With 3 games left and relegation now upon us, what team would people play for the final few games, knowing they mean absolutely nothing to us ?? Should we blood a few youngsters and probable championship starters or should we stick to the (albeit s***) team we have stuck with throughout the season. I would like to see some of the fringe players and kids get a game BUT it would hardly seem fair to the teams who could be effected by our results with regard to relegation and possible European qualification. Any thoughts ??
not interested in the teams we have to play, want to concentrate on the best 11 to start off next season now
Forget the other teams, Harry should now play whatever he considers to be best in the long term interests of the club. Only he really knows what that is. Best I could say us any that don't feature in his plans should now be sidelined.
I do agree to a point but morally i'm a little bit torn. I mean if the ball was on the other foot there would be threads of outrage on here going on for weeks.
Absolutely. This is the premier league, not a training match. Millions of pounds will be distributed as a result of these games. I'm not naive enough to think that English football is a totally 'clean' game, or that our players try their hardest consistently (of course we have cast iron evidence that the opposite is true), or that Harold always means what he says. But at least the game still has the reputation of being hard fought and competitive. If we lose even that shred of integrity, we're doomed. Besides, the players Harold wants to see in the 'long term interests of the club' (what does he care about that?) don't play for us yet. And even if they did, Arsenal will destroy us next Saturday, why humiliate your hopes for the future?
Its a tough one this My 'Good' voice says we are a professional club in a professional sport, we owe it to all teams in the league to play our best side (if we have such a thing) for the remainder of the season, trying as hard as we can to win every game, for the sake of all supporters and to ensure the validity of the final league table. We would not be happy if clubs in our position put out weakened sides against our opposition if we were still fighting relegation or trying to win European places etc. My 'Bad' voice says **** it, we are down, we should put our club first, we should not play anyone we intend to sell in case they get injured and then we can't shift them, we should start playing youngsters or peripheral players in order to give them valuable experience even if it means a cricket score defeat, we should start playing the players who we want to see prove something in the last few games so we can make a final decision on them. None of the above would equal our best team but so what, our 'best' team just got relegated.
The long term interests may be playing the very best team. Basically I'm saying HR picks what he thinks will help us best to achieve a quick bounce back. Long term interest doesn't necessarily mean throwing kids in, it's a very open statement!
I'd certainly play any of the youth team that has potential. Give them some good experience. And I'd play Bothroyd in every game. He could be very good for us next year, and we need to get some confidence in him! Give Bobby his op tomorrow so he can be fit ASAP next year too.
I'm 100% with your 'bad' voice. But I don't think it's bad. Each and every single club is operating in a self-interested manner. I'm not saying we go out there to lose (although losing to Newcastle and thus relegating Wigan might be good!), but we go out there to win AND get some vital experience for next year.
Cant you get fined if the FA percieve you putting out a "weakened team", im sure this happened to a team last season, maybe Wolves.
HR needs to think about next season, now. I think that a defeat against ****nal keeping the Scum out of Champs league would be okay!
You are right they got a suspended £25K fine for fielding a weakened team against Man Utd, i think they made 10 changes then changed back again for the next game. I never really understood the principal of having to name a 25 man squad, then when you play a team involving 11 out of the 25 man squad you get fined... Our situation would be slightly different if we played the same team for the final 3 games, and I'm still not sure what the difference would be between our 'best' side and our worse side... As Beth raised on another thread and Raving above its definitely preferable that Wigan come down with us (not Newcastle or Villa), the question is will we been seen as trying to facilitate this if we play anything other than our strongest team against Newcastle?
Personally think your all wrong. Provided we dont do something silly and play Sutherland instead of Adel or something then I think with the notable exception of Remy, picking players more likely to start next year is a stronger side than picking the big names who have a better rating on Fifa. The complete lack of effort/giving a **** by those on the way out of the door makes those with a stake in the club and starting spot for next year to aim at as the better option. Case and point is Rob Green being picked ahead of Cesar.
This. A team only. Not individuals who don't care for the club or team mates. Time to move on - make a statement now. No time for molly coddling prima donna's. Get on with the job that needs to be done - show some heart, some passion and at least some self respect for your profession.
Play Remy for sure, although he might pick up a knock - maybe even from one of his team mates, might struggle to sell him then.
Even if a weaker team against Arsenal adds to the possibility of Chelsea being nudged down into 5th spot?
I agree - if we simply have to have him playing for us next season, I guess we'll just have to put up with that...
