[cite]Posted By: bibble[/cite]I think Holloway is a breath of fresh air in a stale league.
After us I find myself looking for Blackpolls result, I hope they stay up.
Indeed. I can't help but make comparisons to our first season up there. Patronised to hell by the media, everyone's favourites to go down and never given any credit for what they achieve, the spin being on how poorly the established (bigger) side must have played to drop points against them. Wish them well but I fear that they'll end up with the same result as our first season once the 'squad' factor starts to come into play...although the second 11 did play rather well last night tbf.
Love Holloway if only for being prepared to say something different!
The point of the rule is to stop managers picking and choosing which games they think they can win and only bothering with those. I don't believe Holloway was doing this (Blackpool's performance justified his picks) but Mccarthy last season almost certainly was. They purposefully put out a drastically weakened side and basically rolled over for United last season.
The Blackpool situation is more complicated as they are mostly journeyman who are greater than the sum of their parts, and thus when Holloway says 'I don't know who would win in the first XI v second XI' I believe him. It may well be that he truly has a squad where there isn't a set first XI, and this genuinely respresented his attempt to win the game as best he could. The test will be how many of those players stay in the side for the West Ham game.
The problem for the league is they need some way to quantify the rule to catch situations like the Mccarthy one, and this has been flagged up because Blackpool made TEN changes. Not many sides even make that many when they put out a second string in cup competitions. This isn't just rotating or mixing it up, this is entirely dispensing with the first team, and for the vast majority of clubs that means not taking the fixture seriously.
If we equate this to one of the big clubs, it's like Man United dropping the likes of Ferdinand, Vidic, Evra, Rooney, Fletcher, Nani, Berbatov, Scholes, Valencia and Carrick for a game without any injuries or suspensions. Does anyone honestly believe that in the light of the league stepping in on the Wolves situation, this wouldn't be questioned if it happened?
And I think the disgrace of the Liverpool situation is that they weren't fined, not that Wolves were.
[cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]And what exactly did the League do when Liverpool made a similar number of changes and lost to Fulham which helped them to stay up. Absolutely nothing. But when Wolves and Blackpool do it somehow it's different.
[cite]Posted By: pilchard[/cite]
[cite]Posted By: Addick Addict[/cite]And what exactly did the League do when Liverpool made a similar number of changes and lost to Fulham which helped them to stay up. Absolutely nothing. But when Wolves and Blackpool do it somehow it's different.
Spot on AA, Fulham were down in the muck until Liverpool handed them a lifeline that season and nothing was said, Blackpool and Wolves make changes to their teams and they are bollocked eternally for it- the luvvies of Liverpool and their ilk will always get off scot free. Remember poor old Swindon back in 1990, imagine that happening to one of the big boys![/quote
That finally broke us that year.I'll never forgive Liverpool for that.They dealt us a cruel blow that day.
[cite]Posted By: Sussex_Addick[/cite]If we equate this to one of the big clubs, it's like Man United dropping the likes of Ferdinand, Vidic, Evra, Rooney, Fletcher, Nani, Berbatov, Scholes, Valencia and Carrick for a game without any injuries or suspensions. Does anyone honestly believe that in the light of the league stepping in on the Wolves situation, this wouldn't be questioned if it happened?
Like Arsenal do in the carling cup!
I think Holloway is right, they have a squad and they can play who they like, when they like.
[cite]Posted By: Sussex_Addick[/cite]If we equate this to one of the big clubs, it's like Man United dropping the likes of Ferdinand, Vidic, Evra, Rooney, Fletcher, Nani, Berbatov, Scholes, Valencia and Carrick for a game without any injuries or suspensions. Does anyone honestly believe that in the light of the league stepping in on the Wolves situation, this wouldn't be questioned if it happened?
Like Arsenal do in the carling cup!
I think Holloway is right, they have a squad and they can play who they like, when they like.
Cups are different. Your actions only affect you. If you play a vastly weakened team in the cup all you do is get knocked out, in the league you're handing three points to the other side that could give them an advantage over other teams.
I have no doubt that if Arsenal played a load of kids in a league fixture there would be questions asked, especially if they lost the game.
[cite]Posted By: dabos[/cite]Putting out a weakened team for one game has so much less of an impact than being allowed to loan players to teams in the same division.
Take Man City loaning Joe Hart to Birmingham last season. Man City were able to have an impact on every single game Birmingham played in, by effectively having one of their players playing in that game. And to make it even worse, City were allowed to have 2 easier games than anyone else against Birmingham because they had to use their reserve keeper.
