One of the major talking points this season seems to be the number of defeats that the top teams are suffering, with the Premier League nerds using the statistic to defend the English top flight from the accusations of predictability which have dogged the division for years. These defeats are not just against fellow top teams: Liverpool have lost to Fuham, Sunderlandnil and bottom club (at the time of playing) Portsmouth, Man United have lost to Fulham and Burnley (and could it be argued that the Liverpool defeat was not against a top club considering the reds’ season so far?), Chelsea have lost to Wigan and Arsenal have lost to Sunderlandnil with no holiday equipment involved whatsoever.
First of all, the number of defeats at the top should be further scrutinised. At the moment, when thirteen of the clubs have played eighteen games and most of the rest have played seventeen, the five teams in European places (Chelsea, United, Arsenal, Villa, Spurs) have suffered 20 defeats. Compared to the last two seasons, when the top five teams suffered only 26 defeats all season, it seems high, but during the previous seven seasons (back to the start of the decade) the top five were beaten between 34 and 41 times, with the lowest of those figures only coming in the season when one team (Arsenal) unusually lost no matches at all.
Taking the recent “big four” as a yardstick (although why on Earth Liverpool should be counted when they have never won the PL and Chelsea, United and Arsenal have won all but one of the titles I have no idea), perhaps there is a more noticeable change. At this stage of the season they have lost a combined 19 matches, which compared to the last two seasons (17 and 15 in total) is obviously off the clock. However, again in the previous seven seasons the same teams lost between 25 and 34 games all season, so perhaps the figure is not too high yet.
The five teams with the fewest defeats – not necessarily the same as the previous two categories, and indeed they are Manchester City, Chelsea, Villa, Arsenal and United – have 17 defeats between them at this stage of the season. Again, in the last two seasons the five least defeated teams had 26 and 25 losses all season, but in the previous seven seasons back to the start of the decade they lost between 34 and 43 times in the whole season.
The partial conclusion here then must be that although the top teams are losing more than during the last two seasons, it is precisely those two seasons that should be considered the anomaly and not this season, which appears to be following the longer trend.
Now let’s look at the teams in the relegation zone. Does this mean then that with supposedly more points being dropped at the top there will be more pressure for those in the relegation fight? During the past nine seasons the three teams relegated at the end of the season have managed between 18 and 23 wins between them, with the lowest three figures coming in Derby County’s disastrous season and Sunderlandnil’s two nightmares – the norm has been between 21 and 23. In order to survive it was necessary to reach between 34 and 43 points (taking as the limit the 17th-placed team’s total plus one point, ignoring goal difference).
As it stands at the moment, the bottom three clubs (Bolton, West Ham and Portsmouth) have managed 11 wins between them, although last weekend the bottom three included Wolves, whose win catapulted them to twelfth and would have been the 12th win of the bottom three. If we extend their figures to the end of the season as an average, the bottom three will have 23 wins and 36 points will be the total to beat. So no difference there then.
Perhaps the only difference could be – there’s that word “could” again, about the only thing that makes the Premier League vaguely interesting – the number of points needed for a top five finish and European football. In the last nine seasons the fifth team have needed between 56 and 65 points to guarantee playing in Europe the following season (again, taking as the limit the 6th-placed team’s total plus one point, ignoring goal difference). This season it could be as high as 70 points.
However, at the end of the day most of the table will be exactly the same. Certainly Chelsea, United and Arsenal – winners of 16 out of 17 seasons – will be in the top three or four as always and the weakest teams will be relegated. Everyone will have pretty much the same number of points relative to their final position in the table. There will have been the odd surprising result – like every season, so no change there – but at the end of the day we all know what the outcome will be.
It will take more than Newcastle going down to make the Premier League less than totally predictable.
Friday, December 25, 2009
Sunday, December 20, 2009
The bottom line in the bottom five
By now everyone knows that Wolves manager Mick McCarthy made huge changes to the team that beat Bolton at home then Spurs away for the visit to Old Trafford. He has been dragged over hot coals and asked to explain himself by the Premier League board as well as criticised by anyone and everyone for apparently bringing the game (!) and the Premier League (!!) into disrepute. It is telling that the exception in all the criticism is the people in the hot seat – managers and former managers such as Alex Ferguson, Tony Pulis, Phil Brown and Alan Shearer.
The only apparent basis for the complaints is that the Wolves fans travelled to Manchester and paid £42 to see the reserves (which seems to overlook that fans at clubs like Liverpool pay more than that to see second-team action week after week) although a few people grumbled about the ethics of changing an apparent first eleven in order to gain some mid- or long-term advantage over the club’s rivals.
First of all a reply to a manager who is increasingly delusional and lacking in credibility, Arsenal’s Arsène Wenger: McCarthy was continuing the long-existing trend of utilising the whole squad in order to obtain the maximum number of points – there is no such thing as a first eleven any more, thanks in no small part to the (beneficial) influence of continental managers such as Wenger and their system of relying on the whole squad. The Wolves boss was by no means the first manager even this season to make wholesale changes to his team (Wenger whenever he feels like it) and he wasn’t the last (David Moyes against Borisov). Of course when you’re playing in European competitions too the decision is considered to be intelligent and competitive; when you’re a multi-million-pound manager it’s simply called “rotation”. When you’ve got a bench to die for anything goes.
