Play the same strongest first 11 for all 4 dead rubbers and wait for the injuries to pile up, then play the b team in the important final for lack of personnel and lose. Thats obviously what every other team in the league would do isnt it, according to their fans?
Could United be punished for fielding a weakened team?
- Thread starter 032Devil
- Start date
Seriously stupid move by the PL.
Not sure what they were thinking. Are they trying to punish the fans or the club for what happened at the protest? It looks like a bit of both.
But whatever the reason, ultimately PL fault. They let this happen. Cant then go on and punish united again.
Also, might have been a weakened team, but the big guns came on during the match. We could have come away with a point and were in the match for large portions of it.
Re fielding a weak team for Leicester and possibly a stronger team for the scousers, i honesty believe Ole puts out teams that he believes can go on and get a result against both. Liverpool deserves more respect as theyre form is on the up and Leicester got demolished by Newcastle. Our so called weakened team should have done better against Leicester. Liverpool will be much more difficult and therefore deserves a stronger squad. All on the backdrop of having to rotate everyone.
Not sure what they were thinking. Are they trying to punish the fans or the club for what happened at the protest? It looks like a bit of both.
But whatever the reason, ultimately PL fault. They let this happen. Cant then go on and punish united again.
Also, might have been a weakened team, but the big guns came on during the match. We could have come away with a point and were in the match for large portions of it.
Re fielding a weak team for Leicester and possibly a stronger team for the scousers, i honesty believe Ole puts out teams that he believes can go on and get a result against both. Liverpool deserves more respect as theyre form is on the up and Leicester got demolished by Newcastle. Our so called weakened team should have done better against Leicester. Liverpool will be much more difficult and therefore deserves a stronger squad. All on the backdrop of having to rotate everyone.
Last edited:
If anything, the media praised it. Double standards as always.
What is the point of a squad list if you cannot use the entire squad?
Prove it
Media will be after us with their pitchforks because it’s us. Unfortunately the FA hate us too so they’ll hand us the heaviest punishment they possibly can. Meanwhile both sing the praises of City and Liverpool constantly for doing the same. We apologise for being the most successful club in the world - now please leave us alone.
I remember that twins, Gibson, O'Shea match and fearing a mauling. It was hilarious that we coasted through it to an easy win.
Trevor sinclair is a moron. See how he'd cope with that many games in that short space of time. Dont want it to happen in the future? Then drop the sodding league cup and cut the PL to 18 teams. Less games overall.
Really?
Don't need any explanations at all and it's pretty funny when Chelsea fans talk about it.
Not to mention its a hypocrisy at its finest.
Chelsea and Liverpool would do it.
But he WAS your manager, just like Mata et al are all Man Utd squad players.Could argue were were deducted points and that's punishment enoughI did not rate Lampard as a manager by the way and again was able to view him objectively as a manager without being tinted by him as a player so you're barking up the wrong tree if it was an intended jibe him being a poor manager.
Your manager wasn't good enough and you lost points, our squad players weren't good enough to beat Leicester and we lost points. Why do you think we should be double punished, but you shouldn't?
So some people wanted us to do what exactly? Play full teams in all games, till players get injured and then make changes? Or to do more rotation in both games (Villa and Leicester), but not to many in any of the games so the squad stays strong, regadles of what it would bring to our team (maybe lose both games, as it is not like we have beaten Villa by "four goals to null"), and then to rotate exactly the same for the game against Liverpool? Oh yeah, also to forget the EL final we have coming up.
We had to win the Villa game and then the West Ham result made us qualified for CL. Now we can start doing things more tacticaly. We shouldn't even brought the players in we did.
We had to win the Villa game and then the West Ham result made us qualified for CL. Now we can start doing things more tacticaly. We shouldn't even brought the players in we did.
It’s ethically wrong to make players subject for overexploitation and high risk for injuries.
Trevor Sinclair
You have a squad for a reason. Rotation has always been part of the game. The league is over 38 matches and we did our job nice and early and could “afford” to rotate against an impossible reschedule. Where do they draw the line in future? You can only make 5-6 changes before it’s considered “fine worthy”? And as someone mention, city has an amazing squad due to their spending. So when they ring 8-9 changes, it’s not considered a “weakened team”?
What was the other option, to play our strongest team 3 times in 5 days? Let's not be silly! Ole did the right thing and every manager, regardless of the squad, would have done the same.
Anyway, wasn't there a rule change which allows managers to use the 25 man squad any way they se fit? So the only question could be asked about Ellanga and maybe Diallo, but that is not enough players, plus the changes we have made.
Nice to see a bit of balance to that Sinclair twat. He could hardly string a sentence together and totally absolves City of the same thing because reasons.
It is. I didn't realise McCoist was that sensible. I suppose he's been a manager a a high level though.
There are premier league rules that state you have to give a list of players - eligible players played in the match, end of.
I think we need to decouple the postponed match and the resting of players. Clearly the former caused the latter - but put that to the side, and you can have a rational discussion.
Just imagine Shaw, Rashford and Maguire playing 3 games in 5 days and then all getting injured and missing the Euros.
as they said in the video, City did exactly the same thing, nothing is said, because of the perceived quality of player - yet they lost to a team below Leicester!
