BAD PICKS - revisited

 

I'd been thinking for a while that I should return to some of the likely 'Bad Picks' I highlighted in pre-season to see just how they're panning out so far. The first-quarter milestone in the season seems like an appropriate juncture to do that. But I was given an additional push towards this a week or so ago, when someone on a Facebook forum where I hang out quite a lot (too much) suddenly resurrected a pre-season post of mine from there - apparently mocking some of these predictions (in fact, he concurred that they'd been fairly prescient, and was just goading a response out of me...). On re-examining those selections, and my reasons for them - although some of them have proven particularly challenging cases, and the jury may still be out on one or two of them - I was pleasantly surprised to find that my comments had been well borne out so far.

So.... the really BAD picks I highlighted in this post were:

Matt Turner - He was dreadful last season, and had dropped down to third (possibly fourth...) choice at Forest at the start of this. He might perhaps be a bit nearer to a possible start now that he's been loaned out to Palace (though I imagine Remi Mathews is first back-up there). But even if you're taking the risk of having a non-playing second keeper to save a bit of money in your initial squad, it is so wasteful to go for someone as poor - and as far from any chance of starting - as Turner. There were some good reserve keepers priced at 4.0; and some of them, notably Fabianski (possibly also Valdimarsson - and maybe someone at Chelsea??), who had some prospect of being promoted to the start on merit, because of doubts about the form or fitness of the original No. 1 at their club. At least most of those who were dumb enough to get Turner in the first place have also been dumb enough not to get rid of him - so, his price hasn't yet dropped (god knows how: he's shed over 400,000 owners since the start of the season, including nearly 120,000 in a single week; but that somehow wasn't quite enough to trigger a price change?!); but that could still happen any day now. And the point is that he's a complete waste of a squad place, he brings ZERO value.

Mark Flekken - I think FPL's 'The Scout' bizarrely tipped him at the start of the season, and that may have got The Sheep stampeding... But it made absolutely no sense. Brentford's defensive form fell apart last year; and Flekken is one of the weakest keepers in the League. (And they had a horrible early fixture run, with at least three games they were bound to lose, probably heavily.)  A lot of people have stoically stuck with him, because at least he's doing rather well on 'saves' points! But that's just a measure of how bad Brentford's defence has been this season. He has zero clean sheets, zero bonus points, and has conceded more goals than any other keeper so far; and, most damningly, his goals conceded - as last year - is significantly exceeding his 'expected' number, which suggests that quite a few of these goals are his fault.  He's only third or fourth ranked keeper at his price point (and there are a number of others who look likely to do much better, after making up for injury absences or a short run of poor results early in the season), and doesn't make the top 10 overall. Just a horrible, horrible GK pick.

Ezri Konsa - Villa over-performed last season; they didn't do much to strengthen their squad over the summer, and were obviously going to struggle with the strains of a debut Champions League campaign. Their defensive record was fairly poor last year; it's looking even worse this time - with 15 goals conceded (and, as with Flekken and Brentford, that's significantly worse than their xGC - which suggests their defence is really bad), and only 1 clean sheet so far. There might have been some additional optimism for Konsa because he might have been starting some games at right-back, while Cash had a string of injury problems (though that's not his natural position, and he doesn't offer any attacking threat when he plays there); but he is a centre-back, and centre-backs rarely offer anywhere near as many points as attacking full-backs or wing-backs. There were several - 15 or 20! - potentially good defensive picks at 4.5 million this season; Konsa wasn't one of them. The Sheep got briefly excited about him again, after he picked up a goal against Wolves in Gameweek 5; but for a player like Konsa, that is a once-in-a-blue-moon event. With Villa's present form, he offers nothing for FPL. His ownership has been crashing for the last four weeks, and he must be due a price-drop.

Kobbie Mainoo - People got excited about him because he'd made such an eye-catching debut for England over the summer. But with Ten Hag's perennially fumbling, floundering United, he has usually been having to fight fires in the middle of the pitch, and very, very, very seldom gets the chance to push forward for a sniff of a goal. The lad looks set to be out with an injury for a while now. But he was never anywhere near an FPL pick; people were just getting him out of patriotic pride or something....

Kai Havertz - OK, this one is perhaps a little more equivocal, as he has started the season in fantastic form. But 4 goals, 1 assist, and 7 bonus points from 10 games is not a huge haul; he's only been around the fringes of the top 10 strikers for most of the season. Being essential to Arsenal doesn't make you essential for FPL!  In my original post, I argued that: it will be difficult for him to replicate last season's Fantasy points haul, because he's been reclassified as a 'forward' this year (YES); he is likely to get started in midfield rather than up front a lot of the time (YES); Arteta obviously doesn't fancy him as a full-time forward, since he's been looking to acquire someone like Gyokeres over the summer (YES); and none of the upper mid-price forwards really looked worthwhile this year, because the cheaper options were so many and so strong (YES!! - though I did not anticipate that Wood, Welbeck, Raul, Cunha, Delap, Wissa, Evanilson, Strand Larsen and Vardy would all be close to or ahead of all of them... except Jackson!). At least that transfer target failed to materialise, which may have boosted Havertz's prospects to continue mostly in the 'false 9' role; although Trossard's strong form is another reason why he's sometimes been withdrawn into midfield; and it does seem likely that they will again try to sign a striker in the winter window. Havertz is a great player, but not a great FPL pick.

