Dilemmas of the Week - GW 38 (25/26)

 

And so we face the final curtain..... Gameweek 38 is always a bit of a lottery, as there are so many 'dead rubbers'. The title race is decided, and the relegation places very nearly so; Arsenal and Aston Villa might be a bit tired after celebrating their trophy wins this week, while City might be feeling a bit deflated about letting their title challenge fizzle - and about the imminent departure of their superstar manager. Arsenal and Palace have European finals coming up, so might be giving managed minutes to some of their star players. And with the World Cup just around the corner, a nervousness about possible last-minute injuries might take the edge off some players' games. One wonders also how Friday's announcement of the England squad may affect some players: will Palmer, Gibbs-White, Bowen and Calvert-Lewin be depressed at their - unexpected, possibly unfair - omission, or will they have a chip on their shoulder about it and be fired up to show that Tuchel was wrong about them?  It's very, very difficult to anticipate what team line-ups are going to be, or how well anyone's going to play.

However, the exceptionally tight midfield pack we've seen all season means that there's still quite a tussle going on for the European places. Even Everton and Newcastle in 11th and 12th were very nearly still in contention (to have a chance, they would have needed all three of the teams above them to lose their final match, and that can't happen as Sunderland and Chelsea are drawn against each other): all the positions from 4th to 10th could yet change. And of course Premier League survival is riding on the outcome of the Spurs v Everton and West Ham v Leeds games.

But there are fairly few new injuries this week, so this can be a quick last roundup of the year!

I have been trying to streamline these weekly round-ups a bit from last year, restricting myself for the most part to just the injuries etc. affecting players that are likely to have a major significance in FPL; and also, of course, only to new injuries - I figure everyone should be aware of players who've already been ruled out for some time!  

[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. 

I see the Fantasy Premier League site has added an improved 'Player Availability' page this year (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 38?

Does anybody need to be moved out because of injury?

Malo Gusto missed last week's game against Spurs with a training knock, and is a doubt again for this week. However, Joao Pedro, who was also absent last week with a tight hamstring, has apparently been back in training at the end of the week and is expected to be available.

Chris Richards suffered ligament damage to his ankle against Brentford last week, so will be out for quite a while; this leaves Palace seriously short at the back.

Brenden Aaronson came off with a knock against Brighton last week; it didn't seem too serious, but there's been no further word on whether he's recovered.

Jeremie Frimpong and Alexander Isak were missing last week with minor injuries, but might possibly be available again for the final game, at least off the bench.

Sandro Tonali came off last week with a hamstring problem; Eddie Howe had initially thought that would certainly rule him out, but it seems the issue isn't too serious and he might possibly be able to make a return.

Omar Alderete came off with a knock against Everton last week, and looks unlikely to be available for the Chelsea game.

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

Ryan Christie, Joachim Andersen, and Dan Ballard are still serving out three-match bans.

Max Dowman is unlikely to be involved for Arsenal this weekend, as he's in the middle of his GCSEs.

And it has been decided that last week's home game at Old Trafford would be Casemiro's last appearance for the club.

Did anyone give other cause to consider dropping them?

There is much agitation in the FPL community about the prospect of Arsenal and Manchester City, in particular, possibly indulging in mass rotations this week. It's also a concern with Crystal Palace, who have their Europa Conference League Final in Leipzig this Wednesday against Rayo Vallecano - although they perhaps don't have that much scope for rotation, due to a limited squad and a lot of injuries at present. My feeling is that Arteta is proud and a perfectionist, and that he will thus want to end the season as strongly as possible (and will probably want to treat the Palace game as a valuable warm-up for next Saturday's clash with PSG). And Pep will also want to go out on a high note; and several of his players may perhaps be additionally inspired to produce goals to give him a happy send-off. But, of course, Pep Roulette is always a hazard, and since City have two elevens of almost equal ability, it is very hard to know who will get the start this week. I have a hunch that Khusanov and O'Reilly could make way for the longer established Dias and Gvardiol, and that perhaps Marmoush might get a start over Doku or Semenyo.

Many FPL managers are also fancying a punt on one or both of the relegation battlers, Spurs and West Ham. But there's a reason why they're in that predicament, and I fancy they'll both wilt under the pressure and lose quite badly - with Spurs staying up by the skin of their teeth, only because West Ham suddenly faltered again in the last few games.

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

If I were going to bring in one player from the relegation candidates, it would be West Ham's Taty Castellanos, who should be buzzed after scoring what might be the 'Goal of the Season' last week. However, among the thus-far unregarded forwards, Newcastle's Will Osula has been in even better form of late.

BEST OF LUCK, EVERYONE!

Not quite what we wanted...

 

When Thomas Tuchel selected his first England squad 14 months ago, I observed that the England manager's job is a thankless task, and that invariably every fan will have his own perfect selection in mind and will carp at every variation from that Platonic ideal, however trivial.

However, the just-announced World Cup squad has a few oddities in it that are so egregious, it has got the majority of England fans not just mildly irked, but seriously dismayed, even outraged.

I don't take issue with as many of the choices as some (the compiler of the 'Rejects XI' above cannot seriously have supposed that all of them were going to get a call-up??), but I fear there are a few really big errors in it - which may cost us dearly in the tournament.

So, I'll quickly run through my take on the good, the bad, and the ugly of Thomas Tuchel's picks...

Expected, justified omissions

Not even Nick Pope's mum thinks he's one of the best three goalkeepers in England any more; and his club manager no longer seems sure if he's even better than Aaron Ramsdale - so, there's absolutely no surprise that he didn't make the cut (especially after a season disrupted by injury). The goalkeeping line-up is surely the one part of the squad where there's really no controversy at all.

Trent Alexander-Arnold, rightly or wrongly, was already being sidelined at England under Southgate; and Tuchel immediately made it clear that he has no interest in using him. I think - somewhat controversially - that this is the correct decision. For me, Trent is player whose excellences occupy a very narrow spectrum, and who thus needs to have a team built around him if he is to flourish (he needs hard-working midfielders who will cover for him when he's caught out of position defensively, and very quick forward players who can exploit his long balls over the top). Klopp was able to do that at Liverpool; but I don't think an England manager can.

Harry Maguire, I've said on here before, is 'yesterday's man'. He's given excellent service to England over the years, and he's still a fine player. But he's obviously not our first-choice starter any more; and I fear he's too big an ego to accept merely a back-up role in the squad. Likewise, Luke Shaw, although he has - surprisingly - been an ever-present for Manchester United this season, has clearly declined a bit in fitness from his peak a few years ago, and no longer looks like an obvious prospect for us at left-back... even though that is, currently, the position in which we have perhaps the thinnest cover.

Phil Foden is an unfortunate omission; but he doesn't seem to be securely in Pep's favour, and has played less than 2,000 Premier League minutes this season. I fear that his confidence has been broken by his manager's lack of trust in him (and/or that there may be reasons, unknown to the public, why that lack of trust is justified...). And alas, he's never really managed to make his mark with England, and he had a particularly ineffectual tournament in the Euros two summers ago. In an area of the pitch where we are rather spoiled with an over-abundance of talent to choose from, it really is not surprising that he didn't quite make the cut.

