The Last Days of Ringpulls

 

I believe the Cambodia beer brand (my long-time favourite) was the first to kick the idea off. About 7 or 8 years ago, they started a lottery-style promotion on their products, printing a certain proportion of the undersides of the ringpulls on their cans with symbols indicating an 'instant win' prize. The majority of these wins were just 'one free beer', but occasionally there'd be a small cash prize (I've been lucky enough to catch a few $5 and $10 ones over the years, and $1 prizes are relatively common; I believe there were - much rarer - instances of $20, $50 or $100 windfalls as well). And, once-in-a-blue-moon - or so the marketers protested - you might even win a moped, or - even more vanishingly rarely - an SUV.

This initiative proved to be so popular that all the other beer companies eventually felt obliged to follow suit. And the idea even started to spread to a few other locally-manufactured products, such as soft drinks. But the beer market was its natural home, and it soon became central to Cambodia's drinking culture - and, indeed, to much of its social culture. Comparing your fortunes with those of your companions over the course of an evening's consumption, assiduously storing up your winners to redeem at your favourite corner store, or donating them to a favourite bar to help ever so slightly with their stressed bottom-line (it became a common moral discussion as to whether one was actually obliged to hand over winning ringpulls if you'd got them in a bar or restaurant; a few places started coveting them so greedily that they instituted a policy of opening your ringpulls for you and retaining them automatically...), or giving them to street kids who seemed to come to value them more highly than just small change - these engaging oddities were all a central part of the experience of life in Cambodia for the last several years. In rural villages, the ringpulls apparently even became a convenient medium of exchange for small transactions.

The beer companies, I suspect, increasingly felt trapped in a vicious cycle of competition: the promotions were boosting sales, but they felt obliged to keep increasing the number and value of the prizes offered to maintain their market position against competitors - and it may often have been costing them more money than it was actually earning from increased revenue. In the first year or two of the campaign, when it was an exhilarating novelty, it was pretty easy to redeem small prizes anywhere - at any bar or restaurant or mom'n'pop shop. But the beer companies got increasingly cranky about paying out, making the redemption process for retailers increasingly bureaucratic, and reducing the amount they'd get paid (or so I've been told a few times; obviously I don't have direct experience of this - and I've only been a visitor rather than a resident in Cambodia for most of this period): when they only started reimbursing the wholesale rather than retail price of the most common 'free can of beer' prize, not unnaturally small store owners were no longer willing to give you a can for a single ringpull, and before long it became fairly standard that you needed two 'one free beer' ringpulls to claim one can. And the whole thing was apparently such a hassle that the majority of stores stopped having anything to do with it quite a few years ago. It became a bit of a Grail Quest to find an amenable neighbourhood shop that would still give you free beers for winning ringpulls. And it got to the point where you could usually only redeem cash prizes, even the very small ones, directly from the beer companies at one of their offices (and they are few and far between, not easy to find or access; the Cambodia beer company used to have a small one right in the centre of Battambang, my 'spiritual home', and for a while that was my go-to for cashing in on my winning tabs - but it closed down a few years ago...). So, for many of us, the shine had gone off the idea somewhat quite a long time since. And yet... it was now such an ingrained part of daily life that it had the comfort of the faimilar about it: it was one of those distinctive things about being in Cambodia, one of those unique local quirks that you couldn't help but feel warmly about (even if you weren't a beer drinker).

Even though I'd always do my best to redeem or give away my accumulated winning ringpull tabs in the last days of any visit here, there always seemed to be a few that I'd forgotten about (scattered obscurely in pockets of trousers and the bottom of rucksacks) and a few more that I'd only acquired on my final night or two. And so, every time I come back I have a little plastic baggie of ringpulls that will make my first few days of beer-drinking here pleasantly subsidised. And for the past few years, there's been a cheery old bloke in a little corner shop in Battambang who has happily taken all of these tabs from me at a good rate, and even accepted my cash winners (at, I think, 75% of face-value). It's become one of the little rituals of life here that I really enjoy. Of course, the guy uses it as an excuse to boost sales, insisting that I can't really take less than a case for such a large number of discount ringpulls, and so I always end up having to pay a bit of cash as well; I don't mind at all. But then, of course, you're trapped in an endless cycle. The rate of winners, although very variable from case to case, is overall quite high. I'm guessing it's probably 30-40% for the 'free can' wins, and can occasionally be much higher. I think I have generally been particularly lucky (for possibly the one-and-only time in my life!), and have achieved an overall win rate well above 50%. So, for every largely 'free' case of beers I get from my favourite pusher in Battambang, I end up with another little baggie of ringpulls which has got me well on the way to needing to get another one.

Oh, but now this simple, silly pleasure is about to be squelched by the killjoy government. There have been dark rumours for two or three years now that, bowing to foreign pressure (the country is still heavily dependent on foreign aid to pay for most of its infrastructure, and foreign NGOs do a huge amount of work in the health and education sectors) to tackle excessive alcohol consumption, the Prime Minister was about to introduce measures to limit or ban these ringpull promotions. Indeed, it was widely believed that a complete ban was imminent in 2025, and many people told me then that a definite date for it had already been announced. It seems that was not in fact correct, and the government has been dragging its feet on announcing such legislation for a year or more, but.... finally, it seems, the ban really is happening. All such promotions are supposed to cease from October 1st. From what I've read online, it would appear that that is the date on which winning ringpulls should no longer be produced or sold. But, since it takes a while to clear out stocks, what actually seems to have happened is that the distribution of new winning ringpulls has already been phased out over the last month or so, and October 1st - or probably in fact September 30th - is being treated as the last day on which you can redeem them.

This imminent disappearance of what has become a cherished national institution has had a lot of rather weird little effects in the beer market ecosystem and in the drinking culture over this past month or so.....

People have always been a bit superstitious about certain stores or bars having a greater incidence of 'winners'; or about certain times of year being more propitious (that belief is in fact well-founded: the beer companies do indeed dramatically increase the proportion of small-prize ringpulls just before major holidays); or about certain cases being overstuffed with lucky tabs (probably so; but no-one ever seems to have discovered a reliable means of identifying them). This sentiment has been acutely heightened in the last days of the promotions: people are moving around to different bars, to try to find ones where they seem to be 'luckier'; some are even (sacrilege!) switching away from their preferred brand in the hopeful belief than an inferior rival may yield a higher percentage of wins.

The beer companies have also started putting out openly advertised non-lottery cans, to wean people back on to the idea of beer without prizes. But at the moment these are so universally shunned, and such is the value that people attach (probably exaggeratedly) to the prize promotion, that they have had to sell these at a substantially lower price. Bars which have tried to save money by preferring to buy these no-win cases are now pressured by their thrifty - and probably gambling-addicted - patrons to pass this saving on to them rather than keeping it for themselves. Much ugliness and pettiness has suddenly broken out as a result of this seemingly trivial adjustment to the country's marketing laws.

But all of this stress and furore will soon be over. Few of the winning ringpulls are still in circulation. And it would probably be difficult now to redeem them, in the last week before the ban formally takes effect. If I should acquire any more now, I think I'll probably just keep them - as a souvenir of a strange but happy time.

'But what has any of this got to do with FPL?' I imagine my notional reader asking.

Well, I have often commented on my discomfort and distaste for the strong element of gambling addiction involved in the appeal of the Fantasy Premier League game. And in my sidebar profile here I have labelled my own devotion to the game an addiction (jokingly; but all jokes have a core of devastating truth).

And the ringpull lottery is one of the purest, simplest forms of gambling there is. Interestingly, you don't really stake anything in the conventional sense (you're paying for the beer, not the 'lottery ticket' that goes with it - although, in effect, the beer companies have been charging you a small, invisible premium to participate in this lottery). But it occurs to me that what you're really always staking in a bet is your hopes and dreams, the possiblity of disappointment; a cash stake is just a concrete manifestation of that; it's the emotional investment that you really feel, it's that which gives you the thrill of success or the despair of failure.

And it has recently struck me that this is at the root of FPL's hold over us. We don't have to pay money to participate; but we do put a very heavy emotional investment into it.

And this realisation has led to the further thought that although many people protest that they want to prosper in the game by 'skill', to be acclaimed for their superior insight and judgement, that's just not the case at all, they are deluded. The appeal of the game lies precisely in the fact that it is almost entirely a matter of luck: we want something for nothing, we want to feel 'lucky', we want to feel 'blessed', we want to feel that Fate or Destiny or God or the Universe has been kind to us for once in our lives.