By contrast, Blackpool have influenced ONE game, a game which they nearly got something out of, by utilising their squad like any sensible manager would. They've done nothing wrong.
I agree the loan thing is a problem but it's kind of a separate issue. They're both problems, you don't have to choose one over the other.
[cite]Posted By: Sussex_Addick[/cite]If we equate this to one of the big clubs, it's like Man United dropping the likes of Ferdinand, Vidic, Evra, Rooney, Fletcher, Nani, Berbatov, Scholes, Valencia and Carrick for a game without any injuries or suspensions. Does anyone honestly believe that in the light of the league stepping in on the Wolves situation, this wouldn't be questioned if it happened?
Like Arsenal do in the carling cup!
I think Holloway is right, they have a squad and they can play who they like, when they like.
The Carling Cup is nothing to do with The Premier League.
It is a tricky one, because all the people saying managers should be able to play who they want with no comeback, wouldn't still be saying it if CAFC had been relegated from The Prem, due to our nearest rivals beating a reserve team.
Ian Holloway is a loose cannon who's struck lucky at Blackpool after his failures at several clubs. I'll be surprised if he is still the Blackpool manager at Christmas. The BBC made the mistake of having him as a pundit/studio clown a couple of years ago and he has come to regard himself as a sage/comedian/tactical genius and a believer in his own publicity, a 'Phil Brown' for the 2010/2011 season. To my mind he was neither funny nor apt in his comments then and he's neither funny nor to be taken seriously now. His semi hysterical outbursts over the past few weeks indicate a man who is losing the plot and has a thin hold on reality. Apart from that, I quite like him.
If the Premier League disciplinary board show any consistency, Blackpool will be punished for fielding a weakened team at Villa. It will be interesting to see if Holloway carries out his threat to resign when the PL punishment is announced. I hope that he doesn't, as I fear he will be re-recruited by Radio 5 Live, a staion which has undergone far too much dumbing down over the past few months.
as long as he doesn't moan when a relegation rival picks up 3 points against someone elses "alleged" weakened team near the end of the season then it's ok for hollerway to rant !
struck lucky what a load of bollox he got tiny blackpool up to the premier and add that he also has them playing nice football which was something we done on rare rare occasions under curbs
[cite]Posted By: falconwood_1[/cite]Holloway's been bleating off a bit too much recently and will cop some back soon.
I tend to agree. The "some complete person" interview was cringeworthy. At some stage he'll move from being 'a colourful character' to being 'annoying'
The rule is stupid and only affects the smaller clubs, but Holloway can have no excuses. At least when McCarthy did it, it was almost unheard of to punish a manager for picking a weak team.
I agree, he needs to be careful otherwise he will end up being a self-parody and nobody will listen to him any more.
don't really care if he upsets any of the premier league hierarchy. i think he's got a great attitude. it is 'his' team selection and nobody else. if he picks a crap team and he loses games he's out of a job. i doubt very much that his intention is to lose any games this season, but such as the task blackpool have ahead of them, maybe switching players to keep them fit is necessary. at the end of the day all of his squad will be on premiership money so should be played given an opportunity. i like his rants and mick mccarthy's too for that matter. i'd love to see blackpool and wolves stay up, to the detriment of some so called 'big clubs'.
the thing that makes me laugh is that the rule E20 states that each club must pick their strongest team available. The thing is though when Man U or Chelsea rotate thier squads there are always players in the team that despite being great players aint actually the strongest player they have available but you don't see them getting fined week in week out.
The rule is what's at fault as all these incidents should be judged seperately but they're not.
[cite]Posted By: buckshee[/cite]the thing that makes me laugh is that the rule E20 states that each club must pick their strongest team available. The thing is though when Man U or Chelsea rotate thier squads there are always players in the team that despite being great players aint actually the strongest player they have available but you don't see them getting fined week in week out.
The rule is what's at fault as all these incidents should be judged seperately but they're not.
There's been just two incidents of this debate in the last couple of years, and both only because the manager's made an astonishing number of changes.
Do Man United or Chelsea ever replace their entire team? Would you ever see every single one of Chelsea's first teamers out of the first XI without injuries and suspensions? Rotating a few players is fine, and Wolves and Blackpool have done it and will do it over the course of the season without anyone batting an eyelid. It's misrepresenting the situation to say this is just a question of rotation.
[cite]Posted By: Saga Lout[/cite]The point is it's a squad game now.
So if the manager is not free to pick his team will the FA be picking all the teams for all the clubs in the Premiership?