Ah, but then I really tempted Fate... by nominating 5 more candidates - much better and much more popular players, who were bound to incite some controversy. Let's see how I got on with those...

David Raya - Well, he was for a while up at the top of the goalkeeper rankings - with 3 clean sheets in the first 4 games; but NONE since, as Arsenal have suffered a bit of a wobble. But even at the start of the season, Arsenal were not playing that well: the reason for Raya's ephemeral dominance of the goalkeepers chart was that he was also getting a lot of 'saves' points (last year, he hardly had to make any saves at all!). My argument, anyway, was not about his ability or his expected FPL points performance (though I did think it was unlikely that he could repeat last year's remarkable clean sheets tally, while he would probably continue to produce a fairly low number of saves); it was about value-for-money (I couldn't see him greatly out-performing the best 4.5 keeper options), and about the competition for Fantasy attention from his club (his defenders usually offer a bigger points differential advantage over other top defenders than he does over other top goalkeepers; and you might want to reserve some of your quota of three Arsenal slots for attacking assets like Saka, Odegaard, Havertz, Trossard...). I stand by that. I think Alisson, when he's fit again, will bring significantly better points at the same price-point; and Onana (or perhaps Pickford, Pope, or Leno) might do even better for only 5 million. But there are so many strong 4.5 goalkeeper options this year, I really don't think you need a premium keeper at all. I never said Raya was a bad player, or that he wouldn't bring good FPL points this year; I just don't think he's worth his fee.

William Saliba - I began my comments on the French phenomenon by acknowledging that he is Arsenal's - and perhaps the League's - 'best' defender... but pointing out that you don't get Fantasy points just for that. The argument here was that Gabriel is just as good for Fantasy points, probably just a little bit better, because he has quite a strong record for scoring from set pieces (YES). I also suggested that any of Arsenal's full-backs who got a regular run of starts were likely to substantially outscore him (YES - White, Timber, and Calafiori have all demonstrated their potential for attacking contributions; though they're all competing for a place, and have all had a string of fitness issues so far). And that, as with David Raya, above, you might actually want to keep one or two spots open for attacking players from Arsenal. You don't really want to double up on defence from one club, certainly not central defence; and Gabriel was clearly - if only fairly marginally - a better pick than Saliba from the Arsenal defence. Of course, the sending-off against Bournemouth has sent him crashing down the defender rankings now (a rare misfortune which I do not claim to have anticipated, nor do I rely on it in justifying my original prediction); but I don't think he's ever been ahead of Gabriel, or 4 or 5 others of this season's top performers. And I have to say, I don't think he's been playing quite as well for much of this season: he looks to be getting stressed by being so often the last line of defence when Arsenal lose the ball high up the pitch and fail to stifle the development of a quick counter (last year, this was very rarely happening to them; this year, it's becoming quite a common occurrence), and that's sometimes leading him to commit impetuous, over-anxious, unncessary fouls - like the one on Evanilson that got him the red card.

Josko Gvardiol - Another anti-recommendation that might still be up for argument...  Well, damn, he's just notched his third goal of the season, which has boosted him back up to the top of the defender rankings. But... he's only got 2 clean sheets, while conceding 10 goals, which must be far worse than almost anyone anticipated from City (even though their defensive record wasn't that good last season either). And he's produced NO ASSISTS yet. My arguments against Gvardiol were based on the unreliability of depending on points from goals from a defender (he is a much better finisher than most defenders; but goals are still a rare and unpredictable event from him - just because he's got 3 in the last 5 or 6 games doesn't necessarily mean that he'll bag any more over the rest of the season), and on the ever-present spectre of Pep Roulette. Now, Gvardiol has missed to start 1 game already this season. And I think the reasons why he's so far been just about an ever-present are the absence of competition for a start on the left of defence: Pep really likes what Rico Lewis can offer in an attacking midfield role, and in the past had generally started him as a nominal 'left-back', but this year has switched him over to the right; Ake is the only other natural left-sided defender they have, has played as a full-back occasionally, and is arguably a little better than Gvardiol in some of the defensive aspects of the role - but he's only just returning from injury. If Pep now decides to give Ake a run of games to get his match-sharpness up, or switches Lewis back over the left side in order to give some minutes to Walker, Gvardiol could yet be spending some time on the bench. (And with City's escalating injury woes in defence, there is a likelihood that he could be playing some games as a centre-back, where his prospect of decent points will be much reduced.)  I also think Gvardiol is bound to need a rest soon, as his pace means that he's generally being relied upon as the emergency cover when City suffer a counter-attack (which is becoming a very, very frequent occurence this season). In fact, as he's usually being required to play quite narrow, tucking into the base of midfield, he's not only often having to run back more than half the length of the pitch, but also often having to try to make up 15 or 20 yards out to the flank to close down a flying winger. That's leaving him often looking at fault for goals they concede (but he's not really to blame; Pep's just playing him in an 'impossible' position); and knackered from the amount of sprinting he's having to do in almost every game. Even if he was going to remain an invariable starter (and I'd bet good money that he'll be rotated a lot during the later stages of the Champions League - and possibly during the upcoming Christmas logjam), he is - as I predicted in that original post - not getting forward nearly as much.... because he needs to hang back to provide cover against the counter-attack, and because Rico Lewis is usually being preferred as the defender to push into advanced midfield positions. So, yes, Gvardiol has done outstandingly well so far; but I suspect we've already seen his peak points-per-game, there'll likely be a big tailing-off in his returns over the rest of the season.