Unfortunate omissions

I was a little bit of a sceptic about Levi Colwill a couple of years or so ago, but he impressed me enormously last season, and I think he could become a mainstay of the England team. For that reason, I would have been tempted to make a place for him in this squad, even though he's unlikely to start, and is probably going to be a little ring-rusty after his long injury absence. I also think we need a specialist left-back as cover for Nico O'Reilly, and that slot really ought to have gone to Lewis Hall; he might not have the adaptability of Spence or Livramento, but he is more consistent, and offers much more of an attacking threat.

Jarrad Branthwaite and Myles Lewis-Skelly (and perhaps also Rico Lewis) will no doubt enjoy an England career at some point, but unfortunately they just haven't had enough first-team minutes this year to be in contention for this squad.

Adam Wharton and Alex Scott are perhaps too young and inexperienced to be relied upon yet as regular starters, but they are outstanding prospects for the future, and I would have liked to see space being made for at least one of them in this squad. I think that space could have been easily created by taking one or two fewer defenders.

Harvey Barnes, many people would say, has done enough this season to be considered for a call-up. It is unfortunate that Eddie Howe never seems to view him as an automatic starter, even when he's in hot goalscoring form, but he really has looked a much better prospect this year than his teammate Anthony Gordon; and, given that he's only likely to be called upon as a late substitute when we're chasing a game, his pace and finishing could surely be very valuable to us.

Questionable, but possibly justified inclusions

Tino Livramento undoubtedly has a lot of promise, but he has had too many injury problems this season (and is injured now - so might get replaced in the squad), and just hasn't had the opportunity to establish any settled form. His clubmate Lewis Hall looked a far stronger candidate to me; one suspects Livramento has only got the nod because of his ability to operate on either flank. This was presumably the decisive factor in Djed Spence's favour too. I have been impressed with Spence's development over the past couple of seasons, but I worry about his mental state after the appalling season Spurs have suffered; 'failure' can be contagious, and I would be very wary of bringing in players from relegated clubs (or clubs that have been floundering in that mire; I'm writing this the day before the season finale, so don't know if Spurs managed to escape the drop). I've said before that I like Dan Burn for his adaptability and his attitude; but he hasn't been a regular starter with Newcastle this season, and when he has played, it's been most often as a centre-back; when he has had a start at left-back, he's looked much less composed than he did a couple of seasons back when he was playing the role regularly, and has often been found out for pace. I can see taking Burn as a makeweight, because he'll be an inspiring presence off the pitch, and can provide emergency cover anywhere across the back-four (and possibly even in central midfield); but he does look perhaps the weakest of the defensive picks, and if you feel - as I do - that we're taking too many defenders, he's probably the one that should be cut. Though I really don't think we need both Livramento and Spence - so long as there are no lingering question-marks over Reece James's fitness.

John Stones is presumably included for his experience, and his adaptability (able to fill in at right-back, in an emergency, or even as a holding midfielder). And it's interesting that Tuchel apparently cites 'training data' as reassuring him in this choice: presumably his fitness levels appear to be strong, even though he's almost inevitably going to be short of full sharpness after playing so few competitive minutes this year. Though it seems a rather risky call, I can see the need for including someone with significant tournament experience in what is, mostly, a very young squad. The worry, I think, is that Tuchel likes him so much, he might actually be thinking of starting him. For me, Guehi and Konsa have established themselves as deserved first-choice starters, and we should be concentrating on building their partnership - one which could become the backbone of the team for the decade ahead.

Anthony Gordon has pace, aggression, adaptability; at his best, he's certainly an asset to the squad, and so I can see why Tuchel has stood by him. But he has had a very ropey season at Newcastle, rarely anywhere near his best; his club form does not justify his inclusion at the moment.

Bizarre inclusions

Jordan Henderson is now slow and injury-prone, and has only featured for Brentford half the time this past season. He surely can't be considered for anything more than the occasional token 10-minute run-out in internationals. And if he's been included simply for his dressing-room leadership.... surely we could have brought him along as a 'coach', rather than wasting a squad place??

Ivan Toney has been scoring for fun in the Saudi Pro League - but does that really count for anything? The overall competitive standard in that league is so low that your gran could probably score goals there. He surely can't have been included just for his penalty-taking prowess,... can he? Dominic Calvert-Lewin and Danny Welbeck must be scratching their heads in dismay: they've both had outstanding domestic seasons and notched some good goals against proper defences. There might be reasonable question-marks over their consistency and resistance to injury, but on recent form they should certainly have been in consideration. I think the last forward slot should have gone to the outstanding Jarrod Bowen. The only possible logic I can see for this choice is that Tuchel may be considering using Kane in a deeper position and starting Watkins ahead of him as the central striker; and, if so, you can see why he'd want another forward of closely similar profile to Watkins as a back-up for him. (Though in that case, I would still have gone for Calvert-Lewin.)  We shall see.

The really culpable errors

James Garner has had an outstanding season, and is clearly now our second-best holding midfield option; therefore, he was, I think, an absolutely essential pick as back-up for Elliot Anderson - and if Anderson should get injured, his omission might become one of our biggest regrets.

Morgan Gibbs-White has looked our most versatile and consistent central midfielder for the last few seasons; and I would have taken him to America ahead of Declan Rice (yes, I know what a great season he's had - but I stand by that: Rice is a jack-of-all-trades player, remarkably good at almost all aspects of the game.... but not quite the obvious first-choice for any one role or position) or Morgan Rogers, and certainly ahead of Jordan bloody Henderson.

Jarrod Bowen, I think, deserves a place for his workrate and his attitude, as well as for the fact that he offers a rather different profile to anyone else we have up front. I think that difference of style could prove valuable in games where we're still chasing a late goal. And in games (hopefully the majority!) where we're just sitting on a lead for the last 20 minutes, we can rely on his tenacious pressing to hinder an opponent from coming back at us. If he were being passed over for an obviously superior player, a player with an outstanding goalscoring record this season, then the decision would be less baffling; but to take Ivan Toney instead...?? That is a WTF?!

And of course, the really super-colossal blunder is leaving behind Cole Palmer - who is, quite simply, our best player,... and probably, in fact, the best playmaker in Europe. Tuchel's only proffered explanation seems to have been that "we don't need five No. 10s". No, indeed; but we probably do need to take at least three of them. And Palmer is by far the best of the candidates. Moreover, it is perfectly possible to play two '10s' (or 'false 9s') alongside each other. And most of our players who fit this role, like Palmer himself, are also able to operate a bit wider, coming in off the flanks; or, in the case of Bellingham and Gibbs-White, to play a bit deeper in central midfield. And ironically, two of the nominal No. 10s Tuchel has chosen... aren't really No. 10s at all: Bellingham is a sui generis play-anywhere-and-everywhere player, who's probably at his best breaking from deeper positions as an occasional late box-crasher; and Rogers, for Villa, generally starts out wide, and drifts into the half-space to attack the box, rather than dictating play from central areas. So, that 'too many to choose from' argument just doesn't hold water for me; there must be some other reason why our gaffer doesn't like him. But whatever it is, I think he's wrong; and this is the one selection decision that might cost us our chance of winning the tournament.