Yes it's a squad game, but the point is to not to make it 'first team for games we think we can win and reserves for the others'. The rule becomes particularly important later in the season where one side's dead rubber is another side's relegation battle or title push.
And your last point is a very bizarre extrapolation. It's obviously not a case of picking the team, but it is trying to make sure that the manager genuinely is trying to win the game, and ditching the first team is a warning sign that he may not be. As I said above, the Holloway situation is a difficult one, but I have no doubts that Mccarthy threw in the towell last season at Old Trafford and handed a United side reeling from a 3-0 thumping by Fulham an easy 3 points.
I love a bit of 'suits ruining football'/'all pandering to the top 4' premiership bashing as much as anyone, but I can see why such a rule exists and I sympathise with it.
[cite]Posted By: Sussex_Addick[/cite]Yes it's a squad game, but the point is to not to make it 'first team for games we think we can win and reserves for the others'. The rule becomes particularly important later in the season where one side's dead rubber is another side's relegation battle or title push.
And your last point is a very bizarre extrapolation. It's obviously not a case of picking the team, but it is trying to make sure that the manager genuinely is trying to win the game, and ditching the first team is a warning sign that he may not be. As I said above, the Holloway situation is a difficult one, but I have no doubts that Mccarthy threw in the towell last season at Old Trafford and handed a United side reeling from a 3-0 thumping by Fulham an easy 3 points.
I love a bit of 'suits ruining football'/'all pandering to the top 4' premiership bashing as much as anyone, but I can see why such a rule exists and I sympathise with it.
"Bizarre extrapolation"? I was just trying to illustrate the difficulty of having rule E20 in the modern game. As someone above says, the squad are presumably all on premiership wages and all presumably have been given a squad number because they expect at some point to feature in the team.
I agree though that 10 changes does send out signals and I would be the first to get upset if I felt Charlton had been hard done by because another team threw in the towel. But then I think "so how many changes are acceptable? 8? 7?" - if the FA have a number in mind maybe the rule should be amended then all managers would know where they stand.
[cite]Posted By: Saga Lout[/cite]But then I think "so how many changes are acceptable? 8? 7?" - if the FA have a number in mind maybe the rule should be amended then all managers would know where they stand.
Ah good point, Mr Lout.
Perhaps the Premier League authorities should look first at the Johnny's Paint Pot competition........ and insist a manager names a minimum of 6 of those who've made the most appearances?
That would still give a Prem manager, the chance to make sweeping changes - resting those that apparently need resting.
Then nobody could whinge, because then the ruling would be fixed to apply to all 20 Prem teams, from top to bottom.
[cite]Posted By: Lincsaddick[/cite]Ian Holloway is a loose cannon who's struck lucky at Blackpool after his failures at several clubs. I'll be surprised if he is still the Blackpool manager at Christmas.
The BBC made the mistake of having him as a pundit/studio clown a couple of years ago and he has come to regard himself as a sage/comedian/tactical genius and a believer in his own publicity, a 'Phil Brown' for the 2010/2011 season. To my mind he was neither funny nor apt in his comments then and he's neither funny nor to be taken seriously now. His semi hysterical outbursts over the past few weeks indicate a man who is losing the plot and has a thin hold on reality. Apart from that, I quite like him.
Did really well at Plymouth not so good at Leicester but could not get players in that he wanted. Has brought out the best with his players especially Charlie Adam.. Brilliant man manager if a little excitable.
Comments
After us I find myself looking for Blackpolls result, I hope they stay up.
Indeed. I can't help but make comparisons to our first season up there. Patronised to hell by the media, everyone's favourites to go down and never given any credit for what they achieve, the spin being on how poorly the established (bigger) side must have played to drop points against them. Wish them well but I fear that they'll end up with the same result as our first season once the 'squad' factor starts to come into play...although the second 11 did play rather well last night tbf.
Love Holloway if only for being prepared to say something different!
The point of the rule is to stop managers picking and choosing which games they think they can win and only bothering with those. I don't believe Holloway was doing this (Blackpool's performance justified his picks) but Mccarthy last season almost certainly was. They purposefully put out a drastically weakened side and basically rolled over for United last season.
The Blackpool situation is more complicated as they are mostly journeyman who are greater than the sum of their parts, and thus when Holloway says 'I don't know who would win in the first XI v second XI' I believe him. It may well be that he truly has a squad where there isn't a set first XI, and this genuinely respresented his attempt to win the game as best he could. The test will be how many of those players stay in the side for the West Ham game.
