I think he is quite a good manager. Usual sensationalism
Printable View
I think he is quite a good manager. Usual sensationalism
This post does indeed prove someone is a "complete and utter gobsh*te" alright.Quote:
Originally Posted by an_ceannaire
sure when the level of "debate" reaches that level who could be bothered.Quote:
Originally Posted by an_ceannaire
"could well have gauranteed" is more or less the same thing anyway. over a 38 game season i doubt not putting out a strongest team v man utd will be seen as the thing that "could well have gauranteed" their survival.
as per my previous posts i can understand why it was done but as a sportsman it goes against my ideals. its all opinion at the end of the day
Of all the players that ever played for him I'd guess that about one would agree with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by an_ceannaire
Although that one did say "Mick McCarthy was top class" in his advice to him early in his managerial career.
i agree with mick on this one- although he did go a little over the top changing all his outfield players. he as manager is entitled to play whoever he likes, and to be fair whatever team he played would have spent the night chasing the ball around and most likely losing.
an_ceannaire is a wind up merchant and would have a good job replacing LAughing Bill O'Herlihy on the RTE Panel. "The earth is square: discuss." "No Bill, it's round but only us people in the know are aware of that"
I commented on Mick's selection on the EPL thread in World Football where this thread should probably belong but not much action there :o
__________
Surprised at Mick Mc's decision to rest almost the whole team against Man U. I know he has often said their fate will not depend on results against Man U, Chelsea and Arsenal but against the other teams but I think he was wrong for the following reasons:
(a) Sends the wrong signals to the players and fans i.e. we have no hope of competing with the top teams. We are way too inferior that there is no point in even showing up.
(b) I am sure their top players would have liked to play Man U at Old Trafford.
(c) It lets down the fans who travelled to Old T.
(d) Don't agree with this resting business. The likes of Houllier and other continental managers brought this in to the game in England. Previously, when English teams, in particular Liverpool, dominated Europe, there was no resting of players. The same team usually played week in, week out, and it seemed to have no adverse affect.
(e) Man U were not playing well and lost their last game at home. Wolves had won their last game. A "result" was not beyond the bounds of possibility.
Sorry Mick, I think it was the wrong decision whether they beat Burnley next game or not.
__________________
I think its unfair on the Wolves players and fans, I was reading an interview with Kevin Doyle a while back and one of the reasons he gave for joining Wolves was that he was looking forward to playing in the Premiership at Old Trafford and the likes, I think every player wants to test themselves against the best and if you'd ask any of the rested players at the start of the season I'd say 100% of them would have picked from the fixture list, were away in Old Trafford, Anfield, Villa Park etc, not the likes of Turf Moor, after winning 2 games in a row and against a weakened Man United team I feel Mick should have "given it a lash". After deciding what team he was going pick for the game(which was probably decided a while ago) I feel he should have let it be known so as the fans would have had no reason to feel short changed.
Wolves have played in Old Trafford already this season in the Carling Cup so the first teamers and the fans have had their BIG DAY OUT. The fans who are "outraged" with what Mick did need to have a chat with themselves. If it wasn't for him, they would be travelling to the likes of Plymouth to watch their team play this season.
They have had 2 very tough games and managed to pick up a vital 6 points. Alot of his first team would be in need of a rest (and don't start all that sh*te that professional footballers shouldn't need to rest) and some may have been carrying knocks.
3 points against Burnely rather than against Man United are so much more important and if Wolves finish 1 point ahead of Burnley and survive the drop come the end of the season (provided they do beat Burnley) all those fans will be kissing his arse.
No point beating Man United if you end up in the Championship next year. Wolves need time to develop their squad so no, they cannot compete just yet but with what Mick is doing, they may well one day soon!!!
Ill be backing Burnley at the weekend anyway.
Micks a decent manager at Championship standard but personally I dont think hes good enough for the Premiership.Got relegated with a record points low the last time he was there and even though Wolves work hard enough I think they will be relegated .Last night made no difference but alot of managers might have thought that after United losing at the weekend that a point would have been possible last night.
What way would we have reacted if in the last campaign there was double header with Italy and Bulgaria and Trap had played the 2nd string against Italy saying that we had a better chance of beating Bulgaria. I know its not the same but if I was a Wolves fan I would be annoyed
Why are people giving out to him for this. He can pick whatever bloody team he likes. They have an awfully hard christmas run and have 5 games in 3 weeks. Why shouldn't he rest players in a match he knows they have limited chance of getting anything. Smart move and just might pay dividends over xmas
Out of interest - Based on what, their great away form?Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeside Swagger
Quote:
Originally Posted by an_ceannaire
Aye, cause I will trust SSN.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/foot...rs/8416359.stm
Wolves have to explain themselves..
