Blackburn Rovers boss Tony Mowbray has questioned the decision of Huddersfield manager David Wagner to make 10 changes for the Terriers' defeat by Birmingham.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39758489" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Bit rich when his team benefited from Villa basically rolling over for them

Agree with you there Ric. Wagner made all those changes but Villa didn't even bother to turn up at Ewood.

As Wagner said in an interview, it isn't down to what he does that's resulted in clubs fighting relegation.
He has to do what's best for his club and they've got the play offs to consider.

A Huddersfield fan on the radio said all the players used have played at some point this season and no one batted an eyelid when Wagner made multiple changes for their cup games, including the one vs City, yet it's suddenly an issue now at the tail end of the season.

Ultimately it's a squad game and unless the FA/FL are going to issue some sort of ruling forbidding X amount of changes to a match day squad from one game to the next then there's nothing wrong with what Wagner did.

The fact that it's not helped Rovers just makes it more amusing.

Not concerned with the rights and wrongs of it in any shape or form.

As long as it sees 'em relegated I couldn't give a flying f**k.

I think Brentford will provide em with a sterner test next week.

Mourinho is threatening to play his U21 team against Palace. Now that would need to be looked into if it meant survival for Palace.

Prior to the game werent 7000 villa fans going to enjoy losing to blackburn,Thinking huddersfield would turn brum over?

Blackburn have been fielding a weakened team most of the seaaon!

Sidney1st wrote:As Wagner said in an interview, it isn't down to what he does that's resulted in clubs fighting relegation.
He has to do what's best for his club and they've got the play offs to consider.

Ultimately it's a squad game and unless the FA/FL are going to issue some sort of ruling forbidding X amount of changes to a match day squad from one game to the next then there's nothing wrong with what Wagner did.

The fact that it's not helped Rovers just makes it more amusing.

Wasn't Burnley sanctioned after a game in the early 60s when a large number of changes were made? I think I've seen it mentioned on here before...

I'm just a little too young to remember - only started watching regularly in 1967.

I'm sure CT will know.

There's a Rovers fan gobbing off on FB claiming the rules state anymore than 3-4 changes require a valid reason.

I've had a look but I can't see anything in the rules.

Blackburn won't go down because of what Huddersfield do. They'll go down because they've been ****.

How can anyone even question they played a weakend side? It's only because football "eperts" and "pundits" can't name there squad players.

Paul Waine wrote:Wasn't Burnley sanctioned after a game in the early 60s when a large number of changes were made? I think I've seen it mentioned on here before...

I'm just a little too young to remember - only started watching regularly in 1967.

I'm sure CT will know.

4-4 draw v Chelsea few days prior to the return leg against Hamburg in 1961. Fined 100 guineas,I believe, for each of the ten 'weaker players'. Not a good week as we were knocked out of the European Cup on the Wednesday and then lost in the semi final of the FA Cup to Spurs on the Saturday.

MACCA wrote:Blackburn have been fielding a weakened team most of the seaaon!

Thats a fair point.

Surely you earn the right to field what ever team you want. Wagner will have his reasons as he is employed to manage their best interests. I'm guessing he made changes to rest his best players and protect them against injury and have them 100% for the playoffs. Tony Mowbray can go and **** himself as he has had more than enough games to win to ensure their survival and to question the integrity of another club is shocking. Would he complain if Brentford make 11 changes on Sunday? Doubtful.

Silkyskills1 wrote:4-4 draw v Chelsea few days prior to the return leg against Hamburg in 1961. Fined 100 guineas,I believe, for each of the ten 'weaker players'. Not a good week as we were knocked out of the European Cup on the Wednesday and then lost in the semi final of the FA Cup to Spurs on the Saturday.

Thanks, Silky. I wasn't certain about a fine.

Do these rules still exist? Or does the squad system get rid of this issue?

They tried to nail Mick McCarthy with it when he was at Wolves I think during one of their PL stints but he managed to bin it off I think.

Wolves were fined £25k under Rule E20 for fielding a weakened team against Man U. McCarthy had his eye on the next game...versus us.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/footbal ... 521603.stm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

UTC!

Cheers Duffer.

They should make the official squad size smaller then if that's the case.
18 would probably be better for the FA rules if its still there.
That way they can't moan when someone uses their squad.

If it were us in the relegation spots then I'd be pretty miffed. But we're not, so screw em.....

Long Live The Venky's! Come on Brentford!

Presume anyone in a 'modern day squad' is seen as legitimate. Burnley played 10 reserves(when we had reserve teams) who were presumably seen as 'under-strength. I went to the game v Chelsea but was just short of my 9th birthday and so the minutiae of such decisions was lost in me. 4-2 ahead with just a few minutes left, I was gutted when they got back level as I was supporting a team that I fully expected to win whoever was in the line up. They did have Jimmy Greaves in their team though.

The (PL) rule states: “in every League Match each participating Club shall field a full strength team”.

