Re: Huddersfield's 10 changes
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TISS
:sherlock:
They had 31 points after 21 games. I don't see your point?
Re: Huddersfield's 10 changes
Quote:
Originally Posted by
OurManFlint II
West Ham won on a penalty taken and scored by an illegal player.
Sheff Utd had to win at home to f*****g Wigan but lost to a penalty! It was all in Shef Utds hands, nobody else.
League to blame, not clubs.
Yes the League were to blame as well but Manchester United gave West Ham a greater chance to win? Surely you can see that by not playing Ronaldo etc it gave West Ham a massive helping hand? This is just one example of this happening.
Re: Huddersfield's 10 changes
Quote:
Originally Posted by
lardy
That's an excellent point, especially with a large squad. If NW picks Bamba and Morrison at CB can he expect a call from the FA asking why he left manga on the bench?
Re: Huddersfield's 10 changes
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TH63
That's an excellent point, especially with a large squad. If NW picks Bamba and Morrison at CB can he expect a call from the FA asking why he left manga on the bench?
It's a good question, having said that, in this case it is pretty clear cut it isn't their strongest side. The FA have only enforced this rule when a manager has made sweeping changes, although I'm sure Mick McCarthy dropped his entire side once after a defeat...
Re: Huddersfield's 10 changes
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Pedro de la Rosa
Yes the League were to blame as well but Manchester United gave West Ham a greater chance to win? Surely you can see that by not playing Ronaldo etc it gave West Ham a massive helping hand? This is just one example of this happening.
Fine margins, both game decided by penalties and as mentioned HAD Shef Utd won their game at home to Wigan they might not have been relegated.
West Ham should have been in bigger trouble for illegal players but Man Utds side didn't impact the Shef Utd result, they lost!