Now to the fans: fans have dreams, but pragmatism is the only road for a club like Wolves at the moment. Sometimes in life you stay and fight and sometimes you have to walk away and fight another day. McCarthy's priority this season should be to keep Wolves in the top flight, and in order to do that he recognises that there isn't only one league, there's two or even three or four. He is in the bottom one at the moment and needs to guarantee success against his direct rivals, the likes of Burnley. That way preserves the long-term dream of being able to stand and fight against the likes of Man United, because the dream of just rolling up at Old Trafford belongs to the teams fighting to get out of the Championship – for Wolves it is last year’s dream. This year is different and although the fans can dream it’s time for the manager to be pragmatic. True, £42 is a lot of money, but the fans spent more on their Premier League shirt and they will want it to bear the same symbols next season.
Mark Hughes’ sacking yesterday really was something that brings the game into disrepute and it is also a warning to McCarthy – look after your own club and let the other managers look after theirs, because no-one will help you if you try and follow a blameless route and end up relegated. On the contrary, one slip will see you in the street.
As a footnote to this article, Wolves have just beaten Burnley 2-0 – they have left the relegation zone, leapfrogged Burnley and other direct rivals and are now twelfth. Some people have asked what would happen if Manchester United won the league by two points (I suppose they are assuming Wolves could have managed a draw) but I think a more relevant question is to ask the Wolves fans how they will feel if they survive by the points they have gained against Burnley. It’s all very well for snobbish, elitist and hypocritical managers to moralise from the rich end of the league, but Mick McCarthy has only one priority – keep his team in the Premier League. The fans know that, it’s just a shame certain journalists – and certain managers – are too inexperienced and too protected respectively to have any idea of the bottom line.
The only apparent basis for the complaints is that the Wolves fans travelled to Manchester and paid £42 to see the reserves (which seems to overlook that fans at clubs like Liverpool pay more than that to see second-team action week after week) although a few people grumbled about the ethics of changing an apparent first eleven in order to gain some mid- or long-term advantage over the club’s rivals.
First of all a reply to a manager who is increasingly delusional and lacking in credibility, Arsenal’s Arsène Wenger: McCarthy was continuing the long-existing trend of utilising the whole squad in order to obtain the maximum number of points – there is no such thing as a first eleven any more, thanks in no small part to the (beneficial) influence of continental managers such as Wenger and their system of relying on the whole squad. The Wolves boss was by no means the first manager even this season to make wholesale changes to his team (Wenger whenever he feels like it) and he wasn’t the last (David Moyes against Borisov). Of course when you’re playing in European competitions too the decision is considered to be intelligent and competitive; when you’re a multi-million-pound manager it’s simply called “rotation”. When you’ve got a bench to die for anything goes.
Now to the fans: fans have dreams, but pragmatism is the only road for a club like Wolves at the moment. Sometimes in life you stay and fight and sometimes you have to walk away and fight another day. McCarthy's priority this season should be to keep Wolves in the top flight, and in order to do that he recognises that there isn't only one league, there's two or even three or four. He is in the bottom one at the moment and needs to guarantee success against his direct rivals, the likes of Burnley. That way preserves the long-term dream of being able to stand and fight against the likes of Man United, because the dream of just rolling up at Old Trafford belongs to the teams fighting to get out of the Championship – for Wolves it is last year’s dream. This year is different and although the fans can dream it’s time for the manager to be pragmatic. True, £42 is a lot of money, but the fans spent more on their Premier League shirt and they will want it to bear the same symbols next season.
Mark Hughes’ sacking yesterday really was something that brings the game into disrepute and it is also a warning to McCarthy – look after your own club and let the other managers look after theirs, because no-one will help you if you try and follow a blameless route and end up relegated. On the contrary, one slip will see you in the street.
As a footnote to this article, Wolves have just beaten Burnley 2-0 – they have left the relegation zone, leapfrogged Burnley and other direct rivals and are now twelfth. Some people have asked what would happen if Manchester United won the league by two points (I suppose they are assuming Wolves could have managed a draw) but I think a more relevant question is to ask the Wolves fans how they will feel if they survive by the points they have gained against Burnley. It’s all very well for snobbish, elitist and hypocritical managers to moralise from the rich end of the league, but Mick McCarthy has only one priority – keep his team in the Premier League. The fans know that, it’s just a shame certain journalists – and certain managers – are too inexperienced and too protected respectively to have any idea of the bottom line.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
One rule for them...
(For only the second time, a different sport...)
If press reports are to be believed - and granted, that's a big ask sometimes - Tiger Woods refused to speak to police about the car crash as many as three times. If that's true, I challenge any normal citizen to try the same and get away with it. Life's good when you're rich and famous, isn't it?
If press reports are to be believed - and granted, that's a big ask sometimes - Tiger Woods refused to speak to police about the car crash as many as three times. If that's true, I challenge any normal citizen to try the same and get away with it. Life's good when you're rich and famous, isn't it?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
