I am suffering from an Ashtonesque ankle injury so was unable to play football tonight but still went along for the post match beers and curry and became embroiled in a discussion about the Wolves "penalty" for playing a reserve team at Old Trafford. Out of the discussion, involving rotation and bringing through youngsters, came the very sensible suggestion that, apart from a major injury crisis, no team should be allowed to change more than 3 players from the starting 11 from any one game to the next.
What a simple and effective rule! Yes Manchester United could still rest Giggs, Rooney and Ferdinand, but they would still have to pick 8 first teamers, even if they have already secured the Premiership and are playing a "means nothing" game (to them) at the end of the season. If the same rule were carried over to the cups, we would remove the nonsense of reserve teams being fielded, which is now seriously devaluing both the League and F.A Cups.
Wenger wouldn't like it, of course, but sod him. The game is greater than Arsene Wenger and Arsenal. We need to secure the integrity of competitions and what Wolves did was a flagrant abuse of the rules. A maximum "rotation" of three would enable clubs to develop young talent, rest stars, and still not so devalue an individual contest as to devalue the integrity of the competition as a whole.
It wasn't my idea but it seems like a simple and effective rule change. What's your opinion?
11 comments:
Having coveted the FA & Premier League with your thoughts, what were their response? Have you emailed the chairmen of all the Premier League and gathered their ideas? Or are you just chatting shit yet again?
Ashtonesque ankle injury! Were you training for England at the time or did you trip over the pile of sticky tissues at the side of your bed? If only you'd now retire and put us West Ham fans out of our misery!
I've been reluctantly reading your posts, purely because for some reason they show up on newsnow... and i couldn't not post a comment about the latest pile of dog sh1t3 you have put on here.
Once again you are talking sh1t!
What Wolves did was perfectly within their rights as a football club with a squad of 20 something i guess.... Mick McCarthy obviously thought a full strength team weren't going to get anything from the game, so fielded a weakened team to rest his first teamers so they were fully fit for the next game...
While i would be a little annoyed if i had paid money to see the game, i'd accept it... at the end of the day, for a team like Wolves, your number one priority is to stay up... and by resting the first teamers, in theory, it was a good idea.... whether it worked or not is irrelevant now. But to suggest that you can only make 3 changes each week has got to be one of the stupidest ideas i've heard in a long time... but i am not surprised by you so called "Hammersfan" - yet again, you are making yourself out to be a pr1ck... without any knowledge of football, or the goings on in a club.
Please put thousands of people out of their misery and stop letting newsnow use your sh1t3 blogs.
I suppose you'd want to introduce a rule that you can't pass to many times around the opposition as it gives you an unfair advantage!! (ok, maybe i'm exaggerating there - but i'm only making a point!!)
Coveted 0036? Have we been reading the Bible too much lately? I know I am suggesting a rule change but I'm hardly proposing a new 10 Commandments. I think you meant canvassed! And no, I'm not proposing taking them all on a dib dib dib weekend!
Why would I have a pile of tissues at the side of my bed 0051. Don't judge others by your standards! I have an ankle injury, it is YOUR wrist that is sprained!
Tommy Inaweofmesome, try posting when sober!
What??? Sober??? Inaweofyousome!?!?!?
Who do you think you are?? Some all seeing, all knowing c0ck!?
Going to the game with somebody elses' season ticket card coz he can't go, will they allow me at the turnstiles?
Alright but from the revelations of players faining injury to have a holiday I would not be suprised if injuries rose 200%. Secondly I wouldn't like to see this restriction because what would then differentiate the Carling Cup from the F.A cup? I also think it is up to the FA to make these competitions more valuable. And thirdly i'm failing to see how this would develop young talent in most teams within the premiership, West Ham and Arsenal may opt to replace 3 players with at least one youngster but most teams with enough depth will have at least 2 Kevin Phillips type players to replace them. I think the FA have alot of cheek to decide which playes are better than which in Wolves team, what if they had drawn with Man United?
And what exactly does this "learned" author thinks constitutes a first teamer?! Don't write about these things loosely! It's okay to talk about it with your mates at the pub but this is utter drivel!!
Elvido, firstly this is not supposed to be high art and secondly, the whole point of the suggestion is that it avoids that question, it simply resticts the number of players who can be rotated. At present, McCarthy can cheat and say, "Who is to say which players are first teamers"; should this rule be introduced, the maximum number of players he could rotate would be three, preventing the cheating. Simples.
TIS, I would allow a fourth sub, if aged under 21. That would encourage managers to ease in young talent once in a winning position.
I think it is a good idea! Clubs that play more games would numerically rotate more often, it is a simple and fair way out of a complex problem
Post a Comment