I feel we can never, or only very rarely, experience anything like that intensity of joy and validation from being justly rewarded for our skill and effort. And this, I think, is because dissatisfaction is the fundamental motivator for all animal life. We can't help it: that's just the way evolution has built us, that's why we've survived so long and prospered so well as a species - we almost always feel dissatisfied with everything. That's what makes us constantly strive for more. Even when we do receive reward or praise for our achievements, we tend to overvalue our own abilities, and so we inevitably feel that the praise/reward falls at least somewhat short of the due mark. And even if we might occasionally acknowledge that the level of praise/reward we receive is absolutely appropriate, we feel that it is no more than our just desert - and we don't get much of a thrill from it. We can imagine what such a thrill ought to feel like; we desperately want to experience that. But our dissatisfaction threshold is set too high. We still crave more: we feel we somehow deserve to be over-rewarded. And thus the accomplishments of our intellect, capabilities, industriousness - they rarely give us full or lasting satisfaction: we never feel that we are getting due recompense for being so smart and wonderful.

But when we find a winning ringpull, when we win a bet, when we have a good gameweek in FPL,.... for one brief, rare moment we are getting the thing we seem to most crave - being over-rewarded. We're getting something for nothing: and that is the best bloody feeling in the world.

Fantasy Premier League is so ridiculously enjoyable - and so insidiously addictive - precisely because it's nearly all LUCK.

One further analogy comes to mind, though. Although the beer can ringpull lottery was heavily weighted towards customer satisfaction with a very generous win ratio, you could still occasionally hit a long succession of blank ringpulls. And those no-win experiences hurt, each and every one of them; every blank tab was a cruel taunt, it seemed to be scornfully jeering 'Loser!' at you. A long run of such blanks could be profoundly depressing. So too in FPL: a succession of low-scoring gameweeks, or even a single gameweek in which all of your top players fail to return.... deflates the spirits something awful. Getting that mood rollercoaster under control is, I think, the main challenge involved in playing the game: we have to try to learn to dismiss the bad results, to laugh them off; we can enjoy our occasional good gameweeks, but we must ignore the bad ones and not let them dishearten or annoy us.

Do Wilcard transfers affect prices??

 I don't know.

I don't believe anyone (not ordinary FPL managers struggling with the game, anyway) does know for sure. Although a lot of people have convinced themselves that they do know - on no obvious basis. The idea that transfers made under a Wildcard are excluded from affecting the price-change mechanism in the game seems to be no more than a pervasive myth.

FPL Towers declines to publish any rules on how the price-change mechanism works (because, presumably, they don't want people to get too good at 'gaming the system'). And none of the online guides I've looked at over the years, guides which claim to have deduced the main 'rules' from close observation of price changes over an extended period, has ever suggested that Wildcard transfers are excluded from the process. Moreover, FPL frequently makes tweaks to this mechanism, without announcing or explaining them; so, even if such a 'rule' might have been in place at some point in the past, even last season, it might not necessarily still be in effect now.  So, nobody can really know for sure; and anyone who claims they do is a victim of self-delusion (a sadly common ailment in the FPL community).

I would imagine that this notion arose because it is fairly obvious that transfers made while a Free Hit chip is in play are so excluded from affecting prices; and so it might seem reasonable to suppose that the similar Wildcard chip is subject to the same proviso.

But there is a very obvious difference with the Free Hit: those are not 'real transfers' - they're all going to be automatically revoked within a matter of days.

With the Wildcard, however, the expectation is that all changes may persist indefinitely; and almost certainly some will remain in place for a long time, perhaps for the remainder of the season. And even those which are rapidly reversed, while the Wildcard is still in play, are nevertheless reversed by a conscious decision of the manager playing the game - based on his appraisal of unfolding circumstances. Even if a transfer has only been 'in place' for 24 hours, it is still a 'real transfer'; there is no good reason for disregarding its possible impact on overall ownership levels and price-change cues just because it was made under a Wildcard.

The purported rationale for such a strange and pointless rule is that it is intended to dissuade people from trading for profit on their Wildcard (particularly over an extended gap between gameweeks, such as the current extra-long international break - as I discussed at some length this morning).

There are two problems with this explanation. 

First, individuals trading for profit, or even quite large groups of managers trading for profit, are not generally going to have any decisive impact on price-changes. You usually need huge numbers of managers making the same trade within a short space of time to trigger a change. There are only going to be very rare gameweeks where you do have a very substantial percentage of managers all using their Wildcards at once - such that this might become an issue.

Second, since a Wildcard can be played retroactively at any point before the next gameweek deadline, such a 'deterrent policy' can be easily circumvented by paying points for the transfers initially, and then wiping out that points-spend with a subsequent playing of the chip. [There is now in theory a cap of 20 transfers per gameweek - which is not applied to the Wildcard or Free Hit chips; but that really is a huge number of transfers to make, even in a very extended gameweek. When I have tried speculative trading, I don't think I've come anywhere close to making that number of transfers. So, the prospect of being able to use 'unlimited transfers' with the Wildcard isn't much of a factor in seeking to guard against this supposed 'abuse', I don't think.]

My own - yes, superficial, anecdotal - experience of trying out Wildcard trading over international breaks (when, presumably, very large numbers of managers - perhaps responsible for the majority of the transfer volume in these periods - are indeed on their Wildcards) is that Wildcard trades do appear to play into the price-mechanism. (There wouldn't be such large volumes of transfers every single day unless a lot of them were being produced by Wildcards. There may, of course, be a further question as to whether Wildcard transfers - and perhaps Free Hit transfers also - are publicly counted in the official transfer numbers, but kept apart from a second, secret number of 'real' transfers. But I don't think the denizens of FPL Towers are capable of that level of sophistication in their cruelty - or simply in their administration. I repeat that my impression has been that the large numbers of transfers we see over an extended gameweek like this must be largely due to Wildcards in play,... and they do seem to be affecting price changes.) But, like I said at the outset, I can't be sure; and there is really no way to tell.

However, it doesn't really any difference. Whether or not you yourself are playing your Wildcard is utterly irrelevant to the price-change mechanism in the grand scheme of things. The only factor that would make a difference is if very large numbers of other people are also playing their Wildcards at the same time. And if that is the case,.... well, FPL Towers would be rotten kill-joys if they excluded those transfers from the price-changes. But... maybe they do, maybe they don't.  So what??  We seek to trade-for-profit based on the transfers we can see happening (and our own appreciation of which players are likely to become popular or unpopular). We don't know who those people making the trades are, we don't know if they're on a Wildcard or not; we just have to accept the transfer numbers that the game publishes, and act on those. We may resent that the actual number of transfers may be much higher and is not being fully counted, we may bridle at the thought that our own - and our fellow Wildcarders' - transfers are perhaps not contributing to the price shifts we hope to benefit from. But we have no way of knowing what's going on behind the scenes at FPL Towers; we have to accept the transfer picture and the likelihood of price changes that is presented to us.

The common idea that Wildcard transfers don't affect prices is not only - in all probability - an unfounded myth; it is, ultimately, utterly unimportant, it has no bearing at all on how we approach trading-for-profit on a Wildcard.

The allure of the 'LONG Wildcard' again

Some folks like to play their Wildcard when there's an interruption in the regular Premier League schedule - such as now, when we're getting an especially long 'interntaional break', nearly 3 weeks with no Premier League football. [This is a very slightly adapted re-post of a piece I first wrote for the international break we had this February.]

There are four possible reasons for this preference (though two, no, three of them are pretty frivolous):

1)  You can take advantage of a 'best of both worlds' situation, being able to make transfers early (as soon as the deadline for the current gameweek has passed!) to avoid possible adverse price changes on players you're interested in - while having the security of being able to swap them out again, if they get injured before the next gameweek deadline. 

2) Since these long gaps between deadlines increase the risk of being hit by multiple injuries (there are invariably other games - European ties, domestic cups, or internationals - going on in the interval between regular league matches; and training seems to be becoming more hazardous than playing, in the modern game!), some may find it reassuring to have a Wildcard in play so that they can easily address any such developing crisis - even if they weren't hankering to make any active, improving changes to their squad.

3)  Some enjoy having the leisure to contemplate a major squad rebuild over a longer period of time. Some, indeed, find it difficult to visualise what different combinations of players would look like (and what they'd collectively cost...), and so actually use the 'Transfers' page for trying out multiple 'drafts' of possible new squads. And they can't get enough of this pleasant diversion: they want to drag it out over days and days.

4)  And some pursue 'trading for profit', focusing on trying to build their squad value rather than necessarily improving the total points-potential of their selection. Because there is more time for transfers to happen, and maybe more transfers needing to happen because of the longer period of time elapsed leading to a larger accumulation of injury problems, and because of the probability that more people than usual are using their Wildcards in a gameweek like this,... a long gameweek will tend to have a higher volume of transfer traffic, and this will result in a greater number of price changes. There are various FPL resource sites online that attempt to predict when price changes are imminent (and this year, the FPL website has added one of its own; but there's no 'rocket science' about that - it's fairly easy to anticipate which players are likely to be suddenly popular or unpopular, and you can check in on their recent transfers numbers regularly to see just how big a swing in ownership they are experiencing. 

