Blackpool - 25 Grand Fine

[Slim]

You touch on a couple of good points, in a typical 4-4-2 setup it's hard to see our strongest lineup, so essentially Blackpool are being punished for not have 25 players of the same level.

The rule was changed in wording after the Wolves incident and probably because of it.

Lastly, Stuart Pearce fielded a weaker team vs West Ham I believe due to a cup match happening two days later, not even the hint of being fined and this was when we didn't have £100M on the bench. -shudder- Just thought of Pearce with £300M budget. So the Premier League are not even being consistent with their rulings.

[1950]

Maybe it's just a consequence of the power of the bigger clubs that we would get away with it and shit clubs like Blackpool and Wolves suffer but for competitions sake i wholeheartedly agree with the rule. You can't have teams picking and choosing which games to target for points, every single match should be a spectacle for the fans and they should be allowed to expect to see their best team they can slug it out with whoever.

That's quite a short-sighted view of things.

You're limiting the competition down to individual games. What about the season? Trophies & relegation? Surely it's in the interest of competition, if Blackpool, Wolves et al. are allowed to 'concentrate' on the games they think are most important for staying up? Not saying that's the right approach or anything, but it should be allowed.

If it's about spectacles, should there be fines for any sign of negativity? How does one decide whether a team is playing for a draw, not taking any risks or just not capable of threatening the opposition?
You'd also think that a 2-3 decided in the dying minutes was quite the entertaining game.

And fwiw a 'full strength' team can still play worse (deliberately or not) than a team that's weaker on paper.

[Dameerto]

Absolutely pointless naming a 25 man squad if your team choice is going to be vetted and judged on subjective terms by 'the man'.

[Beefymcfc]

It's all a bit hypocritical isn't it. Take the United v Balckpool game for instance, United brought in Smalling for Ferdinand and Gibson for Carrick/Anderson. By the letter of the law, and because of the first half result, it could be argued that United put out a weakened team, not showing enough respect to thier opposition. Then again, you could also say that Blackpool tried to sit back, weaken their team with the subs made and tried to coast it. Yes, I know it's a little far fetched but if the letter of the law is to be applied, weakened teams were used during the game in order to rest other players.

If the rules state you are to pick 25 players to play in the Premier League, then the manager has every right to play any of those 25 players he wants, regardless of age, tactics, formations etc, otherwise the rules should state you play your best 11 players in every game unless they are injured.

Another feable attempt to impose a law that cannot be regulated, and the miniscule fine, in terms of Premier League money, only goes to confirm that they can't really enforce these restrictions on trade.

I wonder what would happen if one of the Blackpool players who played that day went to the courts and stated that he was no longer going to get a game because of the ruling?

[Beefymcfc]

Well, seems he's kept his word and offered his resignation to the Chairman.

[Mike J]

Well, seems he's kept his word and offered his resignation to the Chairman.

because he is an attention seeking little tosser sometimes

[john68]

Apparently, there was a caveat in his thrat to resign...something along the lines of "if the chairman wants me to".
Maybe Olly was not fielding his strongest threat in that statement....should Oysten fine him?

[Beefymcfc]

Apparently, there was a caveat in his thrat to resign...something along the lines of "if the chairman wants me to".
Maybe Olly was not fielding his strongest threat in that statement....should Oysten fine him?

Ha ha ha, it would be funny if Oysten accepted it.

[Fish111]

Well, seems he's kept his word and offered his resignation to the Chairman.

Knowing full well the chairman won't accept it. Typical Holloway, all bluster and no balls. If i were Oyston i'd make the village idiot pay the whole fine himself.