[Now, if Gvardiol does end up playing nearly every game, and manages to bag another 2 or 3 goals for the season - which, on his showing so far, might seem like a fairly conservative aspiration - he could end up with 170-180 points. That would probably put him at the top of the defender rankings, or pretty near, and would thus justify his hefty 6-million price tag. However, given City's shaky form this season, I think that prospect is rather touch-and-go.]

Pedro Porro - Well, he has got 1 goal (a header?! VERY untypical!!); but that's probably much less than his owners were delusionally hoping for. Only 2 clean sheets so far, and quite a lot of goals conceded; and NO ASSISTS! That goal in the opening game against Leicester gave his owners much encouragement, and kept him up around the top of the defender rankings for quite a while; but he's fallen out of the top 20 now - and I don't see him getting back up there, with Spurs's flakey form this season. Spurs's keeper has a lot of weaknesses; Spurs's high-line tactic has a lot of weaknesses (they rely very, very heavily on Van de Ven's pace to provide emergency cover when they get caught on the break; while he's missing, they might concede a lot...); thus, none of their players look like very reliable sources of defensive points. But people were buying Porro because they thought he was an attacking powerhouse. Not so much. I pointed out that most of his attacking contributions last season had come during a fairly short spell when he was playing as an outright wing-back - almost a winger - because all of their usual wide creative players were injured; he doesn't actually get far forward in the attack very often. This year, in fact, even less so, as he's tending to hang a bit deeper (while Udogie is often the more advanced full-back), and invert into a central midfield box rather than push up the flank. A good player, certainly; but not worth 5.5 million.

Cody Gakpo - This one wasn't really that controversial. Some people (myself included!) might think it a shame that such an outstanding player can't get a regular start for his club. And some people (myself not included!) might feel that Luis Diaz is too inconsistent to be the invariable starter on Liverpool's left flank. Gakpo has replaced him a few times recently; but I still don't see any indication that that's likely to become a lasting change. 1 goal and 1 assist from 3 starts and 7 (mostly quite substantial) substitute appearances isn't that inspiring.

And I'll throw in a 'bonus' one, a player I omitted in these two early posts on 'Bad Picks', but have referred to a number of times since, notably here....

Morgan Rogers - Well, he's just surged back up the midfielder rankings, after bagging another goal against Spurs. But I don't think he's ever quite cracked the top 10; or indeed the top 3 - mostly, not even the top 5 or 6 - for the 5.0-6.0 price category in midfield. And although 3 goals in 10 games sounds moderately impressive, they have ALL been extremely untypical of his usual play. The first was set up for him on a plate by Watkins; and he'd only been drawn into a central attacking position at the edge of the box because Watkins had pulled out so wide to the left, dragging most of the defenders with him (neither of these things happens very often). His second against Fulham was a hopeful hit from outside the box that needed a huge deflection off a defender to wrong-foot the keeper (I'm not sure it should even be credited to him, as it looked as if his original shot might have been bound just outside the left post). And this week, the set-piece coach had come up with a special routine to exploit the eminently bullyable Vicario at a corner; when a goalkeeper stumbles backwards into his own goal, then muffs a clearance with his legs so that the ball falls at your feet barely a foot from the goal-line.... of course. you're going to score (but again, I haven't seen Rogers take up that kind of position on any other set piece so far).  Now, I actually rate Rogers really highly, I think he's a tremendous prospect. But he doesn't look that promising for Fantasy, because he mostly plays in central midfield (he's about the deepest 'No. 10' I've ever seen!), doesn't often get into the box, or even close to the edge of it; and he's too unselfish, always looking to lay the ball off to Watkins to try to score, or to Bailey or Ramsey or Philogene to try to get in behind on the flanks. He is mostly providing Villa with 'pre-assists', for which you get no FPL points, rather than assists or goals. Yes, he is very cheap; but there are at least 2 or 3 - arguably perhaps even 5 or 6 - other options at a similar price who look even stronger prospects. (And midfield points are so important, I really feel you ought to leave yourself more budget than that for your fifth seat.)

Please NOTE: I never said any of these guys were bad players (well, apart from Turner... and Flekken); far from it. They are mostly very, very good players. And in that second post, I explicitly acknowledged that these players would probably produce pretty good points, and that their owners might not feel dissatisfied with them. But the harsh thing about FPL is that just picking very good players is NOT GOOD ENOUGH; for the budget you have available, and the position you're looking at, you need to try to find the BEST POSSIBLE PLAYER - taking into account not just ability and form, but who they play for, and how they are being played, and what their fixtures look like over the medium-term.

