No action against Huddersfield | Vital Football

No action against Huddersfield

T

tombalonga

Vital Newbie
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/40004399

The EFL are not taking any action against Huddersfield for making ten changes against Birmingham.

Can't believe they didn't have a definition of what constitutes full strength, even though the same body seems to have had a definition for the EFL Trophy sufficient enough to fine 12 clubs -
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/nov/16/efl-checkatrade-trophy-under-strength-fines

No doubt that Blackburn (as well as Brum and ourselves) were responsible for being in danger of relegation primarily, but surely the integrity of the competition was still compromised? I personally would never have forgiven Wagner if we had gone down.
 
It's a moral question not a rule based one.

Treat other clubs as you would wish to be treated in the same situation.

Absolutely no need to rest players more than two weeks before the playoffs begin, let alone that many changes.

If you want to do that, go for a meaningless game, not one that affects relegation or promotion.

Same goes for a team in cup final (thinking Cardiff a few years ago) fielding a string against a team fighting for promotion.

I think the club chairmen need to get together and agree on an unwritten rule about this.

If you want to rest players but are playing a meaningful game, then never mind, bad luck- the consequences to you will be tiny compared to the consequenced to others if you mess the team about
 
Hudderfield were probably aware that if they lost Blackburn and Forest would moan, but they didn't care. So whilst you hope that most would respect the integrity of the competition, nothing informal can ever achieve that 100%. Calling Hudderfield immoral from League 1 doesn't much help Blackburn, but a serviceable legal framework/definition (which as the BBC Sport article suggests, they will now come up with) might have prevented it from happening.

Birmingham were sinking like a stone, confidence shot, couldn't buy a win, and the Hudderfield line up that day was probably more important than them getting 'Arry IMO (sparked confidence and gave them a cushion for the last day).
 
All clubs have a deadline by which they name their squads don't they? Now unless they've fielded players that are ineligible to play in that squad and subsequently fielded said players, I fail to see what Huddersfield had done wrong personally. In fact I don't see the case to answer.

You name a squad of say 22 players, a club and coach/manager is entitled to use those 22 players as and when they see fit.

I found it embarrassing that posters on here were actually whining about this in the first place.
 
PVH - 22/5/2017 19:51

All clubs have a deadline by which they name their squads don't they? Now unless they've fielded players that are ineligible to play in that squad and subsequently fielded said players, I fail to see what Huddersfield had done wrong personally. In fact I don't see the case to answer.

You name a squad of say 22 players, a club and coach/manager is entitled to use those 22 players as and when they see fit.

I found it embarrassing that posters on here were actually whining about this in the first place.
Click to expand...

It's a moral question so I don't expect you to get it to be honest
 
It was our fault we were in the shit & id be a lot more sympathetic to our cause of holding a grudge had we not just gone to QPR & rolled over.
 
Pope John XXIII - 22/5/2017 19:53

PVH - 22/5/2017 19:51

All clubs have a deadline by which they name their squads don't they? Now unless they've fielded players that are ineligible to play in that squad and subsequently fielded said players, I fail to see what Huddersfield had done wrong personally. In fact I don't see the case to answer.

You name a squad of say 22 players, a club and coach/manager is entitled to use those 22 players as and when they see fit.

I found it embarrassing that posters on here were actually whining about this in the first place.
Click to expand...

It's a moral question so I don't expect you to get it to be honest
Click to expand...

Was that a comeback?
 
PVH - 22/5/2017 21:57

Pope John XXIII - 22/5/2017 19:53

PVH - 22/5/2017 19:51

All clubs have a deadline by which they name their squads don't they? Now unless they've fielded players that are ineligible to play in that squad and subsequently fielded said players, I fail to see what Huddersfield had done wrong personally. In fact I don't see the case to answer.

You name a squad of say 22 players, a club and coach/manager is entitled to use those 22 players as and when they see fit.

I found it embarrassing that posters on here were actually whining about this in the first place.
Click to expand...

It's a moral question so I don't expect you to get it to be honest
Click to expand...

Was that a comeback?
Click to expand...

It was a casual dismissal but I wouldn't have expected you to understand that either
 
PVH - 22/5/2017 19:51

All clubs have a deadline by which they name their squads don't they? Now unless they've fielded players that are ineligible to play in that squad and subsequently fielded said players, I fail to see what Huddersfield had done wrong personally. In fact I don't see the case to answer.