Transfer trading for profit like this has become more difficult in recent years, as FPL has tweaked its 'algorithm' in a way that makes it rather less easy to trigger a price-change (in either direction), and so we now very rarely see multiple changes in the same gameweek. And of course, you need a player to go up in price twice in order to be able to make a profit on them, because the dreaded 'transfer tax' limits you to half the value of any increase in price since you bought him (rounded down!) when you sell a player on again; hence, you don't earn anything on a first increase in price, nor any extra on a third increase; and you can't reach a fourth increase during such a period of Wildcard trading, as the number of price changes within one gameweek is capped at three. However, where there is an extended gameweek, there is an increased chance that a player's price may rise twice (or twice more, if you were unlucky enough to miss out on his first price rise at the start of the gameweek; although the threshold for each successive price rise within the same gameweek is set far higher, so it is almost unheard-of to see three price rises in one gameweek), thus enabling you to take a quick 100k profit by selling him on immediately. 

In practice, these days it is very difficult to realise a rise in squad value of more than a few hundred thousand through this exercise. And it does take a lot of effort, in scrutinising the transfer numbers every day, and perhaps making dozens of speculative transfers over the course of the gameweek (most of which will return no profit).

You might also be able to take advantage of selling-and-buying-back a player who's falling in price to boost your squad value, by buying him back cheaper than you sold him. That is a little easier to achieve than chasing price rises on new purchases, but.... you rarely want to be buying players who are falling in value!

[I only discovered recently that there is a widespread concern in FPL-land that Wildcard transfers supposedly don't count towards price-changes; and many people use this as a reason for following the risky strategem of initially paying for their mutliple 'long gameweek' transfers (to try to make sure that they will count towards official, potentially price-influencing transfer numbers), and only playing their Wildcard shortly before the deadline (to cancel the huge points spend on all the transfers they've accumulated). This, of course, is a very hazardous procedure, because the FPL website might crash close to the deadline (it often has in the past!), or you might lose your phone, or your Internet connection,... or you might simply forget... and be left with a huge 'bill' of points needlessly spent on futile speculations in the transfer market.

Since FPL Towers are extremely secretive about the 'rules' on price changes, we have no way of knowing for sure whether this notion is true or not; though I believe it to be mistaken, unfounded.  I think it would be impactical of implementation, and would serve no useful purpose. And it does not accord with my own observations of frequent transfer trading over international breaks. Ultimately, though, as I argue in that extended post on the issue that I just linked at the start of this parenthesis, it just doesn't matter. We look at how prices are actually shifting, and predicted to shift, based on the announced numbers of 'eligible' transfers, whatever they are. As with all things FPL, we are at the mercy of whatever figures FPL Towers chooses to give us, and we just have to work with that!]

So, really, only the first of those reasons is potentially a good one for considering a 'long' gameweek to be a tempting opportunity to trigger your use of the Wildcard.

But even that is a weak reason. And it is, almost always, going to be outweighed by the fact that, as I explained here a little while back, any interruption of the regular league schedule disrupts a club's usual training and preparation routines, and thus makes their form upon the resumption of league games more uncertain; and...  you don't want uncertainty when you're planning a major rebuild of your squad for a long run of games (or, for the 2nd Wildcard, for the whole remainder of the season).

I rather feel that - in an 'ideal world', anyway - it's still too early to be contempating using the 1st Wildcard. We haven't had time yet to evaluate the possible impact of changes made in the recent transfer window. And there are no major 'turns' in fixture difficulty for a few weeks yet. It's always better to hang on to a Wildcard for as long as you can - unless there's a pressing need to use it.

Better to hold off a while longer, if you can; but I can see how it's getting mighty tempting at the moment. (I might even succumb to the impulse myself....)

The key argument for waiting a bit longer this year is the unprecedented length of this first international break: the Premier League schedule being suspended for three full weeks. Not only does this increase the possibility of us being hit by multiple injuries before Gameweek 6 (some of which might perhaps not become apparent until after the gameweek deadline!), I fear the risk also of 'stored up' injuries: players returning from international duty with undisclosed minor injury niggles, or simply being caught out by the sudden resumption of much more intense club training, and breaking down ahead of Gameweek 7 or Gameweek 8; that could well be more of a problem than immediate injuries going into Gameweek 6. And then there's the perennial problem that players who've had particularly long flights back - all of the South Americans, usually! and Chris Wood!! - are often unavailable for the first weekend back because of fatigue/jet-lag; so, an optimal Wildcard squad for the next several gameweeks might find itself being short of a full starting eleven, or at least short of a full bench, in Gameweek 6.

Perhaps even more importantly, the long interruption in regular club training is going to be hugely disruptive of everyone's form (that's likely to be a particularly big issue for teams like Liverpool, Chelsea, and Manchester United, who are already struggling for consistency and need a lot of intensive coaching to fix their problems). We just don't know how anyone's going to be playing when we kick off again in October, the season is essentially re-setting and starting again from scratch. And on top of that, we have a number of possibly significant 'turns' in relative fixture-difficulty looking likely over the next few gameweeks after the resumption. 

So, it is very much looking as if the 'ideal' time to play the first Wildcard this year would be in late October or early November. And it would almost certainly have been worth hoarding up a few Free Transfers in case you need them to fix problems going into Gameweek 6.

Time to chill - Monday Music Break No. 4

 

Now that we have almost three weeks off before our next dose of Premier League action (and Fantasy Premier League vexation....), we should all try to make the best of the unaccustomed downtime.

There is no better soundtrack to studdied indolence and carefree loafing than this - So, Relax from the inimitable Leon Redbone. This live rendition from a 1992 concert in Paris is even more deliciously soporific than the original studio recording above.

Let us all enjoy THE SILENCE for a while....

Luck-o-Meter 26-27 - Gameweek 5

I'll try to continue with this series of weekly reviews for a while (although they are rather irksomely time-consuming), using the simpler format I developed in the second half of last season: a tabulation of the major types of 'lucky' incidents. 

I will try to resist any extended commentary (although I probably will still indulge in a few diatribes about any particularly egregious penalty or handball incidents).

This week we seem to be suffering a 'Curse of the International Break' Blues, with numerous teams and players oddly lacking in focus and turning in dreadful displays - almost nothing but 'unexpected' results this weekend! It has turned out to be one of the worst FPL gameweeks in recent memory.

Red cards awarded: 

Red cards not awarded:  Declan Rice really should have been sent off for his petulant little kick at Yalcouyé late on; doesn't matter that it "wasn't very hard" - it was not a challenge, the ball was nowhere nearby, it was just a straight-up assault.

It feels, in terms of naural justice, that Elliott Anderson should probably have received a red card for such a blatant and deliberate handball; although since he was not blocking an attempt on goal or 'denying an obvious goalscoring opportunity', perhaps the current rules would only mandate a yellow card.

Penalties awarded: The penalty against Sorba Thomas was incredibly soft, unjust. It looked as though he had been fouled by Miley, and although he was making a meal of it by going down, the contact his arm made on the side of Jacob Murphy's foot was accidental, and utterly trivial - really not enough to unbalance him, let alone bring him down. Justice was done when Wissa's soft, telegraphed penalty was comfortably pushed around the foot of the post by Tzolakis.

Penalties not awarded: Gabriel's lunging block which appeared to catch Kostoulas's ankle and trip him up surely should have been a penalty. Darren England must have been feeling sorry for Arsenal!

Sunderland's fill-in left-back, young Frenchman Dayann Methalie, brought down Ndiaye with a clumsy lunge right on the edge of the penalty area. Fernandez scored direct from the subsequent free-kick anyway, but it did look very much as if the point of contact between the players might have been right above the line of the edge of the box; and VAR apparently didn't check this??

Sunderland were trebly screwed over by referee Rob Jones and his VAR team. They were denied a clearcut penalty when Elliott Anderson swatted the ball with his hand to help him take the ball away from Enzo Le Fée, Anderson might have been sent off for an offence like that, something that would have critically weakened City defensively above and beyond the mere fact of being reduced to 10 men for the final 40 minutes of play - and, to add insult to injury, City immediately broke down the left flank and seized another goal of their own through Semenyo! Apparently, the subsequent official 'explanation' - self-justificatory fudge - was that the ball had hit Le Fée's hand just prior: that was absolute nonsense (only Joe Hart, on 'Match of the Day', a City man to the core, could have even pretended to be convinced by that rationale) - that contact was accidental, had no material effect on the flight of the ball, was completely unavoidable (the ball bounced against him from a matter of inches away), and his arm/hand was in a perfectly natural position (resting on Anderson's chest to try to maintain distance between them): no way in a million years is that ever a 'handball'!! The match - and, possibly, the course of the title race - shifted crucially on that one awful decision.