And even that assessment of points-potential isn't enough; because you also have to weigh the selection decision in a broader context of who else you could spend the money on, or who else might be a more valuable pick from that club. You're not simply looking for the best player, you're always looking for the optimal pick in a given set of cirumstances. And, for me, none of these guys were that. And sorry, I haven't changed my mind.  (This a VERY unpopular opinion to voice, because a lot of people still have Raya in goal, and/or two or three of those top defenders  I cited after him. And yes, they're doing OK; they're just not the optimal picks.)

Always worth it to fill a points-hole

 

Many FPL managers seem to have a rigid superstition against taking 'hits' (paying points for an additional transfer), EVER. That is ridiculous and self-harming.

The architects of the game have shrewdly priced a 'hit' at 4 points (in some other Fantasy games, it's only 3 points!) - just enough to dissuade you from using them frivolously!

But you should expect to make on average at least 5 points per match from each member of your starting eleven. Of course, you may sometimes come up shy of that. And the returns are never evenly distributed: your keeper and defenders rarely get much more than 3 or 4 points, but you're hoping a few of your star midfielders or forwards might often chip in 8 or 10 points.

Nevertheless, it is a very modest gamble to spend 4 points filling a gap in your starting eleven. You should have a very good chance of making that back, even with a defensive player [UPDATE: that chance has probably been significantly improved in the 25/26 season with the introduction of additional 'defensive points']; you're risking usually no more than a 1 or 2 point loss, against the chance that they might show a 'profit' if they manage to keep a clean sheet or produce an attacking return. For an attacking player, the odds in your favour are much stronger - or a least, the 'upside', the points 'profit' you could make from a good return is likely to be far higher.

If the player you're replacing is likely to be out for a while, you'll get further value from your new transfer across subsequent weeks, which is a small further offset to the initial points-spend on him.

And if you defer making this needful change until the following week, you could just be storing up further trouble for yourself: you might get hit with another injury, and still have to spend the points to get back up to full strength.

Moreover, it you have a hole in your starting eleven, this implies that you've already emptied your bench; so, you're really in a major crisis - sooner or later, you're going to have to take the 'hits' to get things back on track: it might as well be sooner.

Purely elective transfers, swapping out a starter just because you fancy another player more - that's a whole different story. They are ALMOST NEVER worth spending a 'hit' on.

I honestly don't think I've ever found myself in the situation of even being tempted by it - because I don't hang on to players that I'm starting to hate, or fail to bring in players who are starting to show hot form. I can't see how someone finds themselves in a situation where they have a player who is so bad, and they covet a transfer who is so good, that that they can be really confident that the coveted transfer will outscore the despised incumbent by MORE THAN 4 POINTS. I mean, HOW is that possible???

An incumbent player in your team who is at least a starter is almost guaranteed to get a minimum of 2 points, and might well get more. So, the proposed transfer has to score at least 7 points to be worthwhile. That is very, very unlikely. There may be extreme cases - really hot player, really good fixture; and you see further value from him (over the guy you're desperate to dump) in the following run of games too - but that's going to be a rare, rare event; and even then, it's a risk.

To sum up, spending points to plug a hole in your starting eleven is ALWAYS worth the gamble.

Spending points just because the grass looks greener is ALMOST NEVER worth it.

Luck-o-Meter (10)

 

Damn, have we finally seen a Saturday without any refereeing cock-ups?? Well, almost.... (Andy Madley was guilty of a couple of very dubious yellow-not-red decisions in the game at Southampton. And Tim Robinson made a couple of game-changing howlers within a few seconds of each other in the dying minutes at Ipswich.)  It's been a long time coming.... and we're still not quite there. Hope springs eternal - yet eternally likely to be disappointed.

Bournemouth could reasonably feel they might have had two or three more goals against a lacklustre City - if their own finishing had been a little better, or Ederson a little less sharp and defiant.

Kalvin Phillips was surely a bit lucky to escape any punitive action at all for his unnecessary rushing into the back of Buonanotte (and clubbing him across the back of the neck with his forearm!): the kind of 'challenge' that is invariably seen as a yellow card if the ref notices it, and quite often as a red, if - as here - an element of deliberate thuggery is to be suspected. However, his later dismissal for a supposed second yellow offence was a travesty: the Leicester player was kicking towards him as he ran in towards a 50-50 ball, and he actually tried to pull out of the contact; it was either an 'accidental collision' or a foul by the Leicester man - no fault attaching to Phillips at all. But that controversy perhaps distracted VAR from taking a proper look at the stone-cold penalty that had been ignored a few seconds earlier when Fatawu charged into Chapman and smashed him to the floor. WTF??

Welbeck came very close to maintaining his scoring streak against Liverpool, particularly with that excellent free-kick that curled into the side-netting. Van Dijk somehow missed an open goal. And then Gakpo had one of those hopeful, floaty, curling crosses that somehow floated all the way into the top corner....? Lots of strange stuff going on in that game!

