midds

So this means every manager from every team HAS to play his strongest XI in EVERY game. By resting a player he would, theoretically, be weakening his team and would be fined for doing so. Or is there a lmit as to how many changes he can make? Is 1 ok? What about 2? Would 3 get a fine? What about 7? It's bollocks. The FA need to stop interfering so much. Let the managers manage as they see fit. It has to be up to the individual manager to pick the team and he should stand or fall by his decisions. If Wolves go down by a point, it'll be on McCarthy. If they stay up by a point then he'll look back on the Burnley result and think he was justified.

Said at the time McCarthy had the right to pick whoever he wants for each and every game. If it goes wrong and he upsets people it's down to him and it's his responsibilty. That's the chance he took and it's ridiculous that they've been singled out for resting a few when it happens all the time, particularly towards the end of the season. Let's see how much Man U or Chelsea are fined when they do it.

He's very good in his own right but the balance he gives us is fantastic. We can now stretch teams across the pitch and come at them from both flanks. Looking like a superb signing and he'll get even better imo.

Never looked like losing that tonight - even going one down. They're turboshit and we weren't. Ran out easy winners and Harper could have had the night off. We'll not get an easier game at home this season.

Hadn't realised Fellaini was out for 6 months. That's a blow for Everton, just as Arteta is coming back too.

Nothing's changed, we've still got to win these 2 home games and hope Boro and Bristol do us a favour over the weekend. Would rather have seen Forest drop points tonight but there you go.

Simpson is absolutely average. He's competent at this level but would struggle most weeks next if we go up imo. I'd be looking at buying another CH and playing Taylor at RB. Simpson, purely as cover, would be adequate.

I'd be very surprised if we buy a RB now we have Simpson permanently. I agree. We've given him a long term contract for a reason. Aye, because he was cheap. Quite possibly, but at the end of the day because we want to use him as first choice RB for the next 3.5 years. Read that and physically shuddered.

I'd be very surprised if we buy a RB now we have Simpson permanently. I agree. We've given him a long term contract for a reason. Aye, because he was cheap.

Agree, but I can understand the frustration and need to try some unorthodox solutions to a long-standing problem.

They'd make exceptions though. If Torres or Messi ever became available City and Chelsea would give them whatever they wanted to make sure they got them. Money is not an object to a handful of clubs and as they set the benchmark the rest of the clubs will follow. I don't mind players being paid £120k a week if they're earning it but there are far too many ordinary players being paid far too much. That's the problem. The playes you mentioned are top top players. Not scott parkers and joey bartons on 60k a week or a aging nicky butt on top $. BUt then again, would roman allow another highly paid player come in without letting one go? Parker, Butt and Barton are good examples of the overpaid ordinary players I mentioned. I think Roman would sanction it if it meant getting a Torres or a Messi. Chances are Ballack will be moving on soon anyway. The problem is that if Terry, Lampard et al are raking in £140k a week then the lesser players in the squad will expect their wage to be pretty hefty too. Agreed, their is also a rank culture with footballers with "i want what he is getting" without the effort going in to justify it. Players need to have a long hard word with themselves. Yep. The better players will always earn the most money and there's nothing wrong with that, they deserve it if they're filling the ground every week and winning things for their clubs. I just think clubs are going to look for 'value for money' players and, whilst still offering big money to top players, will look around for the right player before throwing £60k a week at them.

They'd make exceptions though. If Torres or Messi ever became available City and Chelsea would give them whatever they wanted to make sure they got them. Money is not an object to a handful of clubs and as they set the benchmark the rest of the clubs will follow. I don't mind players being paid £120k a week if they're earning it but there are far too many ordinary players being paid far too much. That's the problem. The playes you mentioned are top top players. Not scott parkers and joey bartons on 60k a week or a aging nicky butt on top $. BUt then again, would roman allow another highly paid player come in without letting one go? Parker, Butt and Barton are good examples of the overpaid ordinary players I mentioned. I think Roman would sanction it if it meant getting a Torres or a Messi. Chances are Ballack will be moving on soon anyway. The problem is that if Terry, Lampard et al are raking in £140k a week then the lesser players in the squad will expect their wage to be pretty hefty too.

