Soccer Portal

Heard the one about the major footballing organisation that makes clubs competing in its league name a 25 man squad at the start of the season, and then fines them when use the players they've selected to make changes to their first teams? Ian Holloway caught wind of it this week - the punchline was a £25,000 fine.

The Premier League's latest display of jobsworth-ness came in the form of a punishment for the Blackpool chief decision to make 10 changes to his side for a league game against Aston Villa in November. The Seasiders lost the game 3-2 thanks to a last minute winner from Villa's James Collins, and Holloway was promptly questioned post-match on what his response would be if the PL followed their own example and fined Blackpool for their actions. Anyone who has seen an Ian Holloway press conference will know to expect the unexpected - on this day, the Bristolian was characteristically straightforward.

"I'd pack in." Holloway claimed on the day, deadly serious.

"I can't work for this madness. I would resign. They do not know what they're talking about," he explained in his typical West Country burr.

Characters welcome

Blackpool's boss has, at every club he's managed, been lauded and lambasted in equal measure for his take-no-prisoners approach to management. The man is a character, put simply - but he's a fantastic manager by the same accord. Some chairmen have grown to dislike Holloway's air of what seems to be arrogance about his work. Except it's about as far away from arrogance as one could get. Ian Holloway loves his job. At the same time, he knows football managers have one of the shortest shelf-life in professional sports. Why be miserable in press conferences? Why cover up the truth? Why let rubbish questions from journalists wash over you? Why not tell people a joke? Why not tell people what's really going on? Why not inform the British public you're as happy as a badger during mating season? For Holloway, "why not?" is a mantra, not a question.

On the day Holloway offered up his future resignation however, the media opined that the Bristolian had stuck his hands into the flames once too often. The Premier League are not an organisation to be challenged and bossed around. Unless you manager a top 4 club, of course. Then the rules change slightly. But if you're a Blackpool, or a Wolverhampton Wanderers, you have to be careful what you wish for when you dine at football's top table.

Mick McCarthy, like Ian Holloway, is not a man to mince his words. However, the Yorkshireman fell foul of the Premier League last season when, like Holloway, he took the decision to field a weakened side against Manchester United. McCarthy's logical reasoning behind this decision was that Wolves were due to play Burnley on the Saturday following the midweek game against United, at Old Trafford. McCarthy is a football-savvy man - he, along with most other football fans, gave his side no chance against United, and so decided to save his strongest XI in order to give his side the best chance of beating Burnley, a game Wolves would need to win if they were to prove they could stay in the division.

Rule of dumb

The Premier League didn't like Mr. McCarthy's logic however. Football does not work on logic, as we all know. It was deemed that Wolves were in breach of the rules E20 and B13. Before we continue, let's take a quick look at those rules.

Premier League Rule B13 states that, and I quote: "In all matters and transactions relating to the League each Club shall behave towards each other Club and the League with the utmost good faith."

To me, this is just waffle. Who exactly at the Premier League is deciding what constitutes acting in good faith? Did Mick McCarthy act in bad faith to Alex Ferguson, or the league as a whole? Ferguson wasn't complaining, his side won 3-0. Were the rest of the Premier League offended by McCarthy's actions? No-one said anything at the time. A lot of managers probably admired the man's gumption and intelligence. It worked, after all. Wolves beat Burnley 2-0 and would avoid relegation come the end of the season.

Premier League Rule E20 states that, and again, I quote: "In every League Match each participating Club shall field a full strength team."

Again, absurd. Clubs should be fielding full strength teams in every League Match? So why aren't Liverpool getting fined if Fernando Torres is out injured? If Tim Cahill is away at the Asia Cup, why aren't Everton being fined? These players are key to these teams, but they're not playing. By the letter of Premier League law, Kenny Dalglish and David Moyes should've received a couple of nasty shocks from their local postman by now.

So Mick McCarthy, after going to such lengths as to recall George Friend from his loan at Doncaster for the one game against Manchester United, couldn't escape the long arm of the footballing law. But his reason for doing so was crafty. There was an argument that what the Barnsely-born boss had done was wrong. It was, in all honesty, a little bit deceptive. But if Wolves were rightly punished, this isn't the case with Blackpool.

Right side of the law

For starters, Holloway never picked a weaker team because he didn't think his full-strength side could beat Aston Villa. That's not how he operates. The Premier League should surely have realised this by now - that one of the most charismatic managers to ever operate under their banner plays the game without fear. Blackpool set up stall against the likes of Manchester United playing a 4-3-3 formation. Holloway would never openly admit his side had no chance of winning the Villa game, because it wasn't the truth. So what reason did he have to pick a weaker team? The simple answer is because he had to. Blackpool's run of games had gone as follows: West Brom on Monday, Everton on Saturday, Aston Villa on Wednesday, West Ham on Saturday. Four games in 13 days. That's a tough schedule, regardless of league standard or squad depth. Much of Holloway's side was hastily assembled during the summer transfer window, meaning that match fitness had been at a premium for the start of Blackpool's campaign. Coupled with the fact that Charlie Adam had been on international duty, and David Vaughan and Gary Taylor-Fletcher were carrying knocks, it's easy to understand why Holloway wanted to make changes.

Not easy enough for the Premier League, obviously, and their decision to call Ian Holloway's bluff on his resignation threat has been met with widespread criticism from the rest of the managers in the league. Not too much criticism, you understand - if the squeaky wheels want too much grease, they'll probably be fined too. But the likes of David Moyes and Tony Pulis have come out to the press this week to express their bemusement at the actions of the Premier League. It is unlikely Holloway will quit Bloomfield Road - the man is too proud to walk out over such a trivial misdemeanor, and Karl Oyston knows he must keep his enigmatic manager. But the rules must change.

Changing places

Managers must be allowed to pick their team each week from the full complement of 25 they name. Otherwise, what is the point of even enforcing this new rule? If a manager wants to rest players, that should be his prerogative. Those in charge know the dangers of making such decisions. They can lose pivotal games, injure squad players, alienate fans - fielding an understrength team is not a decision taken lightly. And that's if the changes made can even be constituted as making a side 'weakened' or 'understrength'. Who decides if this is the case? Opta stats? Manchester United have shown this season, as Chelsea have done in the past, that effective squad rotation can produce the right results. Resting players is not a sign of disrespect. It is a necessity in today's game, when the pace is quicker, tackles are harder, and games are more frequent. Teams should not be fined dependent on what players play from game to game. The Premier League need to take a good look at themselves, and the rules, and realise where change is needed.

The inconsistency is there for all to see. Why do the FA not step in and fine teams for fining weakened teams in the FA Cup and Carling Cup? Surely this isn't an example of behaving towards a competition in good faith? Yet every season, teams rotate their squads in cup competitions. Why? Because they have to. Because if they don't, their best players will get tired, and injured. Because if they don't, they'll have to rotate in the Premier League instead. Because if they don't - you get the picture. This level of discrepancy in the rules shouldn't feature in football. But it does, and so long as this is the case, there will be controversy, like with Blackpool and Wolves.

Ian Holloway and Mick McCarthy never meant to disrespect the game they love. But in fining the clubs that these men manage, the Premier League has kicked dirt in the face of those that make its' premier club competition what it is. Exciting. Competitive. Full of intrigue. Perhaps that action is the most disrespectful of them all. Next time a manager decides to make significant changes to his starting XI, perhaps the Premier League should consider that doing so is "fine" after all.