But it was ok for Utd to put out a weakened team when Hull were in danger of relegation on the last day of last season.....
http://sports.rediff.com/report/2009...am-vs-hull.htm
I'd like to see how the PL reconcile these 2 stances.....Quote:
Manchester United have every right to field a weakened team against Hull City on Sunday even though it could have an impact on the relegation battle, Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore has said.
"You have to be realistic: they've got a squad, and therefore you can't argue that they deploy the benefit of that squad in a game on Sunday."
1 rule for the Skyballbig4 and several hundred ever changing rules for all the other teams
Wow, how will professional players cope...Quote:
Originally Posted by carloz
Have to disagree with Razor. Mic is a good manager, his results at Sunderland were off the back of having absolutely no money to spend on players. Hence John Stead being one of his signings that year.
How big an influence this has on Wolves results will depend on how Mic manages the situation IMO as I wonder how this will affect the players in his squad. The guys who were dropped for the United game and brought back in for the Burnley game might think they are first team and untouchable. The guys brought in for the United game and dropped for Burnley might think what’s the point they are squad players. Might lead to a drop off in competition within the squad.
I think that’s what will have a bigger affect on their results, not if the players think the integrity of the league has been compromised
Also, with all the attention the Wolves v Burnley match is now getting (which it wouldnt normally have received) - Its more than possible that the Burnley Players will up their game a level, not wanting to play out Micks hopes of them being the 'easy / less difficult' touch
Great post Stuttgart.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuttgart88
Mick is one of the most honest and loyal players ever to play for Ireland. Similarly, he gave it his all when he was manager.
As you said, only one player ever had a problem with Mick and that player has since demonstrated his lack on bona fides when he was effectively sacked by Manchester United and by walking out on Sunderland.
This thread from an ceannaire is clearly a wind-up and should be closed in my opinion, as it does not relate to the national team.
Can't understand the fuss. Every player that lined up is part of the squad submitted to the Premier League at the start of the season and therefore part of the Wolverhampton squad.
He can pick whoever the hell he wants as long as they're registered. The FA asking him to explain his team selection is just lip service. They haven't got a leg to stand on.
It's Mick's call and he is the manager. If Wolves stay up at the end of the season because they got 3 points against Burnley it was worth the aggro.
I can understand why some of the Wolves fans are angry but they must surely realise that the League is 38 games not just one.
Word of caution though. Aston Villa tried a similiar thing in the Uefa Cup last season (rested the first team) and their season fell apart.
whatever about fielding a weakened team, he should look for a new keeper as that clown Hannamen is awful, and always has been.Is Hennessy injured?(not that he's great either)
IMO he was completely wrong in what he did. Not for the integrity of the Premier League but because he's lost the momentum and confidence that they gained from beating Spurs. I think they would have had a fair chance of gaining at least a point from the game with their strongest 11 since United are in awful form and are savaged by injuries at the back.
Also, the pressure has been heaped onto the players now for the game against Burnley - they know the media and fans will hang them if they lose. It was an awful decision by McCarthy.
I don't agree Lionel. For a start, United aren't setting the World on fire but to say they're in awful form just isn't true. Before the blip against Villa they had scored 11 goals in their previous 3 PL games, reached the Semi Finals of the Carling Cup and topped their group in the Champions League. If that's awful form the rest of the PL should be very worried. Chances are Wolves would have lost at OT and the momentum you speak of would have been broken anyway. This way, they got a good rest after their exploits against Spurs and the actual Wolves side that played that match should still have the momentum to carry them into Burnley.
As for the ethics of the whole thing, it's certainly no worse than United fielding a new team against Hull on the final day of last season. To be honest I don't think Arsenal, Chelsea, etc. would be too bothered as I'm sure they pencilled in 3 points for United, long before the teamsheets were announced. It's a part of the game now and although McCarthy took it to the extreme it would be opening a serious can of worms for the FA to pull him on it. Like Shakermaker said above, McCarthy is the boss and it's his decision. Whether we agree that he was right to do it or not I'm sure he had Wolves best interests at heart, and that's what he's there for.
I really despise this line of argument. No one will tell you that the players can't do this. The question is simply whether or not their performance dips. It does.Quote:
Originally Posted by Macy
Burnley and Villa beat United this season. Sunderland drew at Old Trafford. And the Burnley and sunderland results were against much better United teams than what Wolves faced.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeLorean
You say its no better than United fielding a weak side against Hull. Thats complete nonsense. Everyone still expected United to beat Hull with their second string - which they duly did. The fact is the top four can afford to weaken their sides and still win, the likes of Wolves can't. McCarthy basically handed United the 3 points before kick off. How can anyone say thats a good decision??
