Home
News
Premier League
EPL Home
Latest
Clubs
Stadiums
Blogs
Football League
La Liga
Europe
Euro Football Home
Latest
Russian Premier
Bundesliga
Ligue 1
Football Italiano
International
International Home
Latest
World Cup 2010
Fixtures
Results
Denmark 2011
Serie A
AFCON 2012
Twitter
About Us
Advertising
Write for us
Privacy
Friends
Contact Us
 
 

 Latest News


 
 

 
 

Wolves and McCarthy punished for pragmatism


By Joe Russell

Friday 19 February 2010


The FA has decided to fine Wolverhampton Wanderers £25 000 for fielding a weakened team against Manchester United on the December 15, 2009. The FA has now set a precedent for any event that bears any relevance to this case and will have to continue to hand out similar punishments to other offending teams.


Wolves manager Mick McCarthy decided that his side would benefit from a rest before a game against Burnley as they would have a greater chance of beating Burnley than United. Wolves went on to beat Burnley and therefore McCarthy’s decision to effectively forfeit the United game was justified, however, the FA have reasoned that McCarthy’s choice was in violation of Rule B13, which stipulates that clubs should do their best to be faithful to other clubs, i.e. not hand United a victory by playing a team that were inevitably going to lose. Arsene Wenger was particularly irate at McCarthy’s decision as United winning directly affected his team.


However, would the FA’s decision been the same had Wolves won the game, theoretically, they would have had to hand out the same fine as a weakened team was fielded. But, of course, how can a team be fined for winning a game? It would be a completely ludicrous idea and it shows the frail nature of this fine that has been bestowed upon Wolves. The fine itself is insignificant, as £25 000 will be as much as some of their players earn weekly, but it is the decision and not the content that is so important and debatable. Have the FA picked on Wolves because they are a lesser club - a weaker team for Wolves is visibly weaker than a under-strength Chelsea or Liverpool side, so would the FA fine a bigger club for making this selection choice? On countless occasions, the ‘big four’ have fielded weaker sides before a big European game in order to protect their best players from injury but as of yet, none have gone unpunished. Of course, very rarely do they change the team to the same extent as the 10 changes that McCarthy made but the principal is still there.


The big teams usually rest players before an important Champions League game or domestic cup tie. Perhaps the FA doesn’t fine them for doing this because it is in their best interest for the bigger clubs to be promoting English football by succeeding in these competitions. Wolves may be the victim of being a small club - the FA do not particularly care about how Wolves do in the league this season and subsequently, fining them was easier. It is an indictment of the corruption that many fans believe is residing in English football’s governing body. Essentially, the team that Wolves put out each week is the decision of Mick McCarthy and should not be swayed by a worry of receiving the wrath of the FA. McCarthy’s decision upset Wolves fans that had travelled to the game but now in hindsight, it was the correct decision as three points followed against Burnley. McCarthy thought pragmatically about the two upcoming fixtures and decided that Burnley was the more winnable tie of the two and hence, put his best players to action in that game.


The FA’s decision will also upset the Wolves players that played against United. The FA are meant to be, or at least are thought to be, a distant spectator of football that deals with the logistics of English football, not a body that decides who the best players are. As far as they are concerned, all players should be equal and footballing ability should not come into their mind when making disciplinary decisions. What they are effectively saying is that Andrew Surman and George Friend are not as good as Jody Craddock and Karl Henry.


Mick McCarthy has said of the fine: "I accept the Premier League's decision. It was never my intention to break any of the Premier League's rules, only to pick a team that was in the best position to get a result. I'm pleased the matter is now closed.” He has said that the matter is now closed but discussion of this fine will rumble on until a similar case occurs. For instance, Aston Villa and Manchester United face each other in next week’s Carling Cup final but United have a midweek game against West Ham and Villa an FA Cup replay against Crystal Palace. Both Sir Alex Ferguson and Martin O’Neill will be thinking about resting players for the final but now, the FA have said: “The board also wants to put clubs on notice that any future rule breach of this nature would be subject to a disciplinary commission that would have available a full range of sanctions.” If either manager drops the likes of Wayne Rooney, Rio Ferdinand, Ashley Young or Gabriel Agbonlahor for these midweek fixtures, the FA will be in a quandary as to whether they should be fined.


If such a situation should arise and neither side is fined, the FA would presumably point to the magnitude of McCarthy’s change in selection as a main difference, but essentially, any change is a change and should not be questioned by the FA if it is taken in the best interest of the club.

See the full list of OLBG's free Football Tips here.

Related Articles


» 

Hulk open to Chelsea move says agent

» 

Manchester United season review - Champions deposed after a year of fine margins

» 

Sunderland season review - Season of hope ends with disappointment

» 

Looking back on A Different League's 2011-12 Premier League predictions

» 

Brian Laws worried for Wolves

 
 

 
 

Name

Email Address *

Comments


Please enter code on left.


Terms & Conditions

* A valid email is required to submit a comment. Your email will not be displayed on this or any other website, nor will it be passed to any 3rd parties. For more information please see the terms and conditions.



1 Comments


By Andrew Iddon on 19 February 2010 at 13:11


I fail to see the point of having a squad of players if you are not allowed to utilise it as you see fit. It is rather insulting to the 11 players named against United to be dismissed as "weakened". This is a crazy ruling and sets a dangerous precedent. As for Wenger being irate, it is more than a little bit "pot call the kettle black". When Wenger wants to send out his youth team in Champions League group games that have a bearing on where other teams finish, that is apparently his right.


 
 

 
 
 
 

 
 

Premier League Club Pages


ArsenalAston VillaBlackburn RoversBolton WanderersChelseaEvertonFulhamLiverpoolManchester CityManchester Utd
Newcastle UtdNorwich CityQueens Park RangersStoke CitySunderlandSwansea CityTottenham HotspurWest Bromwich AlbionWigan AthleticWolverhampton Wanderers

 
 

 
 

Latest articles


 
 

 
 

European Football


 
 

 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 

 
 


 
 

 
 

Latest Comments


Drogba should go if he want to go there is no need in begging him to stay let him go is mind is not ...

Have arsenal sign Hoilet? ...

The less some of these BIG MOUTH's ex players say, the better,they should keep their opinion to them ...

If this is true its not surprising. Benitez is not a good fit for their system and for FSG and some ...

It has been quite progress for 12 year now - since Mr Megson first took charge and we survived a dro ...

Chelsea will definately win the UEFA Champions League. ...

There's a quote that the definition of madness is doing the same thing over and over again, and expe ...

A very knowledgeable piece. I like your player of the season shout but Ashley Williams just edges i ...

RVP should not leave arsenal coz he helps arsenal to the thard place,Wenga should con ceder that poi ...