Tight/dubious offsides: Kevin Schade looked to be very slightly offside at the start of his break for the second goal on Friday night, but was adjudged not to be - although we never saw the SAOT picture to explain that.

It was a tough break for Thierno Barry that his second goal was ruled out for a 'subjective' offside by Brennan Johnson. It's hard to argue that a player isn't potentially distracting a goalkeeper when he's standing that close to him, but also Johnson wasn't actually making any contact, or really blocking Walton's path to the ball - so, it was perhaps a bit of a 50/50.

It was unfortunate for Tyrick Mitchell that his fine goal - and probable match-winner - was ruled out for a very tight offside by assister Anan Khalaili: off by a knee. This was one I felt was just about substantial enough to have been called with the naked eye - but absolutely at the limit of what should be considered a decisive margin. I'd be far happier with a rule that required the whole of the attacker's body, rather than just a body part, to be closer to the goal.

The offside call for Brian Brobbey's second goal must have been very, very tight: as City held their line on the edge of the penalty area, it looked as though Ruben Dias's left heel might have been playing everybody on by an inch or two (Angulo on the near side was just off; but he wasn't interfering with play). It was one of those where you're happy to see the attacking side 'get the benefit of the doubt' (which was how these situations were always decided, on a discretionary basis, in the past anyway); but whichever way the original on-pitch decision had gone on this, I wouldn't have liked to see SAOT overrule it on such a preposterously fine margin.

When Haaland finally got his goal, after 80 minutes, he was denied the chance to celebrate by an offside flag, and a strangely extended VAR deliberation. In fact, his supplier, Gvardiol, had been plainly onside by nearly half a yard - so, it was a terrible initial call by the linesman, and should have taken mere seconds to correct.

Goals wrongly allowed/disallowed: City's 4th goal should plainly have been chalked off for the earlier handball by Anderson.

Surprise omissions/early substitutions/injuries: Joao Pedro was not able to take part after all on Friday night, not even on the bench (although Alonso had earlier suggested that he might); thus, Danny Welbeck got his first league start for Chelsea.

Brighton captain Lewis Dunk was a late injury drop-out, suffering from a 'stiff neck', replaced by Pascal Struijk; and the recently excellent Malick Yalcouyé was dropped in favour of the slightly more defensive-oriented Chema Andrés (presumably thus a 'tactical' change?). Meanwhile Arteta gave a first league start to Bruno Guimaraes instead of Lewis-Skelly in the holding role - which might have been the beginning of Arsenal's problems.

Ipswich manager Gary O'Neill dropped his keeper, Kjell Scherpen, in favour of back-up Christian Walton (though nobody in FPL owns either of them!).

Tino Livramento broke down in training on Friday, so Lewis Miley had to deputise at right-back.

Jair Cunha was fit to start again in the back-three, displacing Ola Aina who had deputised for him for one week.

Doku is apparently now fit for the bench; but the form of Semenyo and Ndiaye might keep him on the sidelines quite a while longer.

Luke Shaw was back from his short-term injury absence, displacing Patrick Dorgu to the bench; and Baleba was finally fit to take part, although he was not put on from the bench this time.

Near misses: Jaidon Anthony looped a strong header onto the crossbar (flagged offside - but wasn't).

Tim Iroegbunam nearly salvaged a point for Hull in the closing minutes when he prodded a close-range volley inches beyond the far top corner.

Dominic Szoboszlai had two decent attempts with long, curling free-kicks, but couldn't quite get either of them on target.

Bruno Fernandes played Cunha's cut-back first time, but the shot flashed across the open goal and rebounded off the inside of the far-post. 

Big misses/big saves: Kelleher made a good early stop from Neto's fierce left-foot volley on Friday night; but a lacklustre Chelsea made few other chances in the rest of the game.

Arsenal's one decent chance of the game came late on when substitute Gyokeres hooked a long ball on first time, releasing Havertz in behind - but he shot straight at Verbruggen.

Bobby Thomas preserved his side's frail lead with a superb overhead clearance off his goal-line.

Thierno Barry got a free header at the far post, but directed his stooping effort the wrong side of the upright. A little later, Leif Davis ghosted in to the edge of the six-yard box, but with an open goal in front of him completely muffed the shot. At the start of the second-half, Pickford made a sharp save at his near-post from an Enciso shot.

Evanilson's deft near-post flick from Tavernier's square-ball demanded a very sharp stop from Alisson, low at his near-post. Barcola's shot from the edge of the box may have taken a slight deflection to throw off Petrovic, but the keeper still managed to clear the effort with his feet. Isak, shortly after his goal, had an even better chance, played in behind by Jacquet - in the middle, 18 yards out, with only the keeper to beat, he pulled his shot wide. The linesman then flagged him offside; but he wasn't, and SAOT would surely have confirmed a goal if he'd been able to hit the target.

Trafford made a very sharp stop at the foot of his post from Pino's wicked free-kick. Brennan Johnson might have claimed the 'Goal of the Day', if not of the month, with an exquisite touch to set up a chance just inside the edge of the box - but he struck his shot inches wide of the post. In the second-half, Palace stand-in keeper Walter Benitez made a fantastic reaction stop from a close-range effort from Calvert-Lewin (although he might have been offside by a shoulder...). Shortly afterwards, Daichi Kamada ghosted in unmarked for a free header at the far post, but he directed right across the face of the goal and well wide.

Near the end of the first-half at The Etihad, Ndiaye, with a shooting chance in the centre of the box, unselfishly squared the ball to Haaland in space to his right. And the big Norwegian, with no pressure and half the goal to aim at, unbelievably slotted his shot wide of the post - probably one of the worst misses we'll see from him all season! Ruben Dias, almost prodding the ball into his own net after Donnarumma had flapped at and missed a long free-kick down the middle from Xhaka in the centre-circle, redeemed himself with a spectacular hooked clearance right on the goal-line. City nearly got a 6th when late subsitutes Doku and O'Reilly combined, the Englishman played in behind by a sublime diagnonal ball from the Belgian, but Roefs spread himself well to block the shot. Moments later, a scramble in the City box ended with Dan Ballard prodding an effort towards goal, but a defender's block deflected it just wide off the outside of the post.

Lisandro Martinez had a swerving 22-yard half-volley well pawed away by Bernd Leno early in the game at Craven Cottage. Marcus Rashford also had a great chance 8 yards out, but the ball came to him unexpectedly, and his improvised side-foot volley ballooned miles over the bar. A firm low shot from just outside the box by Berge was well tipped away by Lammens; his later save with his outstretched leg from King's fierce cross-shot was even better. Cunha's shot from long-range deflected off one of two blocking defenders and looped high in the air over Leno - but grazed the outside of the post. Mbeumo's strong 20-yard curler was perhaps the best of the lot, but superbly tipped away by Leno; the Fulham keeper also made a great stop going down at full stretch to his left to push away a long, low shot from Cunha.

Outstanding goals:  Emi Buendia probably claims the pick of the crop of this weekend's goals with his savage dipper from long-range. We appear to have established a 25-yard minimum requirement for 'Goal of the Month' contenders!

Gross's opener was cleanly struck from just over 20 yards, but not particularly powerful (no back-lift!), and it was perhaps a little fortunate to ping in off both posts (or very nearly so...). And it was remarkably similar to Morgan Rogers's effort a fortnight ago - which also managed to sneak past Raya at his near-post! Kostoulas's strike just before half-time was a little further out, and more crisply struck, but.... again, you wouldn't usually have expected it to beat Raya.

Mohamed-Ali Cho's consolation goal for Hull was extremely well-taken - one of the best finishes inside the box we've seen for a while! Although Jay Da Silva's first goal of Coventry's campaign was perhaps even better, not least for the early ball into the wide channel from goalkeeper Rushworth to play him in.

It was 'only bangers allowed' in the thoroughly entertaining match at The Etihad: Cherki's dazzling bit of close control probably the pick of the crop, but Semenyo also produced two thumping finishes, Fernandez hit home a very sweet free-kick, and Brobbey nabbed a hattrick of perfect centre-forward goals.

Outstanding performances: Cherki, Semenyo, and Ndiaye are all on fire for City at the moment (a pity that that fire may now smoulder and fade over a three-week break in club training - no-one knows). However, I thought the performance of the weekend came from Bernd Leno: he's been a bit disappointing so far this season, but this Sunday he kept his team in the game with  a string of fantastic saves.

Big mistakes: Lukas Hornicek tried some clever footwork on his byline just outside the goal and was nearly dispossessed by the lurking Belloumi. He did well to seize the ball back - but that was nearly the most embarrassing moment of the weekend.

