Hudds to hand 'arry a lifeline?

[Bwian]

It is just fake outrage because people don't like the Huddersfield manager after he made some comments in the paper about Brighton

You have so many better things to do that you joined in on this thread about an hour before I did?

We are not talking about feeble "fit and proper" tests, we are talking about the teams being put out onto the pitch. Huddersfield lacked integrity by playing a massively inferior side making ten changes. That is completely unfair on the other teams at the bottom - it really is that simple.

Unless you're this Spurs fan.

 

[seagulls4ever]

It is just fake outrage because people don't like the Huddersfield manager after he made some comments in the paper about Brighton

 

[pasty]

Lets turn the tables a little. Hypothetically lets say Brum were mid table safe and waiting for the season to finish, and fielded a massively changed/under-strength side and got spanked by Huddersfield, who by virtue of that win, overtook us in 2nd place with 1 game to go. Would those defending Huddersfield in this situation feel the same about Birmingham in that hypothetical one?

 

[Easy 10]

I really don't want Harry Redknapp to come and be hailed as a Birmingham Saviour over a 3 game period.

That said, Forrest and Blackburn are not in relegation trouble based on one match that neither of them even played in when Huddersfield rested a lot of their players.

Whoever goes down will go down over a 46 game season based on their own performances

This is perfectly true of course. But it does leave something of a sour taste when a team that is playing what is (for them) a dead rubber decides to go and gift another team the points, right at the sharp end of the season, in a CRUCIAL match.

 

[hans kraay fan club]

On the plus side, of course, despite Huddersfield's shittery, Birmingham could well STILL drop.


Brentford V Blackburn Rovers
Bristol City V Birmingham
Forest V Ipswich

Forest and Blackburn both win their winnable matches, and Birmingham must win theirs. A draw would not do them.


20 Birmingham City -20 50
21 Nottingham Forest -13 48
--------------------------------------------------------------
22 Blackburn Rovers -14 48

 

[El Presidente]

I've read that four times now, and I don't see how it relates to the B'ham v Hudds thing in any way. Am I missing something?

I suspect not!

The point I (clearly clumsily and inelegantly) was trying to make is that managers put out weakened teams for their own benefit. The wider interests of potential implications for other teams not involved in the contest does not enter their thought process.

If, for example, Huddersfield had been playing against Norwich or another team who were mid table, would that have made it more acceptable?

Wagner could have put out a full strength team against Birmingham, and they could have gone through the motions, effectively saving themselves for the playoffs, and the result could have been the same. I would have hoped, for example, that the Albion would have put on a better performance against Bristol City last weekend had promotion, rather than the Championship trophy, been the prize.

Blackburn and Forest are not in relegation danger due to Huddersfield, but down to their own poor results for the last 9-10 months.

 

[El Presidente]

This is perfectly true of course. But it does leave something of a sour taste when a team that is playing what is (for them) a dead rubber decides to go and gift another team the points, right at the sharp end of the season, in a CRUCIAL match.

The problem is, the match was not crucial to Huddersfield.

It *could* be argued that the match at the Amex last Saturday was crucial to Bristol City, and little more than cherry on the icing for the Albion. A number of our players had fairly poor performances by their standards.

 

[Bozza]

I suspect not!

The point I (clearly clumsily and inelegantly) was trying to make is that managers put out weakened teams for their own benefit. The wider interests of potential implications for other teams not involved in the contest does not enter their thought process.

If, for example, Huddersfield had been playing against Norwich or another team who were mid table, would that have made it more acceptable?

All other things being equal - yes it would, frankly.

Wagner could have put out a full strength team against Birmingham, and they could have gone through the motions, effectively saving themselves for the playoffs, and the result could have been the same. I would have hoped, for example, that the Albion would have put on a better performance against Bristol City last weekend had promotion, rather than the Championship trophy, been the prize.

Blackburn and Forest are not in relegation danger due to Huddersfield, but down to their own poor results for the last 9-10 months.

9-10 months playing against full strength sides. Why should a side be all but gifted c6% of their points total, when others are not?

No three points is worth any more than any other, of course, but the implications of 0,1 or 3 points become far more evident at the sharp end of the season.

To my mind, Wagner and Huddersfield have damaged the integrity of the competition. I completely understand why he did what he did, of course. We all lived through last season where the Albion were cracking on at 110% whilst Wednesday's best players chilled out whilst waiting for the play-offs to come around.

 

[Marshy]

Just how many changes are acceptable then ?....

Say we did it and made 4 leaving out Dunk, Knockaert, Murray and Stephens....

