For me certain players haven't played as well as we all hoped they would and others have not been given the chance to prove they are any better/worse.
But the thing is... what do you class as being given a chance? For some this would mean a run in the reserves, for others, a few cup games and yet more believe this means they should get into the team. But what about if they aren't performing in training? Should we disrupt a team to shoe-horn someone in there who isn't putting the effort in off the field?
Reserve and cup games as well as training sessions are there for a reason in my eyes and all should be taken in to consideration when picking a team to play a game.
My opinion on squad management goes like this...(bit off topic by the way)
Players who are out of form should be given a chance to play their way back into it again as long as they arent so disastrously out of form that it effects the team and results hugely (for me Cotts is an example of not been given ENOUGH of a chance). Players that then fail to improve given a "fair" chance (yes i no "Fair" chance could spark hours of debate) should then be replaced by another player who the has the opportunity to stake his claim (Sharp being an example of a player being given too long IMO, probably because we have no adequate replacements).
But can you see where this might cause issues?
You pick X, Y and Z to come into the team and none of the trio have done anything to deserve this place apart from being crap. You put them into the starting line up and they play... crap. This would effect the rest of the players negatively as they think:
a) All I have to do to get in the team is be shit.
b) What kind of team is this?
c) I've worked bloody damned hard, done nothing wrong and not got a place. I'm off to a club that won't treat me like this.
The fans then start getting on the manager's back. "Why are you playing X, Y, Z?" forgetting of course than when they weren't playing, they encompassed all the talents of the Escape to Victory team in their prime.
"Play A, B and C instead."
A was dropped after scoring a hat trick three games in a row because the manager thought X should be given a chance. Player A thought "fuck it" and has drunk his way to the bottom of a wine cellar.
B was never the confident type and has got progressively worse after being dropped after a run of assured performances for the vastly inferior Y in the name of "giving him a chance". B now daren't touch the ball in case he does anything wrong and loses his place again. He is a shadow of the player he was before he was dropped.
C was always a bit of a playboy but was playing well before being dropped for Z. After learning he was losing his place, he tossed it off around mucky birds and has caught chlamydia. He is now known as the "big dirty C" and none of the other players will talk to him.
Consequences see
A manager's job isn't to keep his pampered players happy, it's the other way around. A manager's job is to win games.