Enzo Fernandez's cheeky free-kick from the right corner of the box was sweetly struck - but it really shouldn't have caught Robin Roefs out like that.

Calvin Bassey's slightly deflected shot rebounded awkwardly off Lammen's knee and Martinez's hurried attempt at a 'clearance' ended up looking more like a side-foot shot into the corner; though Lammens might still have been able to save it if he'd decided to dive for it with his hands rather than trying to kick it away - an unfortunate comedy of errors.

Bad luck/good luck: Semenyo's second goal was slightly fortuitous as Cherki's slotted through-ball was sort of cut out by a sliding Sunderland defender, but landed right at Semenyo's feet anyway. (I thought 'deflections' like this no longer invalidated an 'assist' - but Cherki doesn't seem to have been given this one??)

Florian Wirtz was lucky to be credited with an 'assist' for Isak's goal: it was possibly a wildly mishit shot or simply an entirely accidental deflection which made little material difference to the path of the ball; all of the work to set the chance up was done by Cody Gakpo. (If the inconsequential deflection had come off a defender, it would still be Gakpo's assist!)

Fulham defender David Affengruber was unfortunate that his attempted block on the edge of the box caused a huge deflection to wrong-foot Leno, helping Cunha to claim a barely-deserved equaliser for Manchester United in the closing moments of regular time.

FPL weirdness: Denying Cherki the assist for Semenyo's second goal seems harsh - and inconsistent. Over the past season, we've usually seen quite large deflections/interventions from a defender disregarded, even if they did materially affect the flight of the ball towards the eventual goalscorer. Here, although there was a very big deflection, it was not a controlled attempt by the defender to play the ball in any particular direction; and although it looped up in the air, the direction of the ball barely changed at all. Cherki was plainly looking to find Semenyo, and did so - how is this not an assist? [Maybe this will be revisited 'overnight' before FPL Towers finally confirms the points and rankings on Monday morning.... Um, NOPE. Oh well, we can't complain too much, because this goal should not have been allowed to stand anyway.]

Bernd Leno, frustratingly, just missed out on a second 'saves' point, only being credited with 5 stops in the game (I thought there had been way more; and it is a pity that there is no qualitative element in rewarding keepers' work - at least 3 of these saves were absolute worldies!!). And, as last week with Bart Verbruggen, although he was clearly the 'Player of the Match' (and possibly of the entire weekend), because of the chronic under-recognition given to goalkeepers in the BPS, he didn't get close to earning a bonus point.

Matheus Cunha was fortunate to be credited with United's winner: it looked as though his effort was bound just wide of the near-post until it took a massive deflection off Affengruber's outstretched boot; that touch was certainly 'decisive' in wrongfooting Leno, but it did also look as if might have turned the effort on target.

Unexpected results:  Almost all of them! Chelsea continue to be all-over-the-place at the back (and you wonder if Robert Sanchez might be about to reclaim his place from Martinez), but without Joao Pedro to lead the line were also toothless going forward; nobody should have expected an evening game away at Brentford to be an easy assignment, but it turned out to be a cakewalk for the home side. While many were fancying lively Brighton to perhaps give Arsenal a bit of a game, no-one can have had any reason to expect that the champions and league leaders would so completely fail to show up for this game - an absolutely abysmal performance that made them look more like relegation candidates (the home fans' taunting chants of 'Are you Tottenham in disguise?' were all too apt!).  Newcastle are usually a bit of a handful at home, but few were probably expecting them to bounce back so strongly from their humiliating demolition by Leeds on Monday night; and even so, they were a bit fortunate to plunder 2 goals in the opening six-and-a-half minutes,... and then to hang on, just, as Hull increasingly dominated the second-half and repeatedly threatened an equaliser. Coventry made a huge step forward to achieve a deserved win against a lacklustre Forest.

It was a bit of a surprise that Bournemouth were so flat this week; at home, against an uneven Liverpool, they had been fancied to have a chance of causing a minor upset.

It was also a little surprising that Crystal Palace, who've been struggling so far, managed to look much the better side away at Leeds, and ended up being rather unlucky not to nick a win.

With United's wobbly form so far, perhaps a struggle - even against a bottom-of-the-table club like Fulham - was not so unexpected. What no-one probably expected, though, was that it would be such a ding-dong of a game: it might have finished with a bigger scoreline than City v Sunderland, but the goalkeeping was better and the finishing not quite as good.

With Chelsea and Arsenal having absolute horror-shows (many of the more naive FPL managers have recently chosen to treble-up on one or both of these!!), and recently fancied Hull and Forest also going down to slightly unexpected defeats, there is much lamentation in FPL-land this week. The 'Team of the Week', contained none of the star names by the end of Saturday; among its members, probably only Tarkowski and Gross have an ownership even above 1%, let alone 10%! Only Semenyo managed to add himself to its ranks on Sunday. The global average was an utterly abysmal 18 points after Saturday, but eventually climbed to a barely respectable 44 points after a livelier Sunday. (CORRECTION: the final global average was 48 points. This new FPL timeline where they don't 'finalise' the gameweek results until 8 or 10 hours later than we were used to is.... really doing my head in!)  With so many inexplicably bad performances from leading teams, an extraordinary number of exceptional goals (and near-misses!), and some very dubious points attributions, this is certainly one of the weirdest gameweeks of the season so far; it was only saved from being one of the worst FPL gameweeks ever by an unusually entertaining and free-scoring Sunday! On top of Darren England's rather generously letting Arsenal off a penalty and a sending-off on Friday night, and that one slightly questionable offside in Brentford's favour, we also saw that absolutely horrendous ignoring of a penalty handball by Elliott Anderson, which may have changed the course of the match. At least there weren't too many dodgy bits of officiating in the other matches, but that's quite enough to make this another 9 out of 10 on the 'Luck-o-Meter'.

Dilemmas of the Week - GW5 (26/27)

 

Another fairly busy midweek schedule, with Thursday night games for Bournemouth and Palace (Europa League) and Manchester City (League Cup), and Liverpool, Spurs, Ipswich, Arsenal, Fulham, Manchester United, Brighton, Coventry, Aston Villa, and Everton (albeit most of them putting out largely 'reserve' sides!) in the remainder of the League Cup 3rd Round ties over Tuesday and Wedneday; but once again, we seem to have got off fairly lightly with new injuries.  [I'll try to update later, if I pick up any major developments from today's press conferences!]

For some years, I have found the 'Injuries & Bans' summary on Fantasy Football Scout the most reliable resource for this kind of information; although this site, Premier League Injuries, is a very good alternative (often a little quicker to update, I think - though it did go through a bit of a glitchy period for a while last year).  Go check these out for more comprehensive coverage. 

The Fantasy Premier League site itself now has a 'Player Availability' page (though hidden under 'The Scout' tab?!). That also seems to be reasonably comprehensive and up-to-date, but god knows how it's supposed to be 'organised' - maybe by 'date of injury'? Obviously, arranging it by club and alphabetical order would be more sensible; but the denizens of FPL Towers seem to have a deep aversion to the sensible.

I've recently discovered this additional resource, the weekly Predicted Lineups from Fantasy Football Edits. My longtime standby for this sort of news, Fantasy Footall Scout, does usually provide some explanatory commentary on its predictions, even including reminders of the key injury concerns, and sometimes also some discussion of possible alternate selections; so, if you like a bit more detail with your 'probable lineups' for the week, that could still be the preferable roundup to look at. But because FPL Edits is so stripped-down, it's rather more straightforwardly accessible, easier to scan through quickly; and I think it's also perhaps a tad more reliable with its expected formations and lineups, and a little quicker to update.

So, what are the conundrums we face ahead of Gameweek 5?

Does anybody need to be moved out because of injury?

The dominant conversation over the last couple of days has been about the announcement of a 'minor issue' for Joao Pedro (vying with Haaland for top spot in the most-owned ranking with around 73%!!); the problem was initially unspecified, but now some Brazilian reports have apparently identified it as some swelling around his medial collateral ligament. And Alonso seems to have said the other day that he'd probably play on Friday anyway. It's 'sore', and he could do with a few weeks' rest; but it sounds like just one of these faked-up pretexts that clubs like to use to get their players excused from international duty (it would be taking the piss-taking to new level, though, if Chelsea are really taking the attitude that 'He needs three weeks of complete rest; but we're still going to start him this Friday night.'). It sounds like he's a minutes-risk for this gameweek - but should not be any sort of a problem going forward after the international break.

Ben White, who'd already been moving awkwardly at the end of the Champions League game a few days earlier, apparently felt some discomfort in his groin, and had to be withdrawn at half-time against Sunderland last week. Fortunately, Jurrien Timber is just back from injury, and looks likely to slot straight back in at right-back. (This is the second fortuitously-timed injury in quick succession which has gifted Ezri Konsa the chance of an uninterrupted run in the side; people who gambled on him as soon as he transferred to Arsenal have been treated rather kindly by the Fates!!)