They'd make exceptions though. If Torres or Messi ever became available City and Chelsea would give them whatever they wanted to make sure they got them. Money is not an object to a handful of clubs and as they set the benchmark the rest of the clubs will follow. I don't mind players being paid £120k a week if they're earning it but there are far too many ordinary players being paid far too much. That's the problem.

What if the 7th place club qualified and knew they were guaranteed £40m for qualifying and spent the lot investing to make themselves competitive? If they didn't qualify for the next few seasons then they'll have a wagebill that they can't maintain. Depends on their wage structure though. If they had to move a player or two on then they wouldn't even feel the hit. Spread the wealth. At the minute the rich are getting richer and opening it up a bit has to be a good thing. why not do it for the premiership title then ? top 8 clubs go into play offs to decide the title. it's wrong and defeats the point of the league system. The league is the league though. The team that finishes top is the champion. That would stay the same. There would be 3 more teams to make up the CL places. 2nd and 3rd would go straight in but the 4th place would be a competition. What are you getting at?

What if the 7th place club qualified and knew they were guaranteed £40m for qualifying and spent the lot investing to make themselves competitive? If they didn't qualify for the next few seasons then they'll have a wagebill that they can't maintain. Depends on their wage structure though. If they had to move a player or two on then they wouldn't even feel the hit. Spread the wealth. At the minute the rich are getting richer and opening it up a bit has to be a good thing.

i thought that would be like newcastle east end (of lore). old people,obviously older than me, call hartlepool, "hartlepools" Queer folk down there though. Not exactly sharp on the uptake.

What if the 7th place club qualified and knew they were guaranteed £40m for qualifying and spent the lot investing to make themselves competitive?

Wasn't the rugby team called West Hartlepool? This implies there is an East Hartlepool. Possibly.

That was a question on 'Eggheads' this week. That should go in the pet hates thread. That fucking program. The way they can never just ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION. Q: Which is the fastest animal on the planet? EH: 'Well, some might say it is the leopard, which after all has a top speed of 50 mph, whereas others might say it is the tiger, which it isn't as its flat paws preclude fast movement, therefore I will say it is the cheetah" *smug facial expression* EXACTLY. Fucking bang on mate. Who the fuck thinks of a quiz program which contains so few questions? Half a bastard hour and they must ask about 20 questions max. Waste of time and money. Pricks. I enjoy it, i get a surprisingly large amount of the questions right too (H) That's because you get the chance to guess.

That was a question on 'Eggheads' this week. That should go in the pet hates thread. That fucking program. The way they can never just ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION. Q: Which is the fastest animal on the planet? EH: 'Well, some might say it is the leopard, which after all has a top speed of 50 mph, whereas others might say it is the tiger, which it isn't as its flat paws preclude fast movement, therefore I will say it is the cheetah" *smug facial expression* EXACTLY. Fucking bang on mate. Who the fuck thinks of a quiz program which contains so few questions? Half a bastard hour and they must ask about 20 questions max. Waste of time and money. Pricks.

I wouldn't want to rely on us winning all of our home games because the way we play that is unlikely. All the more reason every point away from home might prove crucial. Agreed - we have drawn 2 or 3 games at home that we should have won. We've taken 37 points out of 45 from our home games... It's our away form that needs sorting out. If we win 4 more away from home we'll win the league.

That was a question on 'Eggheads' this week. That should go in the pet hates thread. That fucking program.

Maybe, maybe not. It's better than seeing the same 4 teams in it year in, year out though. It's like a f***ing cartel at the minute. Anything that shakes things up a bit is fine with me. At least in this country we have four teams that sometimes mix there positions up. The nations with 1 club that enters there leagues tend to be f***ed for years once the loot of CL money has arrived. This is true but we're talking about the Premier League though. Giving 7 teams a chance of qualifying is better than giving 4 teams a chance. Spread the wealth man. 20 clubs have the chance atm. You know what I mean.

Maybe, maybe not. It's better than seeing the same 4 teams in it year in, year out though. It's like a f***ing cartel at the minute. Anything that shakes things up a bit is fine with me. At least in this country we have four teams that sometimes mix there positions up. The nations with 1 club that enters there leagues tend to be fucked for years once the loot of CL money has arrived. This is true but we're talking about the Premier League though. Giving 7 teams a chance of qualifying is better than giving 4 teams a chance. Spread the wealth man.

clubs would take it serious though if there was a CL place. Not sure about that tbh. We'll never know though because it won't happen.