets focus will get you nowhere at the bottom end
Goals as been mentioned numerous times are the most important thing down this end of the table and we have hardly any goals in us.

 

[1066familyman]

Because Birmingham played 45 full strength teams, and Blackburn 46. I know why Huddersfield did it, but you can't have a league system unless there is a level playing field. What would you say if Huddersfield had played their youth team?

Also, consider the possibility of betting fraud. Before the line ups were announced, you could probably have got 2-1 on a Birmingham win. With the side Huddersfield put out, Birmingham should have been odds-on.

Tell me what rules Huddersfield broke by fielding the team they did.

Blackburn's piss poor season has nothing to do with Huddersfield. Blackburn went down because they weren't good enough. Simple as that.

Huddersfield could afford to not field their strongest 11 because they were good enough to get themselves in a position to do so.

Teams have a squad to use over the course of a season. Nothing in the rules says they have to field their strongest 11 ( subjective anyway) for every game.

I really can't see where the argument is.

 

[Murray 17]

Tell me what rules Huddersfield broke by fielding the team they did.

Blackburn's piss poor season has nothing to do with Huddersfield. Blackburn went down because they weren't good enough. Simple as that.

Huddersfield could afford to not field their strongest 11 because they were good enough to get themselves in a position to do so.

Teams have a squad to use over the course of a season. Nothing in the rules says they have to field their strongest 11 ( subjective anyway) for every game.

I really can't see where the argument is.

EFL Regulation 24 states that a side must field their strongest possible team.

Birmingham had a 'piss poor' season too. In fact, so 'piss poor' that they would probably have lost to Huddersfield and been relegated if they hadn't been playing a reserve team. Relegated by 3 clear points in fact. Or 2 if they had got a draw.

Huddersfield did what was best for them, but you can't have teams doing that when it affects other sides.

 

[1066familyman]

EFL Regulation 24 states that a side must field their strongest possible team.

Birmingham had a 'piss poor' season too. In fact, so 'piss poor' that they would probably have lost to Huddersfield and been relegated if they hadn't been playing a reserve team. Relegated by 3 clear points in fact. Or 2 if they had got a draw.

Huddersfield did what was best for them, but you can't have teams doing that when it affects other sides.

That rule is a complete joke, as highlighted by the EFL's unwillingness/inability to take action against Huddersfield. 'Full Strength' means bugger all really as it's so subjective.

Yes, they clearly fielded a 'weakened' team, but I still don't have a problem with that.

Where do we draw the line on 'full strength' being fielded for every game. Do we not allow teams to rest players at some point in the season then? Must every player considered 1st eleven play every game they are fit enough to play in? See how silly it can all get.

Sorry, I have no sympathy for Blackburn whatsoever and hold nothing against Huddersfield for doing what they did.

 

[Murray 17]

That rule is a complete joke, as highlighted by the EFL's unwillingness/inability to take action against Huddersfield. 'Full Strength' means bugger all really as it's so subjective.

Yes, they clearly fielded a 'weakened' team, but I still don't have a problem with that.

Where do we draw the line on 'full strength' being fielded for every game. Do we not allow teams to rest players at some point in the season then? Must every player considered 1st eleven play every game they are fit enough to play in? See how silly it can all get.

Sorry, I have no sympathy for Blackburn whatsoever and hold nothing against Huddersfield for doing what they did.

Yes, I agree it is difficult to define 'full strength'. I think one of the cup competitions stated a team must field at least x number of players who have played in x% of games.

Let's just hope our relegation rivals don't face weakened teams, although I don't think it's going to make much difference to us this season!

 

[1066familyman]

Yes, I agree it is difficult to define 'full strength'. I think one of the cup competitions stated a team must field at least x number of players who have played in x% of games.

Let's just hope our relegation rivals don't face weakened teams, although I don't think it's going to make much difference to us this season!

Now that is a sensible rule that is quite clear, everyone understands and leaves no room for subjectivity/interpretation. If the EFL adopts that rule as result of the Huddersfield affair then fair enough.

If we find ourselves in a relegation battle this season (I think we will now, sadly) and we play a 'full strength' team on the last day while our closest relegation battle team play, let's say a team who are safe and decide to rest key players because they're in the FA Cup final, I'll have no problem with that personally. If we go down it will be our own fault, just like it was Blackburn's fault last season and nobody else's.

 

[Skoda_htafc]

Almost all of our team that faced birmingham had played over 12 games in league before that match and also multiple cup games so any % of appearances in previous games they would of met rather easily we regularly rotated our squad last season

Sent from my PLK-L01 using Tapatalk

 

[Fnd_hudds]

The players that played against Blackburn would have been in our 25 man squad if the Championship had a similar system to the Premier League.

 

[Fnd_hudds]

We also made 9 changes against Wigan (another game in the middle of a 3 game week). But we won that, so I guess that's ok? Does the result of the game determine whether it's OK to use the players that you pay to play for your club?

 

[GT49er]

That's right. The idea of the league is that it is supposed to be as fair as possible, as you hope the luck evens out over the course of a season and generally the better teams rise to the top and the worse teams to the bottom. But it does rely on integrity from the participants, of which Huddersfield showed they had none.

Blackburn had to play 46 games against full strength teams. Birmingham only had to play 45 against full strength teams and in one game they might reasonably have expected to get only a point or none at all, they were handed a crucial 3 points because Huddersfield chose to play their stiffs and kids as soon as automatic promotion was beyond them. It was utterly shameful and what is worse is the the FA didn't throw the book at them for it.

To be fair, after winning their cup final at the Amex, Bristol City pretty much rolled over and let Birmingham tickle their tummy too.

 

[6703728901]

That's right. The idea of the league is that it is supposed to be as fair as possible, as you hope the luck evens out over the course of a season and generally the better teams rise to the top and the worse teams to the bottom. But it does rely on integrity from the participants, of which Huddersfield showed they had none.

Blackburn had to play 46 games against full strength teams. Birmingham only had to play 45 against full strength teams and in one game they might reasonably have expected to get only a point or none at all, they were handed a crucial 3 points because Huddersfield chose to play their stiffs and kids as soon as automatic promotion was beyond them. It was utterly shameful and what is worse is the the FA didn't throw the book at them for it.

No kids were played in that game, all regularly playing squad members admittedly not first choice, no debuts . Same team held Man City to a draw. Wagner's was paid to get Town through the play offs not keep Blackburn up. Live with it.

 

[Johnny Hudds]

Some of the comments on here are laughable!

The team Huddersfield put out against Birmingham had over 100 appearances in the league between them. Wagner rotated our squad pretty much every week, with more drastic changes occurring in weeks where we played more than one game. It's just what he does. That team that played at Brum is pretty much the same team that drew 0-0 with Man City, won away at Burton and won away Wigan. A similar team also lost away Forest when we made numerous changes too. Outrageous, eh?

Plus, I like it how people think that our 'strongest team' would have done any better. They'd have been half arsed and saving themselves for the bigger games ahead, just look what happened a few days later when we played Cardiff! 0-3 at home with one of the laziest "i don't want to burn myself out or get injured" displays you're likely to see. We were hopeless and clearly saving ourselves for the play-offs.

Also, how about giving Birmingham some credit? They upped their game and battled well. People calling it 'unfair' on Blackburn. How about it being unfair on us that we had to play in front of a full house under a rejuvenated Harry Redknapp side instead of playing them whilst Zola was there in a half empty stadium? We even had to play them under Rowett at home, how unfair is that when so many teams benefitted from a useless Gianfranco Zola side?

If Blackburn wanted to stay up they should have won more games instead of looking at others to do the work for them. They were s**t and rightly got relegated for it.