It is very subjective. There were some on here who would have had Dyche hauled up in front of the powers that be for making 4 changes on Saturday...before the result.

UTC!

edit: oops, forgot that Ba$tards don't play in the PL any more. There is an equivalent rule in the Championship, and League One

Who determines what 'full strength' means? Surely if they are in the squad in the first place they are good enough?

Surely whatever formation a team plays in will dictate who plays. For example if we play 451, who decides who our best option up front is: Gray, Vokes, Barnes or Agyei?

Abc decides who plays where, you should know that by now.

It would be interesting to see if any charges would be brought against a club making 10 changes to the team and winning the game.

UTC!

Squad rotation is the norm these days.
Get over it Blackburn, and then get down.

Sidney1st wrote:Abc decides who plays where, you should know that by now.

So long as Tarks is deployed in midfield

Tony Mowbray looks like a ******* owl. [/endthread]

I agree with Blackburn Rovers on this one. Forget any thoughts about Huddersfield's reserves being good enough for the Championship - they were well beaten by the second worst side in the Championship, on form for the last 20 games or so, who were playing with 10 men. The whole point of playing each side home and away is to make the league as fair as possible for all teams. If Huddersfield decide they are going to try and beat Blackburn but they aren';t going to try and beat Birmingham, that's not fair.

They shouldn't have such wusses in the squad anyway. In our play-off season, 10 players started 48 games or more. Why are Huddersfield so unfit that their entire squad can't play more than 1 game in 3 weeks before the play-offs?

When Dyche took us up first time he used 18 players if I remember rightly.

Mowbray is a racist, insulting Herr Wagner in this manner.

Silkyskills1 wrote:4-4 draw v Chelsea few days prior to the return leg against Hamburg in 1961. Fined 100 guineas,I believe, for each of the ten 'weaker players'. Not a good week as we were knocked out of the European Cup on the Wednesday and then lost in the semi final of the FA Cup to Spurs on the Saturday.

Could you imagine Moanrinhos spat to that run of fixtures.

Its a disgrace, end of. But on we go..

No it isn't.

He's got a squad, he used it, end of and move on.

I would consider Smith, Billing, Kachunga, Mooy, Lowe, Wells and Brown as serious first-team squad members, so not a weakened team. Players with knocks need nursing back to full fitness for the play-offs. Then Wagner can choose from his full available squad if all are reasonably close to full fitness. Or maybe we should expect him to treat the play-offs as just another couple of games of no more importance to Huddersfield than the game against Birmingham?!!

Wagner regularly rotates the team and heade 10 changes against Man City at home and got a draw.

Remember being at work in the late nineties and arrogant Blackburn fans saying.
"Our derbies aren't Burnley and Preston anymore but United ,City ,Liverpool and Everton".
Oh how the mighty fall your derbies now could be Rochdale,Bury,Oldham and perhaps Blackpool.
My God I'm loving this.Long live Venkies.

Paul Waine wrote:Wasn't Burnley sanctioned after a game in the early 60s when a large number of changes were made? I think I've seen it mentioned on here before...

I'm just a little too young to remember - only started watching regularly in 1967.

I'm sure CT will know.

We certainly were - made 10 changes with a European Cup quarter-final and an FA Cup semi-final to come in the following week.

All the details at
http://www.uptheclarets.com/turf-moor-b ... on-chelsea

50 points might not be enough for Brum!

Well, Watford must have done the same thing as 10 man Hull beat them 2-0 as well, with both goals being scored after the sending off. It's called football, get over it.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/39786607" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


The League have sent a letter to Huddersfield, asking them to explain the number of changes.
I'd love to see the written response.

Meanwhile Rovers fans are still jerking themselves into a frenzy about this.

Surely the point is: that if after 44 games of a 46 game season you find yourself in the relegation places, then you can't rely on other teams to come up with the results you need to escape. There'll always be some teams with "nothing to play" for, or indeed with a potential reason to be "inclined not to put in 100%"
Who's to say that if Wagner had played is "usual" first eleven then they might have all played "safe" to avoid injury / suspension etc. and so the result might have been the same?. One could argue that he gave squad players a chance to push for a play-off place and an appearance at Wembley.
One could also argue that it was unfair that the fixture list threw up the opportunity for 7,000 Villa fans to come up and cheer Blackburn on.

Jamesy wrote:I think Brentford will provide em with a sterner test next week.

Hopefully Andre still has a few mates in their forward line who like to score for fun.

If a player deliberately plays badly which allows the opponents to win, then he would be in trouble. Why should it be different when it;s the manager?

The point of being in trouble after 44 games is irrelevant. The season lasts 46 games, and if the last couple of games are going to be turned into a lottery of who plays against a reserve team and who plays against someone that's trying, it makes it a bit of an anticlimax. Especially for the side that's busting a gut to win their last game only to find that their rivals barely have to work for their win.

dsr wrote:If a player deliberately plays badly which allows the opponents to win, then he would be in trouble. Why should it be different when it;s the manager?