And finally.... my TWO unpopular exclusion suggestions!

Morgan Rogers and Declan Rice. Yes, I know, they're outstanding players, and I'm sure they'll do a decent job for us. It is looking rather as if Rogers, in fact, may be so favoured by Tuchel that he might be the preferred starter in the No. 10 role - even at the expense of Bellingham! But for me, he's just not quite good enough: he's had long spells at Villa - not just long passages in a game, but long runs of games - where he's been very ineffectual. He's not as good as Palmer or Eze at threading balls through into the box, he's not as good as Mainoo or Gibbs-White at carrying the ball forward through the midfield, he's not as good as Saka or Rashford at coming in off the wing to shoot at goal. And I wrote at some length about Rice the other day: I admire his qualities, but for me he's better as an attacking midfielder (and he just isn't going to get in contention there, because we have such a wealth of other talent - to the point where we can consider omitting the likes of Palmer and Foden and Bellingham!!); he has his shortcomings as a holding player, and for our central midfield positions, I'd much prefer Anderson and Garner, Mainoo and Wharton, Gibbs-White and even Bellingham.

It's not a terrible squad. And it's not that unexpected (apart from the omission of Palmer, and perhaps of Bowen). Let us cross our fingers and hope for the best!!!

The ultimate REFRAME

I was asked - yet again - on one of the forums the other week what my rank is. And instead of just ignoring the enquiry, or castigating the questioner as an ignorant lout, I came up with this flippant response.... which I find contains a kernel of important truth. This is not silly bragging or empty, delusional consolation; it is a valuable reminder of where our true focus should lie.

"I am FIRST in the only league that matters."

This is always true, for all of us. Because the only competition that truly matters is the struggle with ourselves - to do the best we can, and to constantly seek to improve on what that 'best' can be.

Fretting about your 'Overall Rank', or even your status in mini-leagues, is a VANITY of VANITIES. It is not what the game of FPL should really be about.

A little bit of Zen (95)

"Roads are made for journeys, not destinations."

Kong Qiu ('Confucius')

"Money's just something you throw off the the back of a train..."

Tom Waits - 'Long Way Home'

Money, after all, is just a crystallization of effort, a convenient medium for translating effort into different material benefits. But money, like effort, like all manifestations of the material world, is ephemeral: we use it, and it is gone forever. Nothing lasts; but the true value of a thing arises precisely from the fact that it can only be experienced for a fixed amount of time. The value of an FPL season is not found in the numbers recorded against your name at the end of it, but in the memories of all the doubts and struggles and difficult decisions grappled with over the past nine months.

What is Declan FOR....?

 

More than 18 months ago, I did a lengthy piece here on the blog about why I was unconvinced that Trent Alexander-Arnold could usefully fit into the England set-up. Now, I'm going to risk even greater derision and disparagement by attempting to make a similar case about Declan Rice. (In fact, I recall that I already did so, in outline, in a post from last Spring about my thoughts on the likely development of the England squad under the first few years of Thomas Tuchel's stewardship.)

And as with Trent, it's largely about him not being a style of player who fits any need I can see in the England team. He is undoubtedly a very, very good player; and he's found a very particular niche in the current Arsenal team - where he has come to seem essential to their success. But that does not mean that he would also be essential - or even necessary or useful - to England's success at this summer's World Cup.

I said in that earlier post, actually, that I could see Rice retaining a place in the squad for his value as a utility player and his off-field leadership. But I've shifted my view on that now. And again, it's not for any reason to do with his attributes; I still rate him very highly for those qualities. But I am increasingly convinced that - in an ideal world - he wouldn't any longer be a starter for us. And I fret that he might be too big a personality to accept merely a bit-part role in the squad, to play the dressing-room cheerleader as selflessly as someone like Conor Coady did. Even if he would, there's a greater fear that his presence would nevertheless have a disruptive influence by acting as a focus for any public and media discontent with our performances; I can foresee that if Rice were with the squad - after the season he's just had for Arsenal - there would be constant lobbying from others to reinstate him in the starting line-up.

I mentioned in that earlier post that I worried that, like Harry Kane, Declan Rice had been unfortunately pigeonholed by his physique. For me, he's always looked much more effective as a progressive midfielder, pushing up into the final third and trying to make things happen around the edge of the opposing box. But because he's so physically imposing, he's almost always been lumbered with a more defensive role in central midfeld. And yet the funny thing is that, despite his excellent reading of the game and his sometimes incisive tackling,... he's just not actually all that good at a pure holding role in the middle - at least not on his own. He was fine supporting Soucek at West Ham, or Partey, and now Zubimendi at Arsenal; but when he has to try to control that central space on his own - as he was during Partey's long absences a couple of years ago - he often gets found out.

And I'm afraid that the decisive emergence of Elliot Anderson and James Garner this season should effectively punt him to the sidelines of England selection. They are simply much better at the nitty-gritty of the holding midfield role than Rice is. I think their progressive passing is rather better too. (Arteta, with his obsession with 'control' in games, has not given Rice much leeway to develop the more creative aspects of his game. Much of the time, he wants to draw more on his defensive qualities, even when he's pressing forward. But even more of the time, he just wants him to sit a bit deeper and maintain possession by playing the ball sideways all the time.... It is not developing his vision for the more probing ball forward.)

There are other weaknesses in his game too. He's not great on the turn, not strong when receiving the ball under pressure, facing his own goal, not great at spinning away from a harrying opponent to open up the chance to start carrying the ball upfield. Kobbie Mainoo's way better than him in those aspects of the game. And if we're looking for someone who can put in an effective shift in deeper midfield, but still offer more creative potential through their range of passing, then... I think we have to try to start making use of Adam Wharton,... or Morgan Gibbs-White, or maybe Alex Scott.

For me, Declan Rice is a bit of a jack-of-all-trades type: he's very, very good at almost everything - but he isn't quite the best at any one thing. (Well, perhaps at set-piece delivery. But I don't think someone gets into the England team just for that. And we do have other excellent options there: Palmer, Saka, Foden, Gibbs-White...)

Also, I feel that his greatest strengths are probably in the attacking third - but he hasn't been given full opportunity to develop this dimension to his game in a very conservative Arsenal playing style where he's more often expected to be the gatekeeper than a lock-picker. And again, good as he is, is he really going to get in contention for one of our more advanced midfield roles - in competition with Palmer, Bellingham, Saka, Eze, Rashford, etc.??  Sorry, but I just can't see it.