You have to feel sorry for poor Ryan Yates - obviously destined never to be allowed to have an EPL goal stand! This call was probably 'correct' under the current crazy rules - but it was very difficult to clearly see everyone's relative positions in a crowded penalty area; and I never like to see goals chalked off for a supposed margin of inches.....  And Ola Aina looks likely to claim the prize for the unexpected screamer of the week!!  (There's only been one so far.... Well, OK, I suppose Leif Davis mertis an 'honorouable mention'. And then perhaps Janelt's drive from outside the area on Monday night...!)

I thought Tarkowski was lucky to escape a straight red for his horrific tackle on Archer. He probably only got away with that because it was so early in the game; but thus the impact of his exclusion would have been all the more massive, if the referee had decided that way. Very, very strange that VAR didn't suggest the second look. Perhaps that dubious call was somewhat balanced out by the even more clearcut mistake - though much later in the game - when Bednarek chopped Beto when clear through on goal 20 yards out. The covering defender, a very heavy-legged Harwood-Bellis, was at least five yards away, and the attacker would have been able to crack off a shot immediately from the edge of the box, so of course it was a clear 'goalscoring opportunity' - bonkers decision!

Still, at least Southampton got a probably deserved win (earned on their solid attacking form all season, as well as in having the majority of the good possession in this game) - with another very late turnaround: Armstrong converting on the breakaway only seconds after Beto had crashed one against the crossbar at the other end. Beto is no doubt aggrieved that his apparent last-minute equaliser was adjudged off-side; again a very tight call, but it looked like the correct one. Ramsdale being in excellent form also helped to secure the points - with fine saves from Mangala and McNeil, and a brilliant reflex double-stop from Michael Keane.

Dean Henderson was also somewhat fortunate to get away with clattering into Sarabia's legs a fraction of a second before getting his hand on the ball - that should certainly have been a penalty, and perhaps a sending-off for the keeper; and, coming so early in the game, it would surely have turned the result completely in Wolves's direction. Perhaps Palace might have felt they should have a similar call go their way in the dying minutes when Sa clashed with Munoz; slow-motion replays did suggest that Sa's hand was just about on the ball before two players clattered into each other, but it was a very, very marginal call; and to the naked eye, I certainly thought it looked more as if Sa had been guilty of the foul (though, of course, that kind of decision just about never goes against keepers!). Either way, I hold Anthony Taylor at fault for taking so long to blow his whistle - allowing Mateta and the Palace fans to believe for a moment that they had nicked a (probably deserved?) last-gasp winner. And TWO goals from defenders in this topsy-turvy match (and really, a striker's finish from Trevoh Chalobah!) - that doesn't happen very often.

Solanke's first goal looked, to me, offside. I hate to see good goals ruled out for such tiny 'infringements', and have often said I think the rule should be redrafted to allow attackers a lot more leeway; but... under the current harsh definition, he looked definitely an inch or so offside. And there was something very odd going on with the VAR decision on this: they failed to display their customary lines on the pitch to demonstrate how their decision had been reached. I wonder if this was just a transient technical difficulty. or if they'd found it impossible to lay down distinct lines because the call was so close? Either way, it rather undermines the public's confidence in the process.

Ange Postecoglou pulling Son off the field just 10 minutes into the second half will have been a cruel blow to any FPL managers who played him this week (although he was a slightly doubtful starter going into the gameweek, so they should count themselves lucky they got anything from him...!). This might be have been a one-off to spare his talisman the risk of re-injury (although he pulled Betancur at the same time), but the Spurs boss picks up an FPL black mark as yet another manager who's prepared to make substitutions very early.

At old Trafford, Fofana and Rashford hit the woodwork, Neto and Garnacho had very near misses, and Garnacho, Bruno Fernandes and Enzo had terrible misses (the game might have been a lot more exciting if one of these efforts had gone in...), and Caicedo scored with a bit of a pinger. And Cole Palmer may perhaps have given the best-ever performance not to receive any Fantasy points at all (had the BPS not deigned to grant him a solitary bonus point!). I really could not understand how he did not earn at least 2, if not 3 bonus points there. And there were a few other strangenesses in the bonus allocations this week - most notably Morgan Rogers being given 2 points.... in a match in which his team ended up getting thrashed, and he was withdrawn after 65 minutes?? Something going wrong round here....

Chelsea fans may feel aggrieved that Lisandro Martinez didn't get sent off for striking Palmer above the knee with his studs. I felt the referee's call on that was right, as the contact wasn't very heavy, and probably entirely accidental - Martinez slipped, lost his standing foot as he stretched to make the challenge. However, there's an issue of consistency and transparency in the VAR process again; surely this was a significant enough incident to have warranted a 'second look' on the pitchside monitor? This needs to happen every time there's a challenge like this... not just whenever the VAR official of the day randomly feels like it. And it needs to be established that the recommendation for a 'second look' is entirely neutral, it does not presuppose that there has been an offence of a particular nature, just that it's an incident that ought to be considered closely. (In order to achieve that, we really need to have a small range of set phrases to be used for different kinds of review, rather than just letting the two officials banter freely with each other. Ideally, these cues should be pre-recorded rather than spoken live, to preclude the possibility of any emotional loading in the voice towards a particular outcome. This is why VAR is such a mess; there is no clear and consistent process for addressing these issues - every week, the officials seem to be making it all up as they go along.)

