Ferguson - I am god.

[Craig_H]

We have to submit a list of squad numbers, tho, so i'm pretty sure if we suddenly added 10 new numbers to that before a game, the FA would be pretty damn suspicious.

Like Reece says, if we rest Gerrard or Torres, we are not fielding our strongest side, but are instead utilising our squad. No different from what United are planning on doing, but to a larger scale. They will still be using experienced players tho, utilising their strength in depth.

Dunno what you mean here. We supply a list of squad numbers, but it can be 30 or 40 players, which is pointless in this debate.

If each club could only submit a 25 man squad for the PL, this whole debate would be solved.

The mancs will likely field players such as Amos, Gibson and Eckersley - where's the experience there?

[Scratch]

Dunno what you mean here. We supply a list of squad numbers, but it can be 30 or 40 players, which is pointless in this debate.

If each club could only submit a 25 man squad for the PL, this whole debate would be solved.

The mancs will likely field players such as Amos, Gibson and Eckersley - where's the experience there?

As far as i'm aware, all these players have appeared for the first team...in fact, Amos did so in Europe I think.

And we field players like El Zhar, Plessis, Darby, Spearing without getting docked points, so why worry if united do it.

Like a said, a large squad is a godsend sometimes.

[Craig_H]

As far as i'm aware, all these players have appeared for the first team...in fact, Amos did so in Europe I think.

And we field players like El Zhar, Plessis, Darby, Spearing without getting docked points, so why worry if united do it.

Like a said, a large squad is a godsend sometimes.

We dont field a whole team of them though!

[Scratch]

We dont field a whole team of them though!

And? If we wanted to, we could, and still be within the laws of the game.

[Craig_H]

And? If we wanted to, we could, and still be within the laws of the game.

Well no it wouldnt, because the laws say you have to field a full strength team!

How many times does it have to be said? The law is stupid, but it exists, so the idea is that it's meant to be upheld. So no, we wouldnt be within the laws.

[Scratch]

Well no it wouldnt, because the laws say you have to field a full strength team!

How many times does it have to be said? The law is stupid, but it exists, so the idea is that it's meant to be upheld. So no, we wouldnt be within the laws.

Then in pretty much every game this season where we've fielded the likes of Lucas, Insua, Dossena etc, we should be docked points, because by a policy of rotation we have broken the rules, as you see them, many times over. Doesn't matter if it's one player, or 10 players, rules are rules.

[Chrono]

Well no it wouldnt, because the laws say you have to field a full strength team!

How many times does it have to be said? The law is stupid, but it exists, so the idea is that it's meant to be upheld. So no, we wouldnt be within the laws.

What is the definition of full-strength? In theory playing a single debutant would break the rule as you see it.

I think it does mean 11 players.

[Scratch]

What is the definition of full-strength? In theory playing a single debutant would break the rule as you see it.

I think it does mean 11 players.

Don't bother, he has it in his mind that full strength means best 11.

[Welhung]

Its impossible to determine what your "best 11" would be. Its completely subjective.

It would have to mean that you have a full squad - 11 players.

How could you determine this rule to mean anything else???

Ridiculous.......

[Harv]

Well no, that's not true. This is a question of whether you agree with the rules or not, and clearly you dont - however, the rule is simply, that he must field a full strength side.

I agree that it's a silly rule, but if it's in place, it should be upheld.

As long as he field players within the squad then he IS fielding a full strength team. I dont understand the debate. What you're basically saying Craig is that if a player is fit to play and is good a manager MUST play him, otherwise he is breaking the rules. Load of bollocks buddy. Teams have a squad for a reason, and you should be able to field any player from that squad.

The only issue is one of morality and honor, is it right to field a weakened side against a team facing relegation, when it means they could stay up, and you're in effect sending another team down through your decision to field this weakened side.

I dont have a problem with it, because i would do the exact same thing if i was in Ginsoak's situation. He wants the best for the Mancs...not Newcastle. Imagine if he played a "full strength" side, and Rooney, Ronaldo and Vidic all got crocked and were forced to miss the Final, all because he was doing the right thing by Newcastle.

[Ballykissdevil]

We did it before the Champions League final. Managers had hissy fits. The papers didn't, really.

[Craig_H]

Then in pretty much every game this season where we've fielded the likes of Lucas, Insua, Dossena etc, we should be docked points, because by a policy of rotation we have broken the rules, as you see them, many times over. Doesn't matter if it's one player, or 10 players, rules are rules.

What is the definition of full-strength? In theory playing a single debutant would break the rule as you see it.

I think it does mean 11 players.

You've both exposed why it's a **** rule and i said that from the off.

However, if there's a rule in place, that nobody upholds, what's the point?

[Craig_H]

As long as he field players within the squad then he IS fielding a full strength team. I dont understand the debate. What you're basically saying Craig is that if a player is fit to play and is good a manager MUST play him, otherwise he is breaking the rules. Load of bollocks buddy. Teams have a squad for a reason, and you should be able to field any player from that squad.

The only issue is one of morality and honor, is it right to field a weakened side against a team facing relegation, when it means they could stay up, and you're in effect sending another team down through your decision to field this weakened side.

I dont have a problem with it, because i would do the exact same thing if i was in Ginsoak's situation. He wants the best for the Mancs...not Newcastle. Imagine if he played a "full strength" side, and Rooney, Ronaldo and Vidic all got crocked and were forced to miss the Final, all because he was doing the right thing by Newcastle.

I would do the same thing too. I'm not disputing that.

But the fact of the matter is, the rules call for the 'strongest' available side and while there's always debate, nobody could argue that VDS, Ferdinand, Vidic, Rooney and Ronaldo would be in their strongest lineup, without fail.

How many other rules shall we just choose to ignore then? How about the points rules too? 3 points for a win and 10 points for a draw? Excellent. We'd have won the title.

[Neil Young]

This debate just shows why the legal system has judges. Their job is to interpret the law because, contrary to what some might think, it's not black and white.

[dww]

This debate just shows why the legal system has judges. Their job is to interpret the law because, contrary to what some might think, it's not black and white.

I believe the equivalent are called buffoons at the Premier League.