The problem for the league is they need some way to quantify the rule to catch situations like the Mccarthy one, and this has been flagged up because Blackpool made TEN changes. Not many sides even make that many when they put out a second string in cup competitions. This isn't just rotating or mixing it up, this is entirely dispensing with the first team, and for the vast majority of clubs that means not taking the fixture seriously.
If we equate this to one of the big clubs, it's like Man United dropping the likes of Ferdinand, Vidic, Evra, Rooney, Fletcher, Nani, Berbatov, Scholes, Valencia and Carrick for a game without any injuries or suspensions. Does anyone honestly believe that in the light of the league stepping in on the Wolves situation, this wouldn't be questioned if it happened?
And I think the disgrace of the Liverpool situation is that they weren't fined, not that Wolves were.
Like Arsenal do in the carling cup!
I think Holloway is right, they have a squad and they can play who they like, when they like.
Cups are different. Your actions only affect you. If you play a vastly weakened team in the cup all you do is get knocked out, in the league you're handing three points to the other side that could give them an advantage over other teams.
I have no doubt that if Arsenal played a load of kids in a league fixture there would be questions asked, especially if they lost the game.
I agree the loan thing is a problem but it's kind of a separate issue. They're both problems, you don't have to choose one over the other.
The Carling Cup is nothing to do with The Premier League.
It is a tricky one, because all the people saying managers should be able to play who they want with no comeback, wouldn't still be saying it if CAFC had been relegated from The Prem, due to our nearest rivals beating a reserve team.
The BBC made the mistake of having him as a pundit/studio clown a couple of years ago and he has come to regard himself as a sage/comedian/tactical genius and a believer in his own publicity, a 'Phil Brown' for the 2010/2011 season. To my mind he was neither funny nor apt in his comments then and he's neither funny nor to be taken seriously now. His semi hysterical outbursts over the past few weeks indicate a man who is losing the plot and has a thin hold on reality. Apart from that, I quite like him.
If the Premier League disciplinary board show any consistency, Blackpool will be punished for fielding a weakened team at Villa. It will be interesting to see if Holloway carries out his threat to resign when the PL punishment is announced. I hope that he doesn't, as I fear he will be re-recruited by Radio 5 Live, a staion which has undergone far too much dumbing down over the past few months.
So if the manager is not free to pick his team will the FA be picking all the teams for all the clubs in the Premiership?
I agree, he needs to be careful otherwise he will end up being a self-parody and nobody will listen to him any more.
The rule is what's at fault as all these incidents should be judged seperately but they're not.
There's been just two incidents of this debate in the last couple of years, and both only because the manager's made an astonishing number of changes.
Do Man United or Chelsea ever replace their entire team? Would you ever see every single one of Chelsea's first teamers out of the first XI without injuries and suspensions? Rotating a few players is fine, and Wolves and Blackpool have done it and will do it over the course of the season without anyone batting an eyelid. It's misrepresenting the situation to say this is just a question of rotation.
Yes it's a squad game, but the point is to not to make it 'first team for games we think we can win and reserves for the others'. The rule becomes particularly important later in the season where one side's dead rubber is another side's relegation battle or title push.
And your last point is a very bizarre extrapolation. It's obviously not a case of picking the team, but it is trying to make sure that the manager genuinely is trying to win the game, and ditching the first team is a warning sign that he may not be. As I said above, the Holloway situation is a difficult one, but I have no doubts that Mccarthy threw in the towell last season at Old Trafford and handed a United side reeling from a 3-0 thumping by Fulham an easy 3 points.
I love a bit of 'suits ruining football'/'all pandering to the top 4' premiership bashing as much as anyone, but I can see why such a rule exists and I sympathise with it.
"Bizarre extrapolation"? I was just trying to illustrate the difficulty of having rule E20 in the modern game. As someone above says, the squad are presumably all on premiership wages and all presumably have been given a squad number because they expect at some point to feature in the team.
I agree though that 10 changes does send out signals and I would be the first to get upset if I felt Charlton had been hard done by because another team threw in the towel. But then I think "so how many changes are acceptable? 8? 7?" - if the FA have a number in mind maybe the rule should be amended then all managers would know where they stand.
Ah good point, Mr Lout.
Perhaps the Premier League authorities should look first at the Johnny's Paint Pot competition........ and insist a manager names a minimum of 6 of those who've made the most appearances?
That would still give a Prem manager, the chance to make sweeping changes - resting those that apparently need resting.
Then nobody could whinge, because then the ruling would be fixed to apply to all 20 Prem teams, from top to bottom.
couldnt disagree more
Brilliant man manager if a little excitable.