I think what your saying is far greater nonsense. By United fielding the team they did against Hull it put Newcastles PL safety at a far greater risk. Just because United managed to scrape the 3 points is neither here nor there really. I was talking about ethics when I used this example, and although I feel that they had the right to field whatever team they liked, surely they had more of a morale dilemma than Wolves? Also, Villa and Sunderland are far better teams than Wolves and home advantage was a big factor in the Burnley win. Anyway, I'm not really saying McCarthy was right to do what he did, there's arguments for and against, but I do believe he was entitled to do what he thought was best.Quote:
Originally Posted by lionelhutz
They would have lost and he might have injured some of his better players, so it was a non-brainer decision really.
Come the end of the season, Burnley V Wolves may prove to be a relegation 6 pointer.
Wolves won't stay up by putting out their best team against Man Utd and squad players against the likes of Burnley.
Dead on.Quote:
Originally Posted by drummerboy
I don't see people complaining when ManUtd rests Giggs or Liverpool rests Torres.
There is NO difference.
Out of interest, why was this thread moved, but the Brian Kerr, Faroe Islands thread seems good enough for the Irish section?
Well Done Mick. Got it spot on!:)
Well done, Mick.
So, how many of those who were having a pop off Mick would have won 6 points from Wolves last three matches?
delighted for him.
After reading through this thread, its amazing to see how many idiots there are out there. How can anyone in their right mind, or with half a brain for that matter, think that giving a walkover to any team in a competitive match as McCarthy did during the week could be a positive thing for his team??
It's a ludicrous suggestion - and its even funnier to see the idiots above say McCarthy has been proven right by their victory against Burnley today. Pure moronic stuff. If wolves had given the United game a proper go,why would they not have beaten burnley today??
And before we hear more of the same stupidity in previous pages about wolves players being tired or getting injured in the United match - let me ask ye this, have wolves never played 3 games in a week and picked up 3 results from those games?? Out of interest has any team played 3 games in a week and got 3 results, or this now impossible!! After reading yer posts, it must be impossible.
Also, does this mean if wolves have 3 games in a week later in the season, McCarthy will have to drop his team for the midweek game as they are incapable of playing 3 games in one week??
He's the manager he can pick whatever team he likes
I'd say three points at home To Burnley and your striker coming out saying that they were fresher and sharper might point to it being positive.Quote:
Originally Posted by cartman
I don't agree with this. I think the striker (Doyle) was asked a leading question by the interviewer. What was he going to say? No??Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadend
It is silly to say he was "vindicated" by the decision, as the SKy interviewer said. Wolves finished comfortably ahead of Burnley in the Championship last year. Burnley haven't won away from home all season. Whether Wolves played mid-week or not, they should have beaten Burnley which they did, rested or not. What we will never know is whether Wolves may also have picked up an extra point or three against a totally out of form and weakened Man U side (stuffed 3-0 by Fulham).
I think if we are honest, we'd say that Man Utd vs Wolves is like a heavyweight boxer fighting a middle weight. Yes the middle weight would land some punches but would suffer a lot of punishment in doing so.
If Wolves beat United but lost to Burnley due to having injuries, suspensions and tired players, this would have been the worse outcome.
Burnley v Wolves is a relegation 6 pointer. Beating United wouldn't be worth as many points to Wolves. With that result Wolves have probably condemned Burnley to a relegation fight and may have secured a mid table finish to the season for themselves. Had the reverse happened, Wolves would be in relegation trouble.
Good decision by Mick.
McCarthy picked from a squad of first team players.
Should we even pretend it was the best 11? No.
Should we even pretend McCarthy didn't sacrifice a (remotely) possible result at Old Trafford to better his chances (as he saw it) against Burnley? No.
But they were in the first team squad, and he played them, not reserves. He has the power to do that, and he should have nothing to explain to anybody.
We'll also never know whether they would have beaten Burnley if they'd played a full strength team at Old Trafford.Quote:
Originally Posted by OwlsFan
That's also the point I am making. We don't know either way. They would probably have beaten Burnley whether they played Man U or not and they probably would have been beaten by Man U. However, it is not true to say he was "vindicated" as the Sky commentator said.Quote:
Originally Posted by osarusan
If Wolves go down by a point, I expect the virtual non-fullfilment of the fixture at Man U (since that is what it was) to be brought up again.