The point of being in trouble after 44 games is irrelevant. The season lasts 46 games, and if the last couple of games are going to be turned into a lottery of who plays against a reserve team and who plays against someone that's trying, it makes it a bit of an anticlimax. Especially for the side that's busting a gut to win their last game only to find that their rivals barely have to work for their win.

Loads of points to debate there. How do you know whether a player has played badly on purpose? (Did Shackell have a nightmare at Turf Moor last season on purpose? )
As I already pointed out - but presumably you've not taken into account - how likely is it that a player would give his all and risk injury or a red card, when he's guaranteed a play-off berth, and only 2 games away from a potential Wembley appearance.
Why shouldn't a manager give squad players a chance to push for a play-off place, and freshen things up?
Did Wagner deliberately intend for his team to play badly? Did they - in fact - play badly? (Huddersfield had 78% of the possession, 11 shots to Brum's 7, and 5 corners to their 1. They also committed 17 fouls to Birmingham's 10, so nothing suggests they just rolled over).
I would suggest that Huddersfield's eleven at least went along trying to win the game, which is more than can be said -apparently - for Villa and their fans. Forest and Birmingham could equally claim that Rovers "barely had to work for their win".
As I said you shouldn't put yourself in the position Rovers found themselves in with games and points running out, since you are then against all sorts of random factors.
Let's just assume that we were playing Forest on Sunday, and we had nothing to play for. Hand on heart, how many of us would be cheering and celebrating a Burnley victory that kept Blackburn up? ( I know you would dsr, but I think you would be in the minority, and I'm not sure to what extent we would get behind the team).
I'm not sure if you were watching Burnley at the time, but I presume from your posts that you were horrified when Burnley and PNE deliberately played out a 1-1 draw at Deepdale in the last game of the season to ensure our promotion and their survival in 1973?
I really don't see how these sort of scenarios can be avoided at the end of the season.

dsr wrote:If a player deliberately plays badly which allows the opponents to win, then he would be in trouble.

Is that really the case when you see what happened at Chelsea before Jose left and at Leicester city whilst Ranieri was there this season?

Clearly both sets of players were deliberately under performing, yet there has never been any suggestion that either team would be punished.

The league want a response but have said regardless of the reply, the result will not be affected.

Spijed wrote:Is that really the case when you see what happened at Chelsea before Jose left and at Leicester city whilst Ranieri was there this season?

Clearly both sets of players were deliberately under performing, yet there has never been any suggestion that either team would be punished.

Yes. I must say that - in retrospect - we were rather fortunate to play Leicester at home when we did. They looked relegation fodder that evening, and even though we got a lucky late goal, they were in absolute free-fall.

nil_desperandum wrote:Loads of points to debate there. How do you know whether a player has played badly on purpose? (Did Shackell have a nightmare at Turf Moor last season on purpose? )
As I already pointed out - but presumably you've not taken into account - how likely is it that a player would give his all and risk injury or a red card, when he's guaranteed a play-off berth, and only 2 games away from a potential Wembley appearance.
Why shouldn't a manager give squad players a chance to push for a play-off place, and freshen things up?
Did Wagner deliberately intend for his team to play badly? Did they - in fact - play badly? (Huddersfield had 78% of the possession, 11 shots to Brum's 7, and 5 corners to their 1. They also committed 17 fouls to Birmingham's 10, so nothing suggests they just rolled over).
I would suggest that Huddersfield's eleven at least went along trying to win the game, which is more than can be said -apparently - for Villa and their fans. Forest and Birmingham could equally claim that Rovers "barely had to work for their win".
As I said you shouldn't put yourself in the position Rovers found themselves in with games and points running out, since you are then against all sorts of random factors.
Let's just assume that we were playing Forest on Sunday, and we had nothing to play for. Hand on heart, how many of us would be cheering and celebrating a Burnley victory that kept Blackburn up? ( I know you would dsr, but I think you would be in the minority, and I'm not sure to what extent we would get behind the team).
I'm not sure if you were watching Burnley at the time, but I presume from your posts that you were horrified when Burnley and PNE deliberately played out a 1-1 draw at Deepdale in the last game of the season to ensure our promotion and their survival in 1973?
I really don't see how these sort of scenarios can be avoided at the end of the season.

Anybody who loses to Birmingham plays badly. They've been so abysmal lately, that losing to them is nearly as bad as losing to Rotherham. And losing to Birmingham who are playing a man short, that's really really really bad.

As for the integrity of the league, it's just a difference of opinion as to the importance. Mourinho has threatened to play the youth team against Palace on the last day of the season. It could conceivably matter to us - if Palace got an easy win against United's scrubs and sent us down as a result, you wouldn't think there was anything unfair?

(A Huddersfield fan has pointed out, presumably accurately, that on 9 occasions (mostly cup) Wagner has dropped his entire first XI. When the first XI were reinstated for the next game, they won 1 out of 9. They would definitely be better trying to get the players fitter.)