As soon as Huddersfield Town made 10 changes for their match at Birmingham City on Saturday it was clear there was going to be trouble. There is resting and there is rotation but 10 changes seems both unnecessary and provocative, and more or less bound to invite investigation.
Ten was the number of changes Mick McCarthy infamously made in 2009 when Wolves were faced with a tricky midweek match at Old Trafford before a winnable home game against Burnley. Despite his argument that his much-altered team still contained a number of internationals and experienced players McCarthy could not disguise the fact that he had essentially written off the Manchester United game to inevitable defeat – Wolves lost 3-0 – and the club was fined a suspended £25,000 to prevent any similar stunts later in the season. They did beat Burnley the following weekend, however, so McCarthy got what he wanted, even if the 70,000 crowd inside Old Trafford were short-changed if they were expecting any sort of entertainment.
So while David Wagner quite sensibly felt it important to spare some of his best players before the play-offs when Huddersfield went to Birmingham, he might have got away with half a dozen or so but 10 was always going to attract attention. Birmingham managed to win 2-0, despite having a man sent off in the first half, Harry Redknapp ended up with three important points he might not otherwise have secured, and Nottingham Forest and Blackburn Rovers quite naturally complained that Town’s team selection had handed relegation rivals an unfair advantage.
The Football League has written to Huddersfield asking for an explanation, while making it clear that any punishment will be in the nature of a fine rather than a replay or restatement of the result. Birmingham keep the points, in other words, and while Redknapp’s side could still go down on the final day this weekend, Forest and Blackburn sit two points closer to the trapdoor.
It is an unsatisfactory situation, certainly, though some sympathy was possible with Dean Whitehead’s tweet, when the veteran midfielder observed that over 45 games Huddersfield had earned the right to name any team they liked once their play-off place was attained, while Forest and Blackburn only had themselves to blame if they were still in the mire with one match to go. Tough but fair.
The Championship is a notoriously long and hard grind, and going up via the play-offs is no easy task after such a demanding season. Wagner naturally wants to give himself and his side the best chance, and if he decides it is more important to have fresh, rested players than finish a place or two higher in the final table, who is to say he is wrong?
Were the promotion system simply a matter of finishing as high up the table as possible, as it used to be, there would be less excuse for picking one’s matches at the end, but the play-off routine is a mini-competition in its own right, a crisis built into the constitution, and if the EFL is going to ask its promotion hopefuls to jump through this final hoop it cannot really object to clubs making the necessary preparations.
Furthermore, Wagner has been rotating fairly heavily all season. Not to the extent of 10 changes, granted, but he has quite regularly been swapping out up to half a dozen. Most of the players involved at Birmingham had started the game against Manchester City in the FA Cup, when there was very little outcry about fielding a weakened team, mostly because Town managed to take their Premier League opponents to a replay. All of the starting lineup at Birmingham bar one had made 10 or more appearances this season, so what is a weakened team anyway? In the old days you had the first team and the stiffs, and everyone knew which was which, but at the highest levels football is much more of a squad game nowadays.
Look at Chelsea leaving out Eden Hazard and Diego Conte for an hour of their FA Cup semi-final against Spurs. Beforehand all the talk was of Antonio Conte disrespecting the game and the competition. Afterwards everyone was in agreement that it had been one of the best occasions Wembley has witnessed. That was because Chelsea’s squad is so strong and the overall quality still high even after significant withdrawals. The same does not apply all the way down the league – it certainly did not apply to Wolves eight years ago – though in Championship terms Huddersfield have been playing a squad system under Wagner. They have shown the ability to make changes without a discernible drop in quality.
All of which they will no doubt be pointing out to the Football League when they answer the charges made against them. They will probably be able to mount a stronger and more logical case than the authority, whose rules state simply that there is a requirement to play full-strength sides in all league matches, unless some satisfactory reason is given. Woolly, or what? Does involvement in forthcoming play-off contests count as a satisfactory reason, and if not why not? Check back over all the Championship fixtures for last weekend, or the weekend before, or the Premier League equivalents for that matter. Was everyone playing their strongest team?
Over the course of a season players are routinely rested, dropped, protected from injury or simply left out because a different system or formation is being tried. This is normal. No one hears any complaints about it. The notion of a full-strength side is normally for cup finals or other knockout rounds, major derbies or grudge matches against immediate rivals. A game between a side in fifth place and one in relegation trouble on the penultimate weekend of the season does not really come into that category. No one would have blamed Huddersfield for taking it easy, whatever selection Wagner came up with.
Whitehead is right: Huddersfield have worked hard enough all season to enjoy a little respite if they so wish – how many other teams are already “on the beach”? – and the matter would probably have gone unnoticed but for breaking the 10th commandment. Which is, simply, don’t change the whole team. It looks bad.