It is particularly difficult to write this after Rice has had such an outstanding season - a season where he might in fact lift the two biggest trophies in club football. (I wrote this a few days ago, before we'd seen if the Gameweek 37 matches might settle the Premier League title race, or if Arsenal might somehow be letting that trophy slip from their fingers...)  I fully acknowledge that he's a great, great player, and that he's been playing sensational football this year. But he can be this great and still not quite be starting material for England: he's not our best holding midfielder (not even top three, I don't think), he's not our best option for a more creative central midfielder, and he's really not going to be considered among our top half dozen or so attacking midfield options.

So, absent an injury to Anderson or Garner or Mainoo or Wharton,... I wouldn't be taking Declan Rice to America this summer.

I'm pretty sure Tuchel will, and that he will probably start him alongside Anderson in a double-pivot. And I imagine that will work out OK; if... when we under-perform and crash out, it will probably be because Palmer or Bellingham or Kane or Saka, or one of the defenders, or even Jordan Pickford had a poor tournament, rather than some failing on Rice's part we could pin it on. But I still feel it would be a non-optimal selection, that our squad ought to be just that bit better without him.

Don't hate me, Arsenal fans. It's just an opinion.

Had we but world enough and time.....

 

.... we'd all win FPL one day!

I said last week, in my major post on what actually makes the most difference to your FPL season points total, that smart FPL managers should out-perform not-so-smart ones.... most of the time.

But alas, I'm not convinced that is true: at least, not as often as it should be, not over a single season - not in our unitary existence.

The thing is, with such a huge number of manager accounts in the game every year now, you're inevitably going to get a huge number of them that prosper by sheer dumb luck (even among 'zombie accounts' that are rarely or never active!). And because the impact of luck in our game is far greater than that of skill, that unfortunately means that a very large number of those who do so prosper will prosper so extravagantly that they will outperform a lot of the merely skillful managers in the game who haven't had any out-of-the-ordinary luck, and hence that... not all, but a very great many of the folks in the upper reaches of the rankings most years are likely to be not really very good at all, to have reached that eminence mostly or entirely by luck.

It is my belief that the truly smart FPL managers would only be able to convincingly display their superiority over the masses across a very long timeframe.

You do see some evidence of this, with some of the best long-time managers having now produced fairly consistently decent - though rarely or never outstanding - results over 10 or 15 or 20 years. But even for this to happen, for one's 'true average' level of attainment to emerge, for you to prove your ascendance over the majority of other managers in the game (many of whom will have averages buoyed up by one or two extraordinarily lucky seasons...), it will usually take many, many years - maybe, in some cases, too many years, more than one human lifetime.

And for a really smart manager to win the global crown, or even to crack the top 50k or 100k, it might take him or her hundreds or thousands of lifetimes.

I speculate that if some sort of 'multiverse' hypothesis is indeed the case (that there are many parallel realities, perhaps an infinite number, all subtly different - and that hence, across that infinitude, everything that can happen, will happen somewhere), then smart FPL managers are enjoying their just reward somewhere each year. But within a single reality, it might take centuries or millennia before the dice fall that kindly for us.

For most of us, it will never happen - because life is too short.

The End of Civlization

Another Youtube channel I'm rather fond of, again with a heavily philosophical leaning, is Aperture - run by a Toronto-based digital media company called Underknown. 

This recent video explores the importance of the Hierarchy of Cognition developed by American educational psychologist Benjamin Bloom, a taxonomy of 'levels of thinking' intended as a framework for the planning of more effective teaching.

While the opening sections about the 'dumbing down' and the increasing tribalism of modern society under the adverse influence of digital media saturation are pretty depressing stuff, the film does ultimately take a more optimistic track, explaining how we can try to break free of these negative influences and continually advance our thinking towards the upper strata of Bloom's pyramid.

And it is absolutely chock-full of ideas I've been talking about in relation to FPL for the past few years...

"Analysis requires emotional distance. Evaluation requires neutrality. Creation requires clarity."

“Thinking begins where impulsivity ends. When you slow your mind, you create the space necessary for thought to grow.”

It is a fantastic video, brimful of thought-provoking quotes. Go and watch the whole thing. And then try to apply its lessons.

'Chasing' is the ultimate DELUSION

A chap on one of the FPL forums recently was asking what tactics he should follow in the last two or three gameweeks of the season.

My reply was this:  You do what you'd do in any other gameweek. You pick the best team you can, and keep your fingers crossed for a good outcome. 

There is no way to 'protect' rank, or to 'chase' rank: you have no knowledge of what anyone else will choose to do, and no control over anyone's outcomes. 

If you delude yourself into thinking that a 'more cautious' selection or a 'more daring' selection is better, you're just distracting yourself from what you ought to be doing - trying to find the BEST selection.

That's all there is to it. 'Chasing rank' (or nervously 'protecting rank') is dangerous nonsense; it only leads to foot-shooting.

Luck-o-Meter 25-26 - Gameweek 37

The big hassle this week is the FA Cup Final between Manchester City and Chelsea being scheduled on the penultimate weekend of the season. This means that they can't play their GW37 league games against Bournemouth and Spurs until next Tuesday evening. (I suppose we should at least be grateful that the League didn't decide to declare GW37 a Blank Gameweek for these four teams, and GW38 a Double!)  Having a Friday evening kick-off between Villa and Liverpool was an additional irritation, meaning that we got very very little time on Friday to finalise our team changes. And of course, with City and Chelsea, we have no idea what shape they'll be in for the Tuesday return to league action: elated by success, drained/distracted by celebrations, demoralised by defeat - or perhaps just thoroughly knackered by a tough game (that might have gone to extra time and penalties...). With an especially heightened risk of rotations, it's very dangerous to be relying on players from either of those two clubs this gameweek.

But at least there haven't been too many new injuries this past week!

These weekly 'summaries' have been getting a bit too involved - and excessively time-consuming for me! - so I've been aiming to keep them briefer recently. I made just about zero progress on that resolution for the first few weeks, but.... now I've hit upon a new 'format', which might help: 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).

Red cards awarded: 

Red cards not awarded:  Kai Havertz should have been dismissed for a horrible foul on Ugochukwu on Monday night. There wasn't enough force in it to be a 'leg-breaker', but he dived in widly from behind and caught the opponent very high on the inside of the shin - that's a red card all day long. It was probably too late in the game to have made any difference to the result; but it would at least have given Arsenal a few more grey hairs during the closing minutes.

Penalties awarded: The early penalty award against Kelleher was extremely harsh: he barely touched Ismaila Sarr, who was already going down; contact, yes, but trivial, not enough to bring the player down.

Spurs might reasonably feel aggrieved that they didn't get a penalty when Cucurella wrestled Van de Ven to the floor while he was waiting for a corner to be delivered. The decision may be technically correct - though it was a very close call as to when the foul was deemed to have been committed, and when the ball was deemed to have entered play - under our current absurd law that 'a foul cannot be committed while the ball is dead'; I was saying last weekend that that needs to change.