You name a squad of say 22 players, a club and coach/manager is entitled to use those 22 players as and when they see fit.

I found it embarrassing that posters on here were actually whining about this in the first place.
Click to expand...

And you can be absolutely certain sure that there is no connection friendship or past dealings between either owner or managers of the two clubs?

This is a competition and if that wasn't enough in its own right it certainly is up and down the country on a Sunday morning these games are at the top of the pyramid which means that millions are being gambled directly on them and millions can be and were at stake in this particular case

Every fan up and down the country turns up to their respected club spend a small fortune doing it and deserve as fair a result across every stadium as they can get and that equally applies to video technology and anything else that preserves the integrity of the result

You allow your logic to run rife and its a matter of time before some club or another completely throws a game to the detriment of a local rival

Would you be Ok if a manager to instructed players to not tackle to avoid injury for a keeper to not dive for the same reasons or to use the game as an opportunity to try out a revolutionary formation of 1-1-8 under the auspice of it being his team to do as he see's fit?

Football is rife with corruption teams that do this Man Ure being another are the thin end of the wedge where there seems to be endless debate of what is patently wrong in the spirit of the game
 
If there was a rule that stipulated that a club had to field its strongest side regardless then something could be done but otherwise............

Hudders are not the first to pull that little trick even if it's not in the spirit of the game.

Do you think that our club would do such a thing?
 
Mark2310 - 22/5/2017 23:50

PVH - 22/5/2017 19:51

All clubs have a deadline by which they name their squads don't they? Now unless they've fielded players that are ineligible to play in that squad and subsequently fielded said players, I fail to see what Huddersfield had done wrong personally. In fact I don't see the case to answer.

You name a squad of say 22 players, a club and coach/manager is entitled to use those 22 players as and when they see fit.

I found it embarrassing that posters on here were actually whining about this in the first place.
Click to expand...

And you can be absolutely certain sure that there is no connection friendship or past dealings between either owner or managers of the two clubs?

This is a competition and if that wasn't enough in its own right it certainly is up and down the country on a Sunday morning these games are at the top of the pyramid which means that millions are being gambled directly on them and millions can be and were at stake in this particular case

Every fan up and down the country turns up to their respected club spend a small fortune doing it and deserve as fair a result across every stadium as they can get and that equally applies to video technology and anything else that preserves the integrity of the result

You allow your logic to run rife and its a matter of time before some club or another completely throws a game to the detriment of a local rival

Would you be Ok if a manager to instructed players to not tackle to avoid injury for a keeper to not dive for the same reasons or to use the game as an opportunity to try out a revolutionary formation of 1-1-8 under the auspice of it being his team to do as he see's fit?

Football is rife with corruption teams that do this Man Ure being another are the thin end of the wedge where there seems to be endless debate of what is patently wrong in the spirit of the game
Click to expand...

Spot on.

The idea that "It's their own fault for being in that situation" is as immoral as the act itself.

We can extend that to any area of society- it's the fault of poor that they are exploited, etc.

Every team deserves to earn every place on merit. Even if that is a relegation place.

You earn each place in the League over 46 nearly top level fixtures. How are those places earned on merit if one club has to play only 45 top level fixtures plus a youth team/reserve game.

Did Birmingham earn their 54 points on merit? 51 of them yes. We and Blackburn earned our 51 points completely on merit with 46 hard fixtures. Who knows how many points Birmingham would have earned if they had played the same number of second level fixtures as us.

But Blackburn are rightly aggrieved and Huddersfield's lofty arguments of privilege really rankle to be honest. The idea that once you are down at the bottom you lose your right to fairness and a level playing field is for the birds I'm afraid.

I very much hope in the future one of these clubs is in the position to teach Huddersfield a lesson about this.

 
Pope John XXIII - 23/5/2017 05:21

Mark2310 - 22/5/2017 23:50

PVH - 22/5/2017 19:51

All clubs have a deadline by which they name their squads don't they? Now unless they've fielded players that are ineligible to play in that squad and subsequently fielded said players, I fail to see what Huddersfield had done wrong personally. In fact I don't see the case to answer.

You name a squad of say 22 players, a club and coach/manager is entitled to use those 22 players as and when they see fit.