Marco Bizot had to come off at half-time with a back problem in Villa's League Cup win over Coventry on Wednesday; he's only the stand-in keeper anyway, unlikely to threaten Suzuki's start; presumably James Wright will step up to the bench slot. Holding midfielder Joao Gomes, who's only just finished a three-match ban, also had to go off in that game with a calf strain. Left-back Ian Maatsen hurt his ankle against Forest last Saturday, and will be out for a few weeks.

Palace keeper Dean Henderson (fairly few people own him this year) missed last week's match against Ipswich with an ankle problem which has been troubling him for some time, and he will now be on the sidelines until at least the start of October. Back-up Walter Benitez will presumably continue to deputise for him.

Ryan Sessegnon was unavailable for last week's game against Liverpool because of a groin strain, and remains a doubt. Kenny Tete took a powerful shot in the face, and had to be omitted from the League Cup squad this week over concussion issues; availability this weekend will depend on further concussion checks today.

Hull's outstanding left-back Nobel Mendy is also likely to miss out this week under 'concussion protocols', after suffering a heavy clash of heads with Joao Pedro last week. (Guess how many of this week's 'walking wounded' are in my squad....)  Matt Targett is also doubtful after twisting an ankle in training.

Ipswich striker Emersonn is another one likely to miss out this week after spraining his ankle; although one wonders if new signing Zian Flemming, a goalscorer last week, might have forced him out of the side anyway.

Anthony Elanga was a late omission for Newcastle on Monday night after apparently suffering a 'potentially serious' injury in training; further details still awaited on that. The stampede away from him began quickly: he had been Newcastle's most popular FPL pick, at around 8% ownership, but more than 430,000 have baled on him in the last few days. Multiple woes for Newcastle, as Nico Gonzalez had to go off in that Leeds match after being slammed in the face by the ball, and has already been ruled out for this weekend under 'concussion protocols', while Jacob Ramsey had to drop out of the lineup after suffering a thigh-strain in the warm-up.

Forest centre-backs Nikola Milenkovic and Jair Cunha both dropped out ahead of last week's win over Villa with hamstring problems; Ola Aina and Ousmane Diomande are again likely to deputise for them in the back-three.

Sandro Tonali missed Wednesday night's League Cup defeat to Liverpool with a 'knock'. (I wonder if he might not just have 'downed tools'. He has been really struggling with De Zerbi's tactical ideas, and I suspect he may already have fallen out with his new manager.)

Do we have any players who are dropped, suspended, or not looking likely to get the starts we hoped for?

Coventry's Taiwo Awoniyi and Palace's Axel Disasi are both starting three-match bans for 'violent conduct' fouls last week. So too is Phil Foden - although his offence was much less clearcut!

Sunderland left-back Reinildo misses this weekend after picking up two yellow cards against Arsenal last week.

Did anyone give other cause to consider dropping them?

Coventry players are inevitably being treated as 'toxic assets' after their trouncing by Brighton last week; although not many of them were at all significant in FPL anyway. Milan van Ewijk, by far their most popular pick at 10%, has shed 85,000 owners this week. I would say Palace are very nearly as bad, and Fulham, Everton, and Spurs still so poor as to be rigorously avoided.

Did anyone play so well, you have to consider bringing them in immediately?

Kevin Schade (belatedly) has attracted attention with his brace against Bournemouth; but he's only the sixth most popular transfer of the week so far, so may escape The Curse of the Sheep.

Liam Delap has also garnered some interest with his absolute pinger of a goal from nearly 30 yards out for Forest against Villa - picking up nearly 125,000 transfers in so far this week.

A lot of people are getting stupidly over-excited about Maxim De Cuyper again, just because he scored another goal against a half-strength Manchester United in the League Cup the other night. It was a good finish, but a very untypical one (box-crashing after coming on as a late substitute, when United were starting to collapse, poaching from the six-yard line... on the right-hand side??!!). And come on, they've got Arsenal next! If I were going to risk going for a Brighton player - over what now looks quite an extended run of tough fixtures - it would be Ayari or Gross. Well, no, actually it would be Bart Verbruggen - who kept his side in the game last week with one of the most outstanding goalkeeping performances we've seen all season.

Though, as I said this morning, I wouldn't be using any transfers this week (unless absolutely forced to by an injury crisis); we're much more likely to need them after the international break.

BEST OF LUCK, EVERYONE!

Roll your transfers until after the international break

Rolling cheese, rolling people 

Rolling transfers is usually a good thing - especially since the rules tweak a couple of years ago that now allows us to bank up to 5 Free Transfers. Being able to make multiple transfers at a time can be hugely valuable, for the far greater flexibility it gives us to conduct mini-rebuilds of our squads.

Making purely elective transfers - 'chasing points' with impulsive changes when you have a full first eleven of players who are fit, guaranteed to start, and playing decently well - is usually a bad thing.

Making elective transfers is particularly a bad thing this early in the season, when form hasn't settled down yet, and so we really can't often have any sort of confidence about who might be a better pick than the players we have already.

And it's a particularly, particularly bad thing when we're soon likely to have special reasons for possibly needing to make a lot of changes at once. At the moment, we're about to enter an international break; and not just any old international break, but an unprecedented three-week monster of a break!

Now, I tend to think that the risk of incurring lots of injuries in international breaks is greatly overstated. The rate of injuries in international football is much, much lower than in club football (I can't actually remember ever having lost one of my Fantasy players to an international break injury....). However, the risk is there; and it must be heightened by the unusual length and number of matches of the upcoming break. Moreover, we often have injury problems not being announced until close to or after the deadline, making it impossible for us to bring in replacements. And what seems to happen much more often than injuries while with the national team is players breaking down soon after return - perhaps because of a niggle that wasn't picked up by the medical teams personnel working with the national squads, or perhaps because players have grown unaccustomed to the much greater intensity of club training and over-exert themselves; we are, I fear, likely to see more injuries suddenly appearing as we're going into Gameweek 7 or Gameweek 8 than we are for Gameweek 6. (Also, Joao Pedro, the most coveted FPL player of the moment, is injured already; and we're not yet sure when he might be back - or if he'll be immediaely back to his best when he is. A major fitness doubt over one of the key assets in the game is another reason to hang fire on playing the Wildcard.)

But even more concerning is the disruptive effect that this must inevitably have on club training over the next few weeks. Any form we thought we had seen emerging in the opening few games is likely to evaporate: we're basically all starting our FPL season again from scratch on October 10th! (This is why, in an ideal world, you'd save your first Wildcard until at least the end of October.)  Moreover, there are a few potential 'turns' in fixture difficulty around then, which may prompt you to want to make a few changes to your squad as well.

We are all likely to need to use 1 or 2 transfers (maybe more) straight after the international break to replace injuries that emerge over the next three weeks. We are also very likely to want to use quite a few more transfers in the immediately following gameweeks, because of likely swings in form and fixture-difficulty emerging after this disruptive hiatus in the Premier League schedule. Thus, it is essential to have a few transfers in hand after the break. (Playing your Wildcard over the upcoming break would ameliorate this problem, but not erase it completely, because we're also likely to need to make quite a few changes in the following gameweeks as well.) 

And yet, and yet.... the FPL forums are again full of people asking, "What transfer should I make this week?"  Why are you making any??  Why are you even thinking about it??  It makes no sense.

A little bit of Zen (112)

“The first man at the finishing-line is the one who marks it out.”  

GW

Set your own goals. Measure 'progress' and 'success' only against yourself. Remember: you are always 'first' in the only league that matters.

Early 26/27 predictions

I suppose it's time for me to again attempt some - rash, and undoubtedly wildly inaccurate - projections for where everyone's going to finish in the Premier League this year. The bold and the foolish, of course, dive in with a first set of prognostications before the season's even begun - but I won't expose myself to that kind of ridicule. I prefer an attempt at analysis, rather than mere hoping or guessing.

Analysis is difficult so early on, because we don't have an awful lot of information to go on: only four games in, and early-season form is notoriously erratic, unstable, ephemeral. And any form that might have appeared to be becoming fairly settled is likely to evaporate again over the huge international break which starts in a few days. 

And although we didn't have such a messy transfer window as last year (when several of the biggest signings weren't concluded until after the start of the season, and many players had 'gone on strike' to force moves, and arrived at their new clubs injured or woefully out of condition), we have had a very busy one, and integrating so many new arrivals at once - at individual clubs and across the league as a whole - can be very disruptive: it will take quite a while to see how many of the new boys become key elements of their squads, and how much that affects previous lineup selections, team tactics, and overall effectiveness. We haven't yet seen much of Barcola or Bouaddi or Guimaraes, and nothing at all of Manzambi or Caicedo or Baleba or Palestra - some of this year's biggest signings.