Penalties not awarded:  Soucek was lucky to escape an early penalty shout: the ball into the box clearly did hit his hand, and he had plenty of time to see the flight of the ball and get out of the way of it, but actually appeared to move his arm slightly towards the ball. Another utterly baffling decision from the VAR room: there is no consistency on these calls this season. Brennan Johnson should also have had a penalty, for a brief but very obvious tug on the back of his shirt at the edge of the box. [Arteta was dismayed that Arsenal didn't get a penalty on Monday night when Saka went down in the act of shooting from the edge of the six-yard-box - but he clearly kicked the back of the defender's heel, rather than the defender kicking him.]

Tight/dubious offsides: It was a great pity that Semenyo's early effort against Bournemouth was ruled out. He did look 'off' by a shoulder - but it was a lovely through-ball from Haaland(!) and a slick finish from Semenyo (and it might have kept the title race live into the final weekend).

Goals wrongly allowed/disallowed: Michael Salisbury made one of the weirdest decisions of the season, even when sent to the pitchside monitor for a second look, somehow ruling that there was nothing wrong with Bryan Mbeumo briefly catching the ball between his upper-arm and chest to bring it under control, in the lead-up to Cunha's goal. Significantly, Cunha didn't celebrate because he knew the goal shouldn't have been able to stand - and briefly looked surprised and embarrassed when it was finally given.

Surprise omissions/early substitutions/injuries: Jeremie Frimpong and Alexander Isak were unexpected omissions from Liverpool's match squad on Friday night, while Salah again only came on near the end. Kevin Schade was dropped to the bench, in favour of Dango Ouattara. Kieran Trippier was reinstated at right-back for a farewell appearance at St James's Park - although that might have been down to an absence of anyone else fit to play in that position rather than any sentiment on Eddie Howe's part. Nuno surprisingly gave a start to Callum Wilson over the recently impressive Taty Castellanos - and that availed him nothing; although he repented and brought the Argentinian on after just 25 minutes, and he did contribute a spectacular late goal. Joao Pedro, supposedly suffering a slight knock, was completely rested on Tuesday night (and Chelsea played one of their best games for ages without him!).

Near misses:  Bryan Mbeumo hit the foot of the near-post at the end of an early breakaway, and in the follow-up Casemiro put an effort inches wide. Ismaila Sarr relished starting as the main striker for Palace, and soon followed up his coolly taken penalty with a fierce near-post drive that smashed against the woodwork. Soon afterwards, his partner Strand Larsen also curled a good effort against the far-post. Jake O'Brien nearly equalised for Everton with a powerful header, but Roefs somehow flung his shoulder at it to deflect it away. In the closing minutes at Old Trafford, a great move ended with Diogo Dalot seeing a cracking cross-shot come back off the far post. Castellanos was nearly a hero for West Ham, almost grabbing a second goal when he smashed a near-post effort past Pope in the closing minutes but saw it hit the angle of post and crossbar. Adam Armstrong had a great chance to snatch a late win for Wolves, but his effort came back off the near-post.

Mathys Tel directed a diving header against the foot of the near-post early in Tuesday night's game at Stamford Bridge: that might be the ultimate what-if that haunts Spurs fans next season!

Big misses/big saves: Karl Darlow made a fine finger-tip save from a long-range effort from Pascal Gross. A little later Joel Veltman's sloppy clearance thudded straight against the chest of his partner Lewis Dunk and rebounded towards the goal, demanding a sharp stop from Bart Verbruggen. 

Leandro Trossard cracked a 20-yard shot against the foot of the post early against Burnley; that might have soothed the Champions-to-be's nerves, in what turned out to be a very tight game. Cole Palmer looked to be getting back to his peak fluency on Tuesday night, and forced Kinsky to make a fingertip save with a delicious curler in the first-half. Soon after his goal, Enzo whipped a cheeky free-kick from a wide position straight at goal and thumped the crossbar. Djordje Petrovic made a sharp stop to his left from Nico O'Reilly: that probably ended City's title hopes, and caused misery to the nearly 20% of FPL managers who own O'Reilly. In the second-half - which Bournemouth increasingly dominated - Rayan's cross/shot from an acute angle on the right deflected off O'Reilly's studs and was going to sneak in at the foot of the near-post until Donnarumma pulled off a brilliant reaction save. David Brooks was presented with an open goal, albeit from the edge of the box, in the closing minutes, but swept his first-time shot tamely straight at the keeper. Shortly afterwards, he had another chance on the breakaway, this time beating Donnarumma but seeing his fierce 20-yard shot slam back off the post.

Outstanding goals: Morgan Rogers and John McGinn were having a little private competition on Friday night to see who could hit the sweetest curler; it will be tough to decide which one should get into the frame for 'Goal of the Month' (although it's a pity that some careless defending improbably let Van Dijk steal in for a couple of headed consolation goals, in what should really have been an absolute drubbing for an increasingly rickety-looking Liverpool...). Luke Shaw produced a very neat finish to give United an early lead - only his 5th goal in 12 seasons at the club! Castellanos gave West Ham fans some scant consolation in a terrible game with his 'Goal of the Season' contender in the 70th minute - lashing home Hermansen's long kick with a first-time half-volley that dipped viciously over Pope from just outside the area. (An assist for a keeper is a rare turn-up in itself!)  Mateus Mané - having already stung Leno's palms with a long-range effort early on - banged in a cracker from the edge of the box to give Wolves a rare lead; though, sadly, they couldn't hang on for all 3 points in their last home game of the season.

Enzo Fernandez whipped one in from at least 30 yards, to dump Spurs right back in the relegation mire - a fantastic strike, but Kinsky probably should have been able to keep it out. In a week of many great curling goals, Kroupi's was one of the sweetest of the lot: one of those where he looked as if he knew it was going in before he even received the ball.

Outstanding performances: 

Big mistakes: Sunderland were gifted a third goal in added-on time when Keane and Coleman both unaccountably opted not to pul the ball behind, and thus let it run through the six-yard box to an unmarked Isidor. Leeds were gifted a last-gasp winner when the usually immaculate Jan Paul van Hecke played a lazy, no-look back-pass straight to Dominic Calvert-Lewin (who then cost his FPL owners a point by taking his shirt off to celebrate!), though Verbruggen was also at fault for rushing out, and Dunk for not dropping back to cover for the error. Many managers with Brighton players were left ruing the sudden evaporation of what had looked like in-the-bag clean-sheet points.

Bad luck/good luck: Ouattara's goal was one of the strangest we've seen this season: Canvot's attempt at a headed clearance struck him in the face at close-range as he ran in behind the defender - and deflected straight into the goal, without him knowing much about it!

FPL weirdness:  Bruno Fernandes was rather generously given a second assist: one of those only-in-FPL ones, not part of his official league tally for the season! Even under the much more generous interpretation of 'assists' being used for the points awards this season, it was rather bizarre to see the Forest defender's attempted clearance interpreted merely as a non-consequential 'deflection'. Antonee Robinson was a surprise penalty-taker for Fulham. (This isn't strictly a weirdness in how FPL is recognising game actions or assigning points - but I couldn't think where else to put it.)

