West Ham have filed a complaint with the Premier League after Fulham fielded a ‘weakened’ team against Hull last week – and subsequently lost 2-0.
I cannot help but think the whole process seems a bit like sour grapes. I know West ham need to do everything that they can to try and stay in the Premier League this season, but questioning opposing Managers’ team selections is clutching at straws. When questioned about the complaint, Fulham manager Roy Hodgson said “Firstly I do not think West Ham should be picking our team and I think that is a fairly obvious statement.” I whole-heartedly agree with Roy. It is never anyone else’s place to pick the team but the manager. If they players he picks from are in the first team squad, then the manager has every right to choose them. What is the point in naming a squad if you are not allowed to field a team comprising of any member of that squad that you deem best for the role?
Moreover, the players that he picked for the game weren’t exactly amateurs. Chris Smalling has just been sold to Manchester Utd for £10million, Kagisho Dikgacoi is a South African International and Clint Dempsey scored thesensational winning goal in the last round of the UEFA cup to knock out Juventus. West Ham cannot claim that Hodgson had fielded a team of part-timers or his youth squad. The players on the pitch were good players.
There seems to be an ethos of favouritism toward the big teams by the Premier League. Teams like Chelsea and Manchester United regularly chop and change their starting line-ups. They have a first team squad to choose from, just as Fulham do, and they have every right to choose who they wish. Just because they have a stronger squad than Fulham doesn’t make what they do right and Hodgson wrong. The Premier League cannot decide who a manager should be picking. Unless he fields a player who is ineligible due to Premier League rules, he is justified in choosing whoever he likes. How can the Premier League decide when a team is ‘weak’ enough to impose sanctions and fines upon the manager? Is it down the results they manage with changed teams? Manchester United and Chelsea may well win more often than Fulham with changed teams, but that’s due to the quality of players they have. Theaction itself of choosing a changed team is the same whether you are Roy Hodgson or Alex Ferguson. You cannot punish Fulham because they have a weaker squad.
Hodgson’s team choice against Hull seemed to pay dividends in their following fixture against Wolfsburg, which they won 2-1. Zamora, who was rested for the Hull game, came back to score one goal, and set up the other. However, the result of the Wolfsburg game bears no relevance on whether Hodgson was right or wrong to pick the team he did against Hull. Proof that team selection is no guarantee of results is evident in the very similar case of Wolves and Mick McCarthy.
In February, Mick McCarthy and Wolves were fined £25,000 by the Premier League after fielding a team against Manchester Utd with 10 changes from the previous week. They lost that game 3-0. However, a similar team, with 8 of the 11 picked against United managed to beat West Ham 3-1. I don’t understand how the Premier League could have made an arbitrary decision earlier in the season to fine McCarthy for his team selection against Manchester United when a very similar line-up comfortably beat West Ham. It just shows how impossible it is for the Premier League to judge when a team is weakened to a point where it is no longer competitive.
In my eyes, a manager should be allowed to pick whoever he likes from his squad. It is no business of the Premier League, or any opposing club or manager to question their team selection. As long as the manager is not fielding ineligible players, and is doing what they deem best for the club, then their decisions concerning team selections should be respected.
To read other posts on my blog, please visit http://oddsoccer.com