There were few moments of outstanding personal skill - or misfortune - and once again, few of the big names came up with anything, making it an exceptionally low-scoring gameweek. The 'Team of the Week' is comprised of players for whom there is a reasonable case for inclusion, players who probably mostly have an ownership somewhere around 5% (although it is a massive surprise to find Joao Gomes and Harry Wilson making the selection!). Overall, then, not a very 'lucky' week; just a disappointingly subdued one from the big teams. However, two fairly clear penalties ignored, and three or four potential red cards not even given a second look still make this a very poor week for the officiating, and thus at least a 5 out of 10 on the 'Luck-o-Meter'.

GW10 - What did we learn?

 

Great to see Newcastle finally starting to click again, especially in defence, with Lewis Hall doing a pretty good job of minimizing Saka's threat (nice to see an unusually articulate, as well as humble, post-match interview - in which he gave full credit to Willock and Joelinton for substantially helping out with that mission). Eddie Howe will no doubt be particularly pleased with his boys' 'intensity' numbers, massively dominating Arsenal on sprints, duels, etc., despite being slightly behind on scoring chances and xG, nearly two-to-one down on overall possession. And Gordon and Isak are starting to look back to their best (which is very, very good indeed: people who'd had them in their FPL squads from early in the season probably should have kept faith a bit longer, rather than transferring them out in the past few weeks... only to now want them back!). Howe, perhaps, often doesn't get enough credit for his tactical acuity; but he really did a number on Arteta here. Arsenal, of course, are having their struggles with injuries - particularly in defence, where they've rarely, if ever, been able to start their first-choice back-four (indeed, there's still probably some doubt about what that first choice line-up is - would it be Timber or Calafiori at left-back? doesn't matter that much when they're both injured all the time....); but this has been an entirely expected problem since the start of the season, when they had a really disastrous transfer window, losing just about all of their existing back-up players, while failing to land any of their big-name targets... apart from the fragile Calafiori (who doesn't seem to be an automatically favoured starter, even when he's fit). After that, it was just about inconceivable - absent some huge slices of good luck -  that they could replicate their close title challenge of last season.

While I fondly remember the Brian Clough glory days from my childhood, and am thus happy to see Forest back in the top flight;.... them being third in the table after Saturday's games does seem somewhat unbelievable, a Bizarro Universe moment. Sorry, Forest fans, but I really can't see this lasting - especially with the fixture-run you've now got until Christmas. But... I've also been feeling this way for the past month or more about Chris Wood's astonishing run of goal-scoring form... and yet the big lug somehow keeps popping up for another one every bloody week! The big dilemma for Lopategui now may be what to do with Morgan Gibbs-White. He has been inspirational for the Forest for the past two years, their major creative force. But that is perhaps becoming less the case now that the advanced full-backs, Moreno and Aina, are establishing themselves as a main creative channel to Wood, and the wide attackers Hudson-Odoi and Elanga are also looking regularly dangerous. Gibbs-White's preference for playing far up the field often leaves them a bit light in the centre of midfield, and Forest have actually looked a lot more cohesive with Elliot Anderson playing in there for the past few games. It would be nice to find a way of playing both of them, but that's quite a challenge. And West Ham really didn't look miles off it here; but for Alvarez getting himself sent off for two silly fouls, they might have been able to make more of a fight of this; Bowen, at least, was again looking very sharp.

The gods obviously do not love Ipswich, who had three points snatched away from them by a pair of diabolical refereeing decisions (and VAR non-decisions), for the penalty and the sending-off of Phillips, late in the game (although Phillips was lucky not to have been sent off already, for an unnecessarily combative display). Leicester's late equaliser from Ayew was a very well-worked goal; but the opportunity would probably not have occurred if their opponents had still been at full strength; and Muric - although, for the first time in a few weeks, he managed not to stink the place up with his performance this time - should perhaps have stopped it. Leicester, apart from the class of Buonanotte (OK, and Hermansen in goal...), really don't seem to have very much going for them at all. I'd still take Ipswich to finish above them, though both might well end in the bottom three. Sorry, Ipswich fans - that partial vote-of-confidence will probably jinx them even more.