Unexpected results:  Wolves earning a point against Fulham and Sunderland beating Everton were the only mild surprises of this gameweek. Villa's drubbing of Liverpool can't be seen as at all 'unexpected' on recent form; in fact, the only 'surprise' was that they forgot to defend a few times, and allowed Van Dijk to steal in for a couple of soft set-piece goals that the visitors really hadn't earned. Similarly, Bournemouth have been finishing the season strongly, and it was always to be expected that City would be depleted after the demands of the Cup Final a few days before, as well as feeling the pressure of having been chasing in the title race for so long.

With three midweek matches still to play in the gameweek, with some of the top teams involved, the global average was an unbelievably dismal 24 points, and the FPL 'Team of the Week' included only four players - Rogers, Anderson, Watkins, and the incredibly improbable Van Dijk - with any kind of ownership. The average did eventually rise to a respectable 53 points (though largely because there were a lot of bonus chips in play), and the 'Team of the Week' wasn't ultimately one of the more unexpected we've seen this season; although the back-line of Van Dijk, Robinson, and Morata was entirely down to goals-out-of-nowhere rather than overall play! 

With a lot of goals from defenders this week, and an assist from a goalkeeper, an extraordinary amount of woodwork-battering (possibly the most of the season??), 2 clearcut penalties bizarrely not given, a very dubious one awarded against Kelleher, and another 'correctly' but unjustly denied to Spurs on Tuesday, along with Havertz somehow escaping a red card, and Michael Salisbury's unfathomable decision to ignore the Mbeumo handball that should have invalidated United's second goal, this week is another 9 out of 10 on the 'Luck-o-Meter'.

The nuclear option

 

I mentioned in my weekly review of the last gameweek how very unsatisfying the end of the West Ham v Arsenal game had been - for all true lovers of football, even Arsenal fans.

It is unsatisfying that any game should be interrupted for such a painfully protracted delay, while the VAR process grinds slowly on. It is unsatisfying that a foul on the goalkeeper should be arbitrarily deemed to outweigh 4 or 5 penalty fouls being committed against the attacking team. And, whether that decision was technically 'right' or 'wrong', it is unsatisfying - intolerable - that such a remote intervention might have decided the two most important issues of the season, the destination of the title and the last relegation place.

But we only find ourselves in this vexing situation because PGMOL has so signally failed all season to get to grips with the epidemic of wrestling in the penalty area at every set-piece. When there are this many fouls, or potential fouls, now happening multiple times in the game, the on-pitch referee is naturally overwhelmed and unable to cope with the decision-making being asked of him; but so now too is the VAR team - when there are this many bits of grappling going on simultaneously, it becomes impossible for the back-room team (or at least, impractically time-consuming for them) to fairly and consistently adjudicate which incidents are 'consequential' and which are not, and which should 'take priority' in a final decision.

When former referee Darren Cann appeared as a guest on Sunday's 'Match of the Day' on the BBC, he revealed that the 'solution' under discussion was to bar attacking players in the six-yard box at set-pieces next season.

I fear that entirely misses the point. Well, it would eliminate crowding of the keeper, at least initially; although with the wall of grappling players now moved to the edge of the six-yard box, that might still be difficult/impossible for the keeper to barge his way through. And with the likelihood that more attacking players will be attempting to enter the six-yard box from deeper positions, at speed, I fear there would be an increased risk of collisions and serious injuries. Plus, you know, that's now a whole extra layer of fine-margin decision-making for the officials to deal with, determining if an attacking player has entered the six-yard box prematurely or not. It seems to me that this would just be a horrible mess.

The key problem we've created for ourselves is the amount of wrestling going on in the penalty area - every time the ball comes in from a corner or a free-kick or a long throw-in. The frequent mobbing of the goalkeeper is only one facet of that. And Cann's suggested rule revision wouldn't address that problem at all; it would just shift the ugly ruck slightly further back from the goal-line - probably, in fact, making the melee around the edge of the six-yard box even denser and more difficult to police.

I'm quite happy for the Laws of the Game to remain as they are in relation to access to the six-yard box. We just need to see the Laws we have being more stringently enforced.

But one small change that I think would help enormously with that would be to abolish the absurd notion that you can't commit a foul when the ball is out of play. There are already exceptions to this: obviously, serious violent conduct can't be tolerated at any time, on or off the pitch, whether the ball is dead or not: if you tug an opponent's hair, or stomp on their instep, or throw a punch at them - you're going to get a red card. (At least, that's how I assume things stand. It surely can't be otherwise??)  And I see no reason why it should be any different for other categories of offence. Holding offences at a set-piece, as the ball is about to come into play, can obviously impede a player from reaching the ball when it is in play - the consequences of the improper action continue into the period when the ball has become live. And, in commonsense terms, that kind of thing clearly ought to be a foul.

So, I propose that referees should be able to immediately issue yellow cards for any such infractions they notice - rather than being restricted, as at present, to merely issuing ineffectual 'warnings';... and then things getting too messy for them to sort out once the ball finally enters play.

Further, I'd like to see the definitions of this type of offence tightened up - so that simply putting hands on an opponent in this situation (without the need for any additional shirt-tugging or shoving or grappling) should earn a yellow card.

I would even suggest that we can extend the 'denial of a goalscoring opportunity' rule to make red cards an option, if an attacking player is brought to ground by such an interaction (at least in a 'danger zone' in front of the goal - perhaps a 20-yd x 12-yd area defined by the edges of the six-yard box and the line of the penalty spot). The ball coming into the penalty area from a corner - or a free-kick or a throw-in - is a highly chaotic and unpredictable situation, but one which usually presents a very high chance of a goalscoring opportunity resulting for someone. One can't predict exactly how a ball might break in front of the goal, or how an attacking player might have been able to move towards the ball if not wrestled to the ground. So, it seems to me perfectly reasonable to be somewhat generous in defining a 'goalscoring opportunity' in this circumstance, and to send a defending player off for a major foul of this type.

Yes, I know, this is a 'nuclear option' - it could produce major carnage in the opening weeks of the season. 

Hopefully, most teams and players would be able to take note of the new rules implementation and - mostly - restrain themselves from indulging in the kind of grappling which has so marred the current season. But probably, some of them wouldn't. And we might see 6 or 8 or 10 yellow cards at the first corner of the new season. And perhaps in the first corner of every game of the opening weekend. And perhaps even a handful of red cards too (for second yellow-card offences, if not straight reds).

So be it. After that, everyone would quickly adapt, and cards for these offences would soon become a rarity - because the offence had been effectively stamped out.

Ah, a man can dream....

It shouldn't take rule changes or a major revision in implementation policy to address an issue like this. If PGMOL had acted more promptly and decisively, within the framework of the existing rules, early in the season, we could have stifled this phenomenon already. But now.... it's got completely out of hand; and it needs a more drastic intervention to remedy it. (And it's already ruined the title race...)

Dilemmas of the Week - GW 37 (25/26)

Not too many new injuries again this week, it seems, so...., hopefully, this can be another brief one.

