Why are American teams allowed to rest star players?

It happens in the UK all the time. Big teams will frequently sit their star players for lesser tournament games because they have more important games in mind (League, CL). When do they get fined? Similarly, in the US the regular season comes second to the post-season tournament, the playoffs, and so star players may be rested for some regular season games that really aren't very important when the playoffs are coming up.

I get it.....especially if you got everything locked up or lets say (NBA) youre in the 4th seed and you cant go up and down. An injury can hit anytime, why not rest your guys, make sure you got the best lineup going into the playoffs.

If you go to a game at the end of a season where your team has no incentive to win yet expect them to play their best, you are a stupid person.

TV contracts are based on expected and promised ad revenue and ratings. So when all of a sudden the national game people were waiting for all year screws the fans who traveled and paid top dollar and those advertisers and networks, the next TV contract won't be as lucrative and the players will get less money.

Jordan refused to sit out games with the Wizards at the end because fans came for the Michael Jordan experience. Though now, it's coaches making the decision. Healthy scratches are starting to more than double every year.

The Premier League used to have a rule against it. It was nothing to do with the spectators though, the idea was that if you play a severely weakened team it is unfair to the other teams in the league.

Just as an example of how it can disadvantage other teams - some years ago Manchester United and Chelsea were fighting for the title. When Manchester United played Liverpool early in the season Liverpool tried their hardest and got a 2-0 win, meaning Manchester United got 0 points. Later in the season they played Chelsea and didn't try to win. Liverpool played a weak team and their legendary captain even "accidentally" passed the ball to Chelsea's deadliest striker so he could put Chelsea ahead, Chelsea won 2-0 and got 3 points.

At the end of the season Chelsea won the league by 1 point. You can see why this was unfair - if Liverpool had tried equally in both games Manchester United probably would have been champions.

At one point teams were really taking the piss, one team dropped all their good players and played a complete scrub team for a match against Manchester United so they could rest players for a future match against a team near them in the league. There was a huge amount of outrage over this even though they admitted breaking the rules, it was seen as an unacceptable imposition, so the rule was scrapped. In my view this was a mistake.

Because technically you didn't pay for a ticket to see the names on the back of the jersey, you paid for a ticket to see a team with the name on the front of the jersey. If the star player were injured (actually unable to play), would you be entitled to your money back?

There are plenty of reasons people buy tickets. Not everyone buys a ticket hoping to see a visiting star player. I'd say many people buy tickets hoping to see their team win. If I went to a game and my team lost, I'd want my money back. Doesn't mean I'm getting a refund. So some people would be happy the visiting team didn't play their best guys because it gives their team a better chance to win.