Injury-disrupted City continue to misfire; and when Foden is as largely ineffective as here, you can start to understand why Pep seems so reluctant to start him regularly - something has broken down here, in the relationship between the two, I suppose (or maybe Phil's just suffered a slump in confidence, after his frustrating Euros... following on from a year of being repeatedly outshone by Cole Palmer....? [He was only 'Player of the Season' because he put in the flashiest displays for the title-winning club; everyone realises Rodri was more crucial to City's success, and Palmer was way the most important creative player in the league last year.]). Bournemouth, after their very shakey start to the season, really seem to be getting their shit together now; they were magnificent in defence (Kerkez likely to be the most-transferred-in player this week! maybe Travers also, if people are willing to gamble that he's playing well enough to keep the start ahead of Kepa), and well worth the three points. Some good work from Ederson - particularly the double-save to thwart that early three-on-one break - kept City in the game; if one or two of those attempts had sneaked in, or Tavernier's sweet curler that beat Ederson but slammed against the foot of the post, then their victory would have looked much more comfortable. City deserve credit for their determination in mounting a dangerous late surge (can't help thinking that they looked considerably more dangerous in the attacking third once Rico Lewis had come on; that can't bode well for anyone who's gambled on Walker getting a run of starts again....); but if they had scrambled an equaliser, it would have seemed unjust; Bournemouth were way the better side here. Gvardiol owners are enjoying further momments of smugness after yet another outstanding goal; but, although this form is shaking my confidence in my initial assessment slightly, I still stand by the view that he can't maintain this level of attacking producitivity all season, and hence, City's poor defensive record and the inevitable minutes-risk (even if he doesn't lose Pep's favuor at some point, he's surely bound to be rested quite a bit during the latter stages of the Champions League...) make him very dubious value for a 6-million-pound asking price. Evanilson is probably getting on people's radar as (yet another) cheap forward option now; whilst the disillusionment with Haaland reaches lemming-like intensity.

Such a pity that Brighton could not convert their first-half dominance into a decisive margin at Anfield! You have to give credit to Slot for revitalizing his team at half-time (his in-game management, tweaking tactics and personnel, or just getting the lads fired up to show a bit more determination, really seems to be top-level); but I question how far the initial selection was to blame for their drab first-half showing. Many FPL folks now seem to be convinced that Nunez and Gakpo will be, should be, the preferred starters in centre and left attack; but Diaz and Jota, apart from being better finishers, are just so much more incisive in the press. Kadioglu is another player likely to get The Sheep excited, after his stunning goal (although he followed that up with a stunning miss, so I'm not getting too carried away...); but while Brighton keep on leaking goals so easily, you have to be wary of any of their assets, especially in defence. Verbruggen, Ayari, and Rutter appeal to me a lot more, anyway; and Welbeck, of course, who appears to be enjoying a splendid 'Indian summer' to his career. And if Konate has broken his wrist, I suppose Gomez - rather than Quansah - is due to get a run of starts. It will be interesting to see how that affects Liverpool's form; Gomez has never really convinced me - he has great qualities on the ball, going forward, but always looks very error-prone in the defensive third, especially when playing at centre-back. (And he costs 4.8 million anyway??  I suppose people might see him as a good replacement for Konate, if Liverpool can keep their good defensive record going. But Konate has been the prime component of that defensive record, so that's quite an IF.....)

Southampton finally got a deserved win, one that's been a long time coming - although this was the one game of the weekend where there were a couple of dodgy refereeing calls which may have skewed the match outcome. Overall, though, Everton looked a bit flat in this one, and Southampton were much more fluent in moving the ball forward. They're increasingly looking to me like the promoted side most likely to survive - although they have got a bit of a mountain to climb after their miserable start. While I think Palace and Wolves have too much quality to remain down the bottom end for too long, Everton and Leicester look very likely to be in the relegation battle all season.

Palace, despite missing most of their regular midfield, actually didn't look at all bad; but both they and their hosts Wolves are still much better going forward than they are defending. Cunha's bright form is the main encouragement for Wolves's fans; but for FPL purposes, since he's playing as a fairly deep support striker most of the time, he is rarely likely to claim goals of his own, only provide assists for others; Strand Larsen probably looks the better prospect for a forward pick from the club.

Spurs v Villa looked very much like a battle of upper mid-table sides, both of them miles off their best, at least in the first half; Villa were barely worth their early lead, nicked in a goalmouth scramble. Ange must have put some amphetamines in the half-time cuppa, because Spurs were completely transformed when they came out again after the break. There are still concerning signs for both teams, though: Villa looked very, very flat, and Ollie Watkins has (only temporarily, I'm sure) mislaid his scoring boots. FPL managers must be alarmed about Ange's selection and tactics, apparently no longer regarding Maddison as an essential starter, and feeling able to pull Son off only 10 minutes into the second half (was he still concerned about his recovery from the thigh muscle injury?). And although Vicario is stiiving to be a bit more assertive at set-pieces, he is so far achieving only very modest success with this. 

The Sheep are now bleating after Dominic Solanke, who did have an excellent game here; but his first goal looked offside (if only very narrowly; and there was something odd going on with the VAR here, as the call was apparently 'too close' for them to draw in their customary lines on the screen?!), and his second was put on a plate for him by a staggeringly unselfish square ball from Richarlison. The problem remains for Solanke that he's often dropping quite deep in his link-up play, and not getting into goalscoring positions as much as you'd like from a primary goalscorer; even if that changes, Spurs just haven't been very consistent so far this season; and even if that changes, Solanke's probably going to have to share the goals with Son and Johnson, and a few others - all of which make him, for me, decidedly not a very attractive prospect in FPL. (But.... two goals?! Just watch: he'll be the most transferred-in player this week!!)  There's also a chorus of bleats, of course, about Morgan Rogers, who picked up another goal here. I remain unimpressed, as this was so untypical of his usual play, or indeed of Villa's usual play: he was only in the middle of the six-yard box because they were trying out a special set-piece routine to exploit Vicario's notorious bully-ability in these situations. It doesn't seem likely that we'll find him in those sorts of positions, or scoring those sorts of goals very often - maybe ever again.