Moreover, although we have so far been extraordinarily blessed with the relatively low number of early injuries compared to recent years, there have still been a fair few: we're still without the likes of Mitoma, Minteh, and Hinshelwood, and Saliba, Kroupi, Mateta and Ismaila Sarr, Rodon, Bradley and Ekitike, Burn and Osula, Amad Diallo, Doku, and Maddison, Kulusevski, Odobert, Simons, Porro and Udogie - all of whom might have been of some FPL interest.

So, just a few weeks into the season, it's really all still a bit of a crap-shoot. We could just point to the current league ranking and say, 'Well, that's what the form indicates so far.' But of course, there wouldn't be much point to that. We have to try to extrapolate the underlying hints of the potential for sustained form over the season from this small sample of - mostly very inconsistent - results we've had so far. And we have to try to make allowance for the things that might have distorted some of those results: relative difficulty of fixtures (or the occasional 'freak result' in defiance of the expected fixture difficulty!), injury absences, slow adaptation to new tactical approaches (in addition to the record number of new signings this year, we've seen a very large number of managerial changes!), and unlucky sendings-off, bad refereeing decisions, etc.

So, here it is - my first fumbling attempt at a prediction of where everyone will finish in the Premier League this year. (As last year, I'll attempt follow-up revisions at around about the one-third and two-thirds points of the season as well.)  Unlike last year,... I'll throw in a few additional comments at the end about which players seem likely to have the biggest impacts this season, both real-world and in FPL.

As I said yesterday, Arsenal are the only one of the leading clubs who've started out in really commanding form, while their rivals are all stumbling around rather unconvincingly thus far - and so have to be the strong early favourites to retain the title. [Haha! I may have jinxed the defending champions - who just a few days later put in a throughly wretched performance away at Brighton and got absolutely spanked.] Manchester City are inevitably their biggest threat again. They would be for Haaland alone, but the additional attacking/creative threat posed by Doku, Cherki, Semenyo, Ndiaye, Foden, and Fernandez is also pretty terrifying. And I do believe Maresca is a very tactically canny coach who will usually be able to bring the best out of this extaordinary group of players. The big question-mark at the moment is their occasional flakiness in defence, and the less-than-confidence-inspiring form of Donnarumma in goal (his distribution has always been terrible, but even his shot-stopping and positioning have occasionally looked a bit questionable recently). Chelsea have started the season looking as if they might be even more dangerous than City in attack, but even flakier than them in defence (and Martinez really doesn't look to me like much of an upgrade on the unreliable Sanchez in goal). And they may not have the balance or depth in the squad to sustain a consistent challenge across the whole season - although the absence of any distracting European football should be a big help to them. Liverpool, so far, have been failing to adapt to Iraola's new requirements, and have looked as woefully inconsistent in defence as they were in their floundering season under Slot last year. But at least Isak is looking sharp again, and you feel they surely ought to have enough talent in the squad to finish securely in the Champions League places; though I do worry that Barcola could prove to be a colossal waste of money, that Van Dijk could be rapidly aging out, and that Wirtz is once again looking too physically puny to prosper in this league. Liverpool, then, are one of the biggest uncertainties of this season: they may have the class to finish a little better than this, maybe even to mount a challenge to Arsenal at the top; but, at the moment, predicting even a 4th place finish for them looks rather optimistic.

Although Bournemouth have been suffering thus far from an unfortunate propensity to drop points by leaking a late goal, I think they have shown some of the most impressive form we've seen from anyone this season. Evanilson and Rayan haven't found their scoring boots yet, but Tavernier and Scott have been in superb form, Kluivert finally looks as if he may be getting back to his best, and Kroupi could add further to their forward threat when he gets back from injury. My hunch is that they will ultimately prove to be stronger and more consistent opponents than our other two 'over-performing' mid-table favourites, Brentford and Brighton. Brentford, though, could run them very close: although Thiago hasn't hit scoring form yet, he's playing pretty well, and Schade is providing the goals instead; and Mamadou Sangaré, one of the most impressive of the league's new arrivals so far, is adding a steel to their midfield that they've lacked in the past.

Before the season, I'd fancied Manchester United to make a strong showing, and perhaps even emerge as - albeit distant and ultimately unsuccessful - challengers to Arsenal (they were, after all, the league's best team last year, after Carrick had taken over in January). However, they've had a really awful start to the new campaign, and are looking as if they might slip back to floundering in mid-table. A lack of stable selection in the back-four, a continuing failure of the front-three to gel, the continuing lack of trust in Sesko for a regular start at No. 9 (Cunha just does not like that role, and does not thrive in it), and the continuing absence of new midfield hard man Baleba have all been limiting their performances. As with Liverpool, this prediction for them is a bit of a 'compromise', and is likely to be way off - in either direction: they could do much better than this, if they manage to get their shit together; but they could also do much, much worse...

Newcastle have been worryingly inconsistent so far, but I like what Jaissle is doing with them, and I think they ultimately have a bit more quality, especially up front, than the rest of the upper mid-table contenders: Barnes, Wissa, and Elanga have the potential to become one of the most terrifying front-threes in the league. Leeds have started out the season very impresively, especially at the back (and I think Jamie Trafford might prove to be one of the most impactful signings of the season); but I have misgivings about how far you can rely on Dominic Calvert-Lewin to lead the line for you for a whole season (in good form at the moment: but in the past, he's shown himself to be both physically and psychologically brittle, picking up numerous injuries or just suddenly losing his confidence in front of goal). Hull I really, really like so far; and I don't think there's been any element of 'luck' about their impressive early run of results (if you're outperforming stats like your xGC, it's not luck - your defenders are making lots of great blocks, and your keeper's making lots of great saves). However, newcomers to the league usually get 'figured out' by their opponents, at least by the top clubs, sooner or later, or simply find it difficult to maintain the psychological intensity that's fired them up to make a strong start to the campaign. I'd like to see Hull sustain their early promise and challenge for the European places (I think they could well finish higher than these few teams I've placed narrowly above them); but 10th would be a hell of a result for a newly promoted side, so that's my fairly conservative early projection for them. Brighton, despite their strong start, just don't really impress me that much: I think they've been 'over-performing' so far, against mostly very weak opponents (Villa looked like relegation fodder in that opening game, and even Chelsea have an awful defence at the moment; they were lucky to come away with such a big win against Coventry, who actually created most of the game's best chances; and against Leeds, they were lucky to get a draw). They don't have a convincing No. 9 at the moment (unless Kostoulas, or the newly signed Promise David, can establish themselves as Premier League class; Giorginho Rutter is a 10, not a 9). And I worry that the need to rotate through their large squad (in order to keep up the resale value of fringe players) makes it difficult for them to establish consistency. (On the other hand, with Hinshelwood, Mitoma, and Minteh - three of their most dangerous players - still to return from injury, there is also a possibility that they could become even more of a handful later in the season... [And it does look like I maybe haven't been giving them their due so far. Their dismantling of League leaders Arsenal a few days later was indeed very impressive - even though Arsenal didn't really show up for the game.])

At the moment, Spurs look utterly abject. But they have somehow managed to grind out goalless draws in their last two games; and they do still have a very long injury-list of key players. So, the potential for massive improvement is clearly there; you'd think there's too much quality in that squad for them to remain in the relegation zone all season. But De Zerbi's tactical plan is just not working at the moment; in fact, it's failing so badly that he's managing to make top signings like Sandro Tonali and Matheus Fernandes look like terrible players. And already the Italian coach is looking exasperated, baffled, dispirited; I wouldn't be at all surprised to see him become one of the season's first managerial casualties. But just how early that might happen, and whether it would help or hinder Spurs's progress up the table is one of the great unknowns of the season. 12th might seem a rather optimistic finish for them at the moment (especially after they narrowly avoided relegation in the last two seasons); but if things start clicking for them, the quality in the squad is such that they ought to be capable of very much better than that - so, again, it's a bit of a compromise assessment, midway between the best and worst imaginable outcomes for them!

Sunderland haven't really strengthened their squad from last year, and will find the pressure of European football a drain on their stamina. They're still very robust defensively (and I think Roefs could again be a promising goalkeeper pick in FPL), but lack very much of an attacking threat. And for that difficult second season in the Premier League, finishing safely in lower mid-table would be a pretty satisfactory accomplishment. Forest are another enigma: they show a lot of promise under Glasner, and I have hopes for what Daniel Munoz might accomplish there as a wing-back; but it will take time for the new system to bed in, and at the moment Sels and his defenders are looking much less secure than they have in most of the past two seasons. Also, with Chris Wood evidently aging out, they don't have much up-front threat (though maybe Liam Delap will be the answer to that problem?); but this might mean that Gibbs-White and Ndoye have to step up as the primary goalscorers. Although Everton have started the season quite impressively, they have again conspicuously done nothing to strengthen themselves in the transfer window - while losing their best player, Illiman Ndiaye. Although Pickford and the very robust defence should be able to keep them out of relegation trouble, I can't see them having a consistent enough threat going forward to finish very much higher than that: while Thierno Barry has put away quite a few goals early in the season, he's also been profligate with some good chances; I just don't think his conversion rate is consistent enough to rely on him as a primary striker; and since they let Beto go to Fiorentina, they don't seem to have any back-up. 