I am trying to streamline these weekly round-ups a bit from last year, restricting myself for the most part to just the injuries etc. affecting players that are likely to have a major significance in FPL; and also, of course, only to new injuries - I figure everyone should be aware of players who've already been ruled out for some time!  

[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. 

I see the Fantasy Premier League site has added an improved 'Player Availability' page this year (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 37?

Does anybody need to be moved out because of injury?

There's still no word on the nature of the injury that forced Riccardo Calafiori to come off against West Ham last Sunday, but it seems he's still a doubt for this week. The knee injury that caused Ben White's early withdrawal in that game is at least serious enough to rule him out for the little that remains of the season.

Kaoru Mitoma pulled a hamstring when playing Wolves last Saturday, and will miss the remainder of the season.

Hannibal Mejbri was withdrawn against Villa last week, but apparently it was just cramp or fatigue rather than anything too serious, and he is possibly/probably in contention to play this week.

Pascal Struijk made an appearance against Spurs last week, but was forced off by the hip problem that's been bothering himn for a couple of weeks.

Manuel Ugarte supposedly missed selection last week because of a back issue - but does anyone really expect to see him playing in the Premier League again?

Joelinton is said to be a 'slight doubt' for Newcastle because of a thigh problem - but given how much he's suffered with muscle injuries in the past, I would imagine that means he's definitely out of action this week.

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

Bournemouth's Ryan Christie is out for the season, after picking up a three-match-ban red card for a bad foul on Timothy Castagne last week. Joachim Andersen also picked up a red card and a three-match ban for his crunching challenge on Adrien Truffert in the same match. Dan Ballard is in the middle of a three-match-ban for 'violent conduct' (a hair-pull), so we won't be seeing him again this season either.

Harvey Elliott is ineligible to play for Aston Villa against his parent club Liverpool on Friday night - although, since we haven't really seen anything of him all season, that's an irrelevant technicality. Facundo Buonanotte is similarly barred from representing Leeds against Brighton, though he too has hardly featured lately for his loan club.

Did anyone give other cause to consider dropping them?

I have to say, Liverpool are looking really ragged to me, and I don't think I'd be taking a chance on any of their players for a tough last two fixtures - even the always excellent Dominik Szoboszlai or the just-back-from-injury Alexander Isak. I don't have much faith in a De Zerbi renaissance at Spurs either, and I suspect they'll probably struggle, and almost certainly drop points against both Chelsea and Everton. Although Chelsea are looking fairly awful too....

The big problem this week is the FA Cup Final happening before the end of the league programme. With City and Chelsea contesting that on Saturday afternoon, their GW37 league games against Bournemouth and Spurs are delayed until Tuesday evening. Given that the Cup game is always likely to be especially emotionally draining, even if it's a fairly straightforward game, and could be physically too, if it goes to extra time and penalties, it's probably better - if possible - to avoid relying too much on City or Chelsea players on Tuesday. Some of them might well not play at all; and those who start might not be at their best, and might only get short minutes. A lot of FPL managers already got burned by Pep's rotations of Doku, Cherki, Reijnders, and even Haaland in last week's would-be 'Double Gameweek'; something similar is sadly likely this time. But.... at this stage of the season, with chips and Free Transfers probably all used up, folks won't really enjoy the option of moving out City/Chelsea players; alas, if they have too many of them, they could well end up fielding a short FPL team this week, or at least having a few 1-point returns. It is a cruel game.

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

I liked the look of Junior Kroupi, Josh King, and Kevin Schade last week,.... and everyone at Everton recently! But not enough to make any of them priority acquisitions. At this stage of the season, you really just have to save your transfers in case you get hit with a sudden avalanche of injuries in the final week!

BEST OF LUCK, EVERYONE!

A little bit of Zen (94)

"Anxiety destroys scale, and suffering makes us lose perspective."

Saul Bellow

Things always seem worse than they are. And they often appear to be worse for us than they are for others. But even on the rare occasions when that's true, things are almost never as bad as they might be.

There is a comfort to be found in perspective.

So, what does MAKE THE DIFFERENCE in FPL?

Last month, I made the rather bold assertion that... it doesn't matter all that much which players you pick in FPL. And I promised to soon go into more detail about what I believe does make the most difference to your outcomes in the game (but I was thwarted in that resolution by the sudden loss of my computer and Internet access!). Finally, I am trying to address that topic.

Now, of course, as I acknowledged in that earlier post, it does matter to some extent who you pick; just... not nearly as much as we'd all like to hope. Some FPL managers make a lot of really bad picks, and of course they don't deserve to prosper (although sometimes they do; there's too little justice in the game). But my key point there had been that there is usually quite a broad spread of potential good picks; and within that field of sensible, promising selections, most players will perform just about as well as each other - certainly over the full season, or a big chunk of it; but also surprisingly often over even a fairly short run of games. I have sometimes run multiple teams, with radically different tactics and selections - but they ended up with nearly identical final points totals. I regularly compare myself against a number of long-time managers that I consider to be shrewd and consistent; there are rarely more than 100 points between us at season's end, sometimes a lot less - even though we've made some wildly different picks. Yes, most years, there are a few players (maybe just one; maybe none...) who are performing so consistently above the general range of everyone else that they become genuine must-haves. But most managers recognise that Haaland or Palmer or Saka or whoever is an 'essential' (at least, for now; that status rarely lasts a whole season). There's almost always room for plenty of debate around who are the 'best of the rest' that you should have in the squad. And amongst these better players, there are usually many potential selections of almost exactly equal value.

So, unless you ignore this pool of solid talent, and wilfully make a lot of bad picks, most of your player selections aren't actually going to have a huge impact on your final points total or your rank - at least, as compared to other good FPL managers.

So, what does..... make the difference in our game?

I believe the main factors determining FPL outcomes are as follows:

1) Getting off to a flying start. The opening of the season is one big lottery. There are so many unknowns - players have switched clubs, some managers have changed, tactics may shift dramatically in the new season, revisions to PGMOL guidelines may have a huge impact (vastly fewer penalties over the last two years, while goalmouth wrestling at set-pieces is now routinely tolerated....; though that might change next year), and the pre-season friendlies don't usually give us any reliable guide as to what anyone's form or fitness or confidence is going to be like going into actual competitive games; we are essentially betting blind with our initial squad selection.

If you are lucky enough to correctly guess nearly all of the players who are going to make the hottest start to the season, you don't just get nice scores in the opening few gameweeks, you can get a huge momentum continuing through the first third or so of the season. People who've been less lucky, and have picked a lot of players who are unexpectedly dropped or strangely struggling for form, will have to use multiple transfers - perhaps even take a few 'hits' - over the opening weeks to put things right; they may even be forced into using their first Wildcard early - thereby missing out on the considerable advantage that it can give you if you are able to use it later in the first half of the season for a tactical rebuild at a key moment. 

