More outrage as SAF disgraces himself and league integrity

Originally Posted by denis lawless

dont fall for that dunk....bang in a transfer request

I just want to do my best for the team, the future, only god knows...

Originally Posted by denis lawless

dont fall for that dunk....bang in a transfer request

you trouble causing polish bastard......dunks a squad player who never complains, stop stirring it

Originally Posted by no fun

you trouble causing polish bastard......dunks a squad player who never complains, stop stirring it

cleanist

Predictable non-story about a preposterous rule. It's not even so much about a 'weakened' side. It's more the fact that the side he puts out don't need it as much as Blackpool. Same thing happened against West Ham in '07. The line-up was more than capable of winning, but WH needed it more, wanted it more, played well and rode their luck. If someone would like to tell Fergie what his strongest side is, i'm sure he'll be interested to know what it is. Giggs didn't play against Arsenal and we lost, i think City should complain. . . Even if it's the reserves and we win, would he still be punished? I think whatever side he puts out will beat Blackpool, if they don't then so credit to Blackpool. If Blackpool win they deserve to stay up. You're in control of your own destiny, guys. United have earned the right to put whatever £#%&!in side out they like and they don't owe anyone anything.

Same shit in 94 when we played six or seven youngsters against Port Vale.

Some @#%&! even brought it up in the house of commons, If I remember right.

£#%&!ers.

Originally Posted by zanzare

Same shit in 94 when we played six or seven youngsters against Port Vale.

Some @#%&! even brought it up in the house of commons, If I remember right.

£#%&!ers.

Yeah, those 6/7 players included Beckham, Neville, Butt & Scholes I think

Originally Posted by zanzare

Same shit in 94 when we played six or seven youngsters against Port Vale.

Some @#%&! even brought it up in the house of commons, If I remember right.

£#%&!ers.

that was a league cup game wasnt it ? ...now everyone is doing it.

Originally Posted by denis lawless

that was a league cup game wasnt it ? ...now everyone is doing it.

We devalued and brought shame on the League Cup, then the FA Cup in 2000, and as a knock on effect, teams like Villa & Blackpool are now playing weakened FA Cup teams and allowing shite like citeh through to the final :shakehead:

We have a lot to answer for imo.

Originally Posted by no fun

after the strokes they've pulled this season, the FA can £#%&! off

if 19 is secured, my team would be ;

albert the kit man
martin edwards
#1 south stand sikh
#2 south stand sikh
little bloke with a tache sat in front of pepe guardiola v schalke
bebe
obertan
gedthemull
#3 south stand sikh
#4 south stand sikh
foe's corpse


and lets not forget some suit from the FA will be presenting the trophy


boo the @#%&!

Still no Berbs.

What does he have to do to get a game?

Originally Posted by dunk

We devalued and brought shame on the League Cup, then the FA Cup in 2000, and as a knock on effect, teams like Villa & Blackpool are now playing weakened FA Cup teams and allowing shite like citeh through to the final :shakehead:

We have a lot to answer for imo.

full strength in the charity shield though

If they are in the 25 man squad, i would have thought they can do £#%&! all

Originally Posted by no fun

after the strokes they've pulled this season, the FA can £#%&! off

if 19 is secured, my team would be ;

albert the kit man
martin edwards
#1 south stand sikh
#2 south stand sikh
little bloke with a tache sat in front of pepe guardiola v schalke
bebe
obertan
gedthemull
#3 south stand sikh
#4 south stand sikh
foe's corpse


and lets not forget some suit from the FA will be presenting the trophy


boo the @#%&!

Not a bad side if you take out Bebe and Obertan and replace them with 2 Chilean miners.

Originally Posted by John Blazini

We beat Schalke 4-1 in a European Cup semi-final with a 'reserve side'. Pretty sure whoever we put out will have a pretty good chance of beating Blackpool.

Notice how UEFA didn't accuse us of playing an under strength side.

Are the FA saying you can name a 25 man squad but you are not allowed to play half of them?

When Wolves got fined for fielding a 'reserve' side at OT last season the FA made the point that it wasn't the fact that so many changes had made for the UTD game, it was that the team was 'changed back' again for the next match (a home game against Bolton) which they saw as an admission of fielding a weakened side.

So for a start, the same wouldn't apply to UTD as the next league game will be next season.

Secondly, as a supporter of a team who will most likely have a lot riding on that UTD v Blackpool game, I am not only totally relaxed about squad players coming in for that game, I actually think it would be better. I'd much rather players were in the team who were thinking about getting in to the European Cup final team - or making the bench - than players who were concerned about possibly getting injured. Ultimately though, the whole rule of a manager 'must always pick the strongest team' is a farce, especially when we now have named squads. The manager, not the FA, should decide what his strongest team is for any given game.

Originally Posted by denis lawless

im hoping for a game myself

payback to the FA for all the @#%&!ish tricks theyve pull in the last few seasons....hope Blackpool stay up

Yes like this season rescheduling the Chelsea game at a bad time for us and a good time for the rentboys. £#%&! 'em all.

Originally Posted by DuanePipe

When Wolves got fined for fielding a 'reserve' side at OT last season the FA made the point that it wasn't the fact that so many changes had made for the UTD game, it was that the team was 'changed back' again for the next match (a home game against Bolton) which they saw as an admission of fielding a weakened side.

So for a start, the same wouldn't apply to UTD as the next league game will be next season.

Secondly, as a supporter of a team who will most likely have a lot riding on that UTD v Blackpool game, I am not only totally relaxed about squad players coming in for that game, I actually think it would be better. I'd much rather players were in the team who were thinking about getting in to the European Cup final team - or making the bench - than players who were concerned about possibly getting injured. Ultimately though, the whole rule of a manager 'must always pick the strongest team' is a farce, especially when we now have named squads. The manager, not the FA, should decide what his strongest team is for any given game.

That's kinda the point I was getting at earlier. The side we played against Shalke would have more of a point to prove than the one that played against Chelsea.

Besides, whatever side we put out is a daunting task for Blackpool. I bet all these clubs potentially worried that we may put out a weakened still wouldn't wish for Blackpool to be playing anyone else on the last day.

Bottom line is, if UTD - first team or squad players - did lose to Blackpool, none of the other teams could have any reason to moan. It's down to individual teams to get enough points to stay up, not look for favours - especially at this stage in the season. I mean, UTD came back and took points off Blackpool earlier in the season whereas Liverpool have handed them 6 points.

the story is obviously %@#$&!s - so and so will do such and such if thingymajic does this that or the other...

but the rule itself is a good one, and absolutely appropriate given how corrupt football has always been

don't see how it would apply to united though, since most of united's squad qualify for a championship winners' medal under the league's own rules

I don't see how a rule can be a good one if it's as ambiguous as this is.

'Strongest'. Who decides?

If the league's top scorer is benched for a game, there's an argument that the 'strongest' team is not fielded.

If a manager decides to make 6 changes because he thinks the players will be fresher, can he not argue that he felt that was his 'strongest' team for that specific fixture?

A rule should be explicit. This one isn't.

Originally Posted by DuanePipe

I don't see how a rule can be a good one if it's as ambiguous as this is.

'Strongest'. Who decides?

If the league's top scorer is benched for a game, there's an argument that the 'strongest' team is not fielded.

If a manager decides to make 6 changes because he thinks the players will be fresher, can he not argue that he felt that was his 'strongest' team for that specific fixture?

A rule should be explicit. This one isn't.

first 11 players to arrive through the front door on matchday...start