I found it embarrassing that posters on here were actually whining about this in the first place.
Click to expand...

And you can be absolutely certain sure that there is no connection friendship or past dealings between either owner or managers of the two clubs?

This is a competition and if that wasn't enough in its own right it certainly is up and down the country on a Sunday morning these games are at the top of the pyramid which means that millions are being gambled directly on them and millions can be and were at stake in this particular case

Every fan up and down the country turns up to their respected club spend a small fortune doing it and deserve as fair a result across every stadium as they can get and that equally applies to video technology and anything else that preserves the integrity of the result

You allow your logic to run rife and its a matter of time before some club or another completely throws a game to the detriment of a local rival

Would you be Ok if a manager to instructed players to not tackle to avoid injury for a keeper to not dive for the same reasons or to use the game as an opportunity to try out a revolutionary formation of 1-1-8 under the auspice of it being his team to do as he see's fit?

Football is rife with corruption teams that do this Man Ure being another are the thin end of the wedge where there seems to be endless debate of what is patently wrong in the spirit of the game
Click to expand...

Spot on.

The idea that "It's their own fault for being in that situation" is as immoral as the act itself.

We can extend that to any area of society- it's the fault of poor that they are exploited, etc.

Every team deserves to earn every place on merit. Even if that is a relegation place.

You earn each place in the League over 46 nearly top level fixtures. How are those places earned on merit if one club has to play only 45 top level fixtures plus a youth team/reserve game.

Did Birmingham earn their 54 points on merit? 51 of them yes. We and Blackburn earned our 51 points completely on merit with 46 hard fixtures. Who knows how many points Birmingham would have earned if they had played the same number of second level fixtures as us.

But Blackburn are rightly aggrieved and Huddersfield's lofty arguments of privilege really rankle to be honest. The idea that once you are down at the bottom you lose your right to fairness and a level playing field is for the birds I'm afraid.

I very much hope in the future one of these clubs is in the position to teach Huddersfield a lesson about this.
Click to expand...
Couldn't agree more.
This is what I said previously on another thread.
You just worded it a lot better. :17:
 
Some important points above no doubt. But I'm less interested in Huddersfield's lack of integrity and more in why the EFL had an enforceable definition of what constitutes a strong side for one of their competitions but not another one.
 
Anyone remember this game?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_div_1/8615417.stm

Billy Davies said It was a very good exercise. "I'm delighted as it allowed us to play some players, give them some minutes and rest one or two. Being guaranteed a play-off spot, it gives us the opportunity to go and have a look at one or two things"

It cost Swansea a play off place.

How many of those with a 'moral compass' complained then?
 
Not the same situation really, Marvin. Five players who started that game also started the home playoff leg against Blackpool - not ten like Huddersfield. Even if there was a rule in place to prevent large scale changes perhaps five or six changes would be justifiable anyway.
 
So 50% to 60% in changes is acceptable, but 90% isn't?

Where are we drawing that line then, 75% or 80%?

Or just it's different if we do it and find excuses as & when we need to.
 
I'm saying that there should have been a robust definition in place - as the EFL have for their other competition. Then no one, including us, has any excuse and you remove the moral ambiguity.

It's not for me to draw that line. But yes I do think possibly five changes could be a maximum amount (with clarification needed e.g. about how many of those players can be youth players and other issues surrounding special circumstances e.g. injuries).

Ten changes is simply ridiculous though, indefensible anywhere, and I would condemn us doing the same.
 
What goes around comes around - I am not condoning making such changes, but ultimately Wagner was right that we should be focussing on our team/performances.

Still - you wonder how he'd react in the same circumstances.

Fortunately - home form kept us up - just need to ensure that we avoid a similar fate moving forward!
 
MarvinsPA - 23/5/2017 09:45

Anyone remember this game?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_div_1/8615417.stm

Billy Davies said It was a very good exercise. "I'm delighted as it allowed us to play some players, give them some minutes and rest one or two. Being guaranteed a play-off spot, it gives us the opportunity to go and have a look at one or two things"

It cost Swansea a play off place.

How many of those with a 'moral compass' complained then?
Click to expand...

There are three changes in that team, all up front-McGoldrick, Adebola and Garner. Two of those were regular squad players.

The rest of the team featured in the playoffs

Not exactly the same as changing the entire team is it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.