Villa look to be in a world of trouble at the moment: they lost the core of the team over the summer, and haven't brought in that much in the way of convincing replacements: they'll really be needing an awful lot from Nico Jackson (and Manzambi and Madjo, when they get over their injuries). And even if those attacking talents can produce the goods for them, I worry they don't have the depth in the squad to endure the strain of a European campaign as well. Emery is a very shrewd manager; but this challenge may be beyond even him. And he is starting to look increasingly exasperated at this situation, as if he's reaching the end of his tether; I can envisage him resigning, or wilfully provoking his own dismissal with public complaints, before the mid-point of the season. With the quality they've shown over the last few years, you'd think they should be capable of at least reaching the top ten, and maybe even the top eight or the top six; but thus far, they've really looked like relegation candidates - and even placing them at 15th looks a bit hopeful.

Ipswich look shakey in defence, but might have enough attacking threat through the likes of Enciso, Fatawu, Maeda, Davis, and Flemming to haul themselves just clear of the relegation mire. I'm afraid Palace, after the progressive emasculation of their squad over the last few seasons, the loss of their inspirational manager, and now the early loss to injury of their two best goalscorers, are looking doomed to the drop - despite the talent of players like Wharton, Pino, and Richards. Fulham, too, despite having a lot of talent in their squad, just don't seem to be getting on with their new coach Arbeloa (another prime candidate for an early exit). And they don't have a convincing spearhead to their attack: neither Garcia nor Muniz look quite capable of taking on that mantle. 

Alas, poor Coventry! They do look like the one team you can safely bet on already to be back in the Championship next year. And I think most people had expected things to be very different: they won the title last season at a canter, and often played some thrilling attacking football that looked like it wouldn't be out of place in the top flight. But perhaps that led to some complacency: Hull and Ipswich not only spent big to radically rebuild their squads, they adapted their style of play to try to make themselves more resilient against better-class opposition; Coventry seemed to think they could essentially rely on more-of-the-same, and they have proved to be very, very wrong. Now, the loss of their star forward Haji Wright was a major blow; and he could give a big boost to their prospects if he can quickly return to his best (although he's expected to be out until at least late November; and by then it might already be too late). And to be fair, they have shown some signs of improvement, after two dreadful opening games: they nearly got something from their visit to The Etihad, and were really rather unlucky to end up on the end of such a drubbing from Brighton last weekend (their defence was abysmal, but their attack actually looked pretty dangerous). Another reason for many people's confidence in Coventry's prospects in the top division was the general affection and respect that Frank Lampard commands in the game: an intelligent man with extensive experience of the Premier League as both a player and manager, you'd think he ought to be capable of guiding a promoted club to a stable lower mid-table position in their opening season. But... at the moment, he's looking like he doesn't understand what's going wrong, doesn't know how to fix it: I fear he will soon be the overwhelming favourite for an early dismissal. But it's really too early to judge: for Coventry, and for most of the other teams, an awful lot could change between now and the end of the season - or even between now and the end of November (when I'll be checking in again to consider revising these assessments).

As for the players... 

Raya and the Arsenal defence are again looking likely to be the clean-sheet kings. But Raya and Gabriel are much too expensive this year for early season picks; and, as I said the other day, I don't see Konsa as (yet) being a secure enough starter to be worth taking just to save 1 million on the budget. Calafiori is so far the overwhelming best pick from the Arsenal defence; and until Timber comes back, I really don't think you need a second.  

For me, Trafford, Tzolakis, and Verbruggen are looking preferable picks between the sticks; Roefs hasn't shown much as yet, but I still have faith in his quality as a keeper, and in the doggedness of the defence in front of him. 

Gvardiol, Guehi, Tarkowski, and - slightly more surprisingly? - Kayode are looking much the strongest of the other defensive options; although we can all load up on Leeds and Hull defenders at the moment to save money (I plumped for Mendy and Bogle early on; one of my few decisions to really pay off so far!!). We haven't seen that much of him as yet, but Munoz was one of the best defensive picks of last year, and could be even more impactful this year, as Forest seem to be trying to play with more progressive - rather than primarily defensive - wing-backs. De Cuyper was probably only a good pick in the very short term (he might not keep that start on the wing for long; and Brighton had two soft fixtures in the opening four, but now face quite a long run of far tougher games). And the other defenders who've made an early splash with attacking contributions - Leif Davis, Tyrick Mitchell, Neco Williams, Timothy Castagne... and even Lewis Hall too - all seem likely to concede too many goals to be good FPL prospects this term.

Bruno Fernandes is again playing very well, and had that one monster game against Ipswich; but, for me, he's just too damned expensive this year (however good he is, he can't possibly be 1.5x as good as the next-best options!) - especially with United currently struggling for form. Saka and Palmer are showing signs of being very nearly back to their devastating best: but at the high price of 9.5 million, we can probably only afford one of them - and might consider trying to go without either. Odegaard, suddenly playing some of the best football of his life and looking like he could be a regular attacking threat in a dramatically rebranded Arsenal this year, is a very tempting alternative to Saka, as is the currently prolific Rogers to Palmer at Chelsea (although I observed yesterday that Rogers has in the past been prone to periods of quiet form, while Palmer, at his best, has been able to sustain high rates of return over very long periods - and is on penalties as well!). Gakpo has started very brightly, but is now injured. Mbeumo has returned decent points, but hasn't yet really lived up to his potential - as a primary goalscorer generously classified as a 'midfielder', playing for a team like United, that really ought to make him one of the hottest properties in FPL; but last season he did not fulfil that promise, and I worry that it's starting to look like he won't quite do so this year either. 

There's an enticing array of options in the middle and lower budget tiers this year. At Bournemouth, Tavernier has been in excellent form at the start of the season; and Kluivert is looking like he might be finally starting to get back to his best; but Rayan hasn't found his form yet (a big disappointment to me, as I'd gambled on him in my opening squad), and Scott, despite excellent form and good early points returns, isn't likely to be a regular producer of attacking returns. Cherki has looked very dangerous, but might not be secure in his minutes; I am still optimistic that Doku could prove to be the most reliable points-producer in the City midfield, but I start to lose faith a little as this 'minor' injury absence drags on and on; and Enzo Fernandez - looking likely to get regular starts (as he's evidently such a Maresca favourite) and play in quite an advanced role - is worth keeping an eye on too. Schade is in good goalscoring form at an irresistible price; and Gross, Stach, and Fulham's Josh King have also made great starts - representing outstanding value at the bottom end of the price spectrum (although I suspect Hinshelwood could displace all of them if he returns to a regular start). Manzambi is the newcomer to the league who I feel could have the biggest impact (although he might struggle at a Villa side who look in such poor shape at the moment); and his Swiss national teammate Okafor is a player that I fancy could well come into some hot goalscoring form at some point - my final two 'ones to watch' in midfield.

Up front, there's quite a conundrum as to how to juggle the selection. Haaland is again looking the likely front-runner and near-essential forward pick, but he is at a wince-making high price this year that is tempting many of the shrewder managers in the game to attempt to get by without him. Joao Pedro has started out super-hot, and looking as if he could perhaps sustain a challenge to Haaland for the Golden Boot. Isak, too, is finally starting to show signs of recovering his best form, after an entire season blighted by injuries; but the unconvincing form of Liverpool as a whole makes me slightly doubtful about getting him at this point - unless you're going without Haaland: he's clearly likely to be one of the three best forwards this year; but they're too expensive for you to splash the cash on getting all three of them. I'm sure Igor Thiago will come good at some point; and Havertz should really be getting some consideration, now that he's clearly displaced Gyokeres as Arteta's preferred central striker (still just shy of 8% ownership, presumably only because there are so many other Arsenal players people want!) - I fancy these will probably become the most popular 3rd forward picks sooner or later.

Among the cheaper forward options, Calvert-Lewin and Wissa are the early favourites (although I expressed some reservations above about whether we could rely on Dominic to remain fit and in-form for a long stretch); but I would fancy Will Osula even more, if he can soon return from injury (yet another one of my initial squad picks that quickly went wrong!!). And I can see McBurnie, Delap, Flemming or perhaps even Kostoulas (though I wouldn't count on him keeping the start for long) becoming popular options at the temptingly low 5.5-million price-point.