The tv companies wanted the Liverpool game fixture to suit them. It’s on those cnuts, if anyone wants to point fingers. We were fielding a weaker team one way or the other. Pool or the foxes. That’s what happens you force a team to play 4 games in a week. You play a 1st team squad that’s running on fumes or you play the 2nd string. Either way, it’s weakened team. If Liverpool and West Ham want to moan about one game that we got beat in being responsible for where they are in the league…oh wait, it’s not them moaning. It’s the cnuts that work of the tv companies that are moaning. Funny that.
You can't give schedule like that to any club & imagine that they won't heavily rotate players. Man Utd were able to rotate & still field a fairly respectable team.
Dear Mr Trevor Sinclair
Here is your Spot the Difference test
31 Ederson
2 Walker
5 Stones
3 Rúben Dias
11 Zinchenko
26 Mahrez
25 Fernandinho
8 Gündogan
47 Foden sub Agüero 85'
17 De Bruyne sub Gabriel Jesus 82'
20 Bernardo Silva sub Sterling 82'
31 Ederson
3 Rúben Dias
14 Laporte
6 Aké
16 Rodri
27 Cancelo
21 Torres sub Gündogan 71'
7 Sterling
22 Mendy sub Zinchenko 80'
9 Gabriel Jesus
10 Agüero sub Foden 70'
[copied from BBC website]
20 different players, that is. Only 2 of them played the whole of both matches
Here is your Spot the Difference test
31 Ederson
2 Walker
5 Stones
3 Rúben Dias
11 Zinchenko
26 Mahrez
25 Fernandinho
8 Gündogan
47 Foden sub Agüero 85'
17 De Bruyne sub Gabriel Jesus 82'
20 Bernardo Silva sub Sterling 82'
31 Ederson
3 Rúben Dias
14 Laporte
6 Aké
16 Rodri
27 Cancelo
21 Torres sub Gündogan 71'
7 Sterling
22 Mendy sub Zinchenko 80'
9 Gabriel Jesus
10 Agüero sub Foden 70'
[copied from BBC website]
20 different players, that is. Only 2 of them played the whole of both matches
Forget it, clearly the guy is wumming at this point. They will respond with whatever bs that supports their argument and rile you up.
Even if you mention how Jose went with a completely changed team vs Pool in 2014 when they played someone like Kalas in defence, look how they will respond to support their claims. Had liverpool won that game, it could have negatively impacted city who were also in the title race but you won't hear them talking about how morally wrong that was.
You should be able to use any player you have registered in your 25 man squad as that it what it’s for after all...
At the end of the day, it's exactly this.
No chance, will open up a massive can of worms as other teams, even as recent as Manchester City, and ourselves have fielded massively changed teams for EPL games, managers have a squad of 25 to choose from and rightfully hold all the cards.
If this were to lead to anything there would be all sorts of cases in future as a result of it, all the noise is because Liverpool have potentially been affected by it, if you had won the game or if you was playing someone like Fulham, no one would have batted an eyelid.
I think what is happening here is to try and make your manager field a weakened team in your next game as a reaction.
If this were to lead to anything there would be all sorts of cases in future as a result of it, all the noise is because Liverpool have potentially been affected by it, if you had won the game or if you was playing someone like Fulham, no one would have batted an eyelid.
I think what is happening here is to try and make your manager field a weakened team in your next game as a reaction.
As a follow on from the City comparison, its an interesting one where Sinclair (or supposedly the FA) are to be the judges of who is a good player and who is not. If I am Greenwood, Bailly, De Gea etc then I dont think I would be too impressed with the notion that I am not good enough to be picked to play a match, and that by picking me it is some sort of insult to the integrity of the game.
scoursers dropped 14 points to Fulham, Brighton and Burnley... but yes it was us rotating our squad in the middle of a stretch where we play 5 games in 12 days that's gonna stop them from getting top 4
agreed. That’s should be the end of it and we shouldn’t even be having this conversation.
now Klopp has come out and said he would have done the same thing - it should dampen some of the media idiots.
actually listened to Sinclair say we should be deducted 6 points. What an absolute cnut. He should be taken off the air for promulgating such a ridiculous view.
i love debate, but obviously he’s got an axe to grind. I can’t understand why someone didn’t ask him whether he would be happy to, and be able to perform at his best if he had to play 3 games in 5 days.
just remembered the cretin used to play for City. That explains it. Twat.
Chelsea just made 7 changes and lost. Liverpool have a chance again
Just to pick up on something that was said in the Talksport video.
The detractors expect the players to play 3 games in 5 days, the same time period the governing body suggests players should have to recover from 1 game.
@BullhitterChelsea just made 7 changes and lost. Liverpool have a chance again
7 changes is this true?
Doesn't seem morally right to me that.
No. The other clubs need to suck it up. We got forced into a very unusual game schedule (regardless of whether that was self-inflicted or not), and it's up to that club/manager which players they want to field for a given game. End.
The difference is that City, like the medias beloved Liverpool, are considered to be untouchable; the media who are pushing the points deduction are really enjoying seeing us in trouble since SAF retired and the recent SL spat has made them hate us even more, despite the facy City and Liverpool had signed up to it. Its revenge, sheer nasty spite.
Dont forget, the Liverpool match was postponed by deluded supporters who seemed to think they can change things, well most believed that Im sure but no doubt there were the usual idiots there intent on causing trouble.
My God the double standards. Why was it ok for ManCity to change 9 players vs Chelsea?
“Man City have that privilege. They’ve already made it. “
United had also made it. City’s match against Chelsea was just as important for the top-4 fight.