While it is not impossible to make up for a poor start, it is very, very difficult: it can take until the mid-point of the season, or even longer. And it is possible, all too possible, to suffer such a bad start that you will never get back into the top 1 million.

 

2)  Being lucky with your captaincy picks.  While we do occasionally get a player who has such a long run of consistently high returns (not every week, but often enough to make him worth repeatedly betting on with the armband) that you can make them your default captaincy choice, even then you can't really expect them to give you a strong return more than about 1 week in 3 on average (and, even when they do, they often won't in fact be your highest points producer of the week!), And even when it might be reasonable to keep picking one outstanding player most of the time, it's never a good idea to make someone an invariable choice. Even last year, when Salah had such an improbable, record-smashing season, his returns tailed off a bit over the last few months. 

You should usually expect to have at least 4 or 5 of your players in any given gameweek who have an elevated chance of returning a really good FPL score; picking 'the right one' is next-to-impossible - you'll be wrong more often than you're right. You can't realistically expect to get a nice return from your captaincy more than once in every 3-4 gameweeks; and that will only actually be your best score of the week about half as often.

Unless.... you're very, very lucky. If your 'success rate' with the captaincy shifts upwards from a normal (actually, good) 30% to more like 50%, that can make a big difference to your eventual points tally. [An 'average' captaincy return is 4-5 points, a 'poor' one 2 or less, a 'good one' 8-10 points. So, every 10% that your captaincy success rate improves is probably worth an extra 15-20 points.]  You do tend to find that the global champion each year has been distinguished by an extraordinarily high return from his captaincy picks.

3)  Not being too heavily hit by injuries.  There can be an enormous variance in the impact of injuries on an FPL manager over a season; and this can make a huge difference to your rank (just ask Spurs!).  My record worst, a few seasons ago, was 55 injuries in a season (and that's discounting minor knocks and illnesses that only rendered someone 'doubtful' for a week or so; that's significant problems that made someone likely to be unavailable for an extended or indefinite period, and required their immediate replacement in the squad).  I reckon my 'usual' number has been in the 30-40 range - which is probably rather above the general average.

Think about it: if you have that many injuries, you have to use almost all of your Free Transfers - and probably some 'hits' too, far more than you'd like! - just on replacing injury absentees. You have almost no scope for making elective transfers to improve your squad on the basis of changing form or fixture-difficulty. You are hamstrung, disastrously limited in how you can approach the game. An injury to a major player doesn't just rob you of the points you hoped to get from them in the coming gameweek(s), it shackles your tactical options too.

And, of course, last-minute injuries, which you aren't able to replace and leave you with an unexpected hole in your squad, can have an even more negative impact.

4)  Lucking into the players who can give you a few huge scores (perhaps just the one).  I began by saying that the majority of players from the constantly varying pool of 'sensible choices' don't generally provide much differentiation in their points returns. But a few do - over a very short run of games, really by pure fluke. And if you can be lucky enough to be on a few of these at just the right time (most of these are players who don't provide long-term value, so you don't want to be owning them before they hit their sudden 'vein of form' - or for too long afterwards), it will make a huge difference to your end-season total. 

This is one of the most frustrating aspects of FPL, because, most of the time, there is no indication of where these sudden bursts of form come from: a player who's done nothing all season, perhaps even a player who hasn't been getting regular starts, sometimes produces a great game - and a nice FPL points haul - out of nowhere. 

In general, FPL veterans counsel against 'chasing last week's points', rushing in to buy a player who's just produced one big haul. And that is mostly sound advice: most of the time, this doesn't pay off. But occasionally.... it does: the player with no established form all season will produce another good return (maybe not in the very next game, but fairly soon), and perhaps even a third. It is a torturous conundrum as to whether to bring in a player who's had 2 or 3 decent returns in a short space of time: is this really emerging form, or just a flash-in-the-pan that's already over??  [Phil Foden produced an especially goading example of this just before Christmas. He appeared to be out of favour with Pep again this year, hadn't been getting regular starts; and, when he was playing, was mostly being deployed in a rather deeper role where he was having zero attacking impact. And then, in a period of extreme fixture congestion, where there was a midweek league game as well as crucial final matches in the Champions League group stage, he suddenly played 4 successive games within the space of a fortnight (though he didn't start them all!), and produced a double-digit haul in each of them. No-one had ever done that 4 times back-to-back before; and he couldn't even really have been expected to play in all 4 of those games, when they came in such quick succession. And there really had been no reason to fancy bringing him just before the start of that sequence. If you had, you were very lucky. If you didn't have him before the streak started, you might reasonably have thought the first haul was a one-off freak. And when he did it a second time, you might reasonably have thought that he couldn't possibly do it three times in a row - and probably would get rested in the next game anyway. And once you'd missed out on 3 successive hauls, you know you've missed the party and there's no point coming in for him now - even if he might get one or two more decent returns in the coming month. Last December, I wrote at length about how we make selection decisions like this, and the timing of them - with particular reference to this Phil Foden example. That was FPL at its cruellest and most taunting.]

5)  Getting a good return from your chips.  The chips are another huge randomizing element in the game of FPL. Certainly, you can make 'smarter' or 'dumber' choices about when to play them; but there is no guarantee that the 'smarter' choices will be rewarded (or that the 'dumber' ones won't sometimes unjustly work out well!). To get a really good return from your Bench Boost, you need to have all 15 squad members starting, and producing a decent haul; and there is absolutely no way to predict when that might happen - it almost never does. [The optimum return from the Bench Boost chip is probably slightly higher than it is for the Triple Captain, but the chances of that transpiring are far lower.]  As noted above in the point on the weekly captaincy selection, over the season you can't be confident that even your best player is going to return a good haul in more than 1-in-3 or 1-in-4 games, and you can never know for sure when those games are going to be. There is usually a rather higher chance of identifying the games in which a really good haul is most likely for them; but even in those (player bang in form, his team is bang in form, opponents are in woeful defensive form), it's never better than a 50/50 as to whether he'll give you a double-digit return or a blank. And the Free Hit, at least the 2nd one, is usually more about getting yourself out of trouble (most often, in a big Blank Gameweek) than producing a positive lift in a regular gameweek.

Every gameweek in FPL is a collection of bets. When you play a chip, you're making even more bets, or increasing your stakes. This expands the range of possible outcomes and generates a high variance in FPL points returns. Some people get very lucky with these returns, some get very unlucky. And this makes a big difference overall.

FPL is all about making predictions. And you can never be confident in the outcome of a prediction. You can never know that your initial squad is going to be near-perfect for the start of the season, you can never know that your captain (or your Triple Captain!) is going to produce a good haul, you can never know if a player is about to get injured, you can never know if a player you've just transferred in is about to produce a really huge return, you can never know if you're going to going to get a good - or any worthwhile - return from playing your Bench Boost or Free Hit.

'Skill' makes some difference in our game: smart FPL managers will - almost always - do much better than dumb, naive, inexperienced ones. But amongst the smarter managers, the only difference, really, is luck. The 'margins' in the game are to be found in these most random and unpredictable elements of it.