Now 4 changes isnt that many, and i am sure that number of changes happend quite regular in sides this season.... but it would still significantly effect the potential outcome of the game.

Would a team have the right to complain then... ?

 

[TWOCHOICEStom]

I don't quite know why this thread is descending into all sorts of different scenarios. It happens in the cup, it happens in the league, it happens before Champions League matches. It's a fact of football.

But this is an example of it being used in a worst case IMO. Hudds changed TEN players playing against a team who stood to gain a hell of a lot by winning, putting others firmly in the shit by doing so.

I don't think the league should punish them, but I would find it VERY funny if they BOTTLED promotion with the fully rested team.

 

[El Presidente]

All other things being equal - yes it would, frankly.



9-10 months playing against full strength sides. Why should a side be all but gifted c6% of their points total, when others are not?

No three points is worth any more than any other, of course, but the implications of 0,1 or 3 points before far more evident at the sharp end of the season.

To my mind, Wagner and Huddersfield have damaged the integrity of the competition. I completely understand why he did what he did, of course. We all lived through last season where the Albion were cracking on at 110% whilst Wednesday's best players chilled out whilst waiting for the play-offs to come around.

It worked for Wednesday last season and the EFL did nothing. If they had taken effective sanctions then (as for some bizarre reason, they have for the Checkatrade trophy) perhaps Wagner might have thought twice (although given the potential rewards of promotion he'd probably still reach the same conclusion).

 

[sparkie]

If Huddersfield rested players then I think that's squad management and fair enough.

If they deliberately lost to engineer avoiding Fulham over 2 legs then that's more serious.

Evidence of intention though is not really possible.

 

[El Presidente]

Just how many changes are acceptable then ?....

Say we did it and made 4 leaving out Dunk, Knockaert, Murray and Stephens....

Now 4 changes isnt that many, and i am sure that number of changes happend quite regular in sides this season.... but it would still significantly effect the potential outcome of the game.

Would a team have the right to complain then... ?

We made five changes for the match at Norwich, mainly due to the players who were dropped failing a breathaliser though on the Friday.

 

[Bozza]

It worked for Wednesday last season and the EFL did nothing. If they had taken effective sanctions then (as for some bizarre reason, they have for the Checkatrade trophy) perhaps Wagner might have thought twice (although given the potential rewards of promotion he'd probably still reach the same conclusion).

But Wednesday's changes only affected them - they impacted their own chances of accruing points and it made little difference as to what their opposition gained or didn't gain as a consequence.

Huddersfield changes impacted all other clubs involved in the relegation dogfight.

 

[El Presidente]

If Huddersfield rested players then I think that's squad management and fair enough.

If they deliberately lost to engineer avoiding Fulham over 2 legs then that's more serious.

Evidence of intention though is not really possible.

With six points to play for there were still a number of eventualities prior to the matches last Saturday.

Fulham's form hasn't been quite as amazing as some have made out in the second half of the season though.

 

[El Presidente]

But Wednesday's changes only affected them - they impacted their own chances of accruing points and it made little difference as to what their opposition gained or didn't gain as a consequence.

Huddersfield changes impacted all other clubs involved in the relegation dogfight.

Agree entirely. I'm not saying what they did was ethical or honourable, but I'm not surprised it happened.

 

[SAC]

I don't quite know why this thread is descending into all sorts of different scenarios. It happens in the cup, it happens in the league, it happens before Champions League matches. It's a fact of football.

But this is an example of it being used in a worst case IMO. Hudds changed TEN players playing against a team who stood to gain a hell of a lot by winning, putting others firmly in the shit by doing so.

I don't think the league should punish them, but I would find it VERY funny if they BOTTLED promotion with the fully rested team.

I wouldn't put them as favourites to go up now so it will be difficult to determine if they bottled it or were beaten by a better side. So long as they don't have to rely on penalties I think Fulham will go up. Does it really matter if they play them in the semi final or the final?

 

[Creaky]

But Wednesday's changes only affected them - they impacted their own chances of accruing points and it made little difference as to what their opposition gained or didn't gain as a consequence.

Huddersfield changes impacted all other clubs involved in the relegation dogfight.

That's the same argument used regarding 'weak' team selection for cup games.

It's not the case though - it not only devalues one competition it also gives them an advantage in another one or against other teams in the same competition - isn't that the whole point of resting key players?

It's either 'OK' to rest players or it isn't.

 

[dadams2k11]

Can't see why people are getting their knickers in a twist. It don't effect us we are Premier League.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

The Football League have contacted Huddersfield for their observations.

http://www.efl.com/news/article/2016/efl-statement-birmingham-city-v-huddersfield-town-3702628.aspx