The game at Old Trafford was a frustrating, and sometimes ill-tempered affair. It might have caught fire if one of several missed chances had gone in, but there was nothing much to get excited about, apart from Caicedo's excellent drive from the edge of the box to secure a share of the points. Palmer, I thought, had an absolutely outstanding game (as did the central double-pivot of Caicedo and Lavia), but most of his teammates were strangely lacklustre here; Neto and Madueke failed to get involved in the game very much at all. The post-Ten Hag United played with a little more spirit, but not much incisiveness; no real sign of a 'new manager bounce' for van Nistelrooy here.

I couldn't figure out much about the Fulham v Brentford game from very brief highlights on Youtube, but the match reports indicate it was another case of Brentford having nothing much in the attacking locker apart from their high-tempo starts and occasional set-piece routines. At least they showed a bit more defensive solidity than they often have, soaking up Fulham's pressure until added-on time (Flekken once again racking up a lot of 'saves' points, but once again failing to keep a clean sheet; it is somewhat bizarre that such a poor keeper, in such a poor defensive team, should actually be doing reasonably well in the goalkeeper rankings, just because of the huge number of stops he's required to make in every game...).  Fulham's patience and discipline was ultimately rewarded; and I think Robinson and Tete, although they've been pretty quiet so far, are starting to look like tempting defensive options for FPL.

A little bit of Zen (14)

 

"Thoughts meander like a restless wind inside a letterbox...."

John Lennon - 'Across the Universe'

This is one of my favourite covers of The Beatles: Fiona Apple's version of 'Across the Universe', commissioned for the soundtrack of Gary Ross's 1998 film, Pleasantville.

Dilemmas of the week - GW10

Every week, we need to take a long hard look at our squad, and ask ourselves if we want to make any changes....

And even if we do see a pressing case for a change here or there, we then need to weigh that against the possible advantage of saving our transfer - 'rolling' it over to use in a future week. This option achieves greater tactical complexity this season with the new rule that allows us to save up as many as 5 Free Transfers to use at one time. If we ever manage to do that, it would in effect be a 'mini Wildcard', enabling us to conduct a major squad overhaul in one fell swoop (particularly useful as there are a handful of 'premium' players who cost so much more than everyone else that you can't conveniently move them in and out of your squad without making multiple other changes as well).

Then, of course, occasionally multiple changes may seem so inescapable that we have to consider whether it's worth spending points on 1 or 2 extra transfers (a tactic which obviously deserves a whole post of its own one day).

So, what are the conundrums we face ahead of Gameweek 10?

Does anybody need to be moved out because of injury?

Well, at least it doesn't look like anyone picked up any problems during this week's League Cup ties (well, except for Savinho; and it seems he might be OK...?), but....  There is still an infuriating lack of clarity about the condition of the Arsenal defence: Gabriel, Timber, and Calafiori are still 'doubts' for the weekend. (Arteta has made some optimistic noises about Gabriel; but that means nothing. He has become notorious for being 'economical with the truth' about the injury status of his players.)  My guess would be that, in the absence of any bad news, we can probably expect Gabriel to be back next weekend.... maybe this week; but the other two will probably be resting and recovering until the other side of the next international break. This will probably mean some windfall starts for anyone who took a punt on Kiwior (and maybe Zinchenko??) getting a run of gametime at some point. But it's probably rather bad news for everyone else relying on Arsenal assets. With so much of last season's success founded on the solidity and consistency of their back-line, they look immediately more vulnerable, and less dangerous, when that is badly disrupted; and even the mercurial Saka may struggle to make an impact if they're often going to find themselves with their backs to the wall, as they did in the latter part of Sunday's game. Still, at least Saliba's back from his one-match suspension; so, maybe things won't be too bad.

Son, Kepa, Johnstone, Gordon, Dunk, Hinshelwood, and McNeil all went missing before or during the last batch of games - but it seems there's a chance they might be back this week. Callum Wilson, Luke Shaw, and Morgan Gibbs-White might also be nearing a return.

Alisson and Jota, DeBruyne and Doku, and Joao Pedro remain sidelined for an indefinite (though not 'long') period. But it seems Jack Grealish might be back in contention for this weekend. (Does that mean Phil Foden might be left on the bench again??)

Sancho and Ward-Prowse, as loanees, are ineligible to play this weekend against their parent clubs.

And damn, White, Gvardiol, Rodri, and Wood emerged as late injury doubts for the weekend as well; that could cause a lot of FPL hurt.

And Eze too. (No surprise there...)  And Lerma and Wharton....  (The gods do not love Crystal Palace, evidently.)

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

Well, Areola seems to have lost his place to Fabianski - although there might have been a fitness issue at play in that decision as well. And while Fabianski made a couple of outstanding saves, and I can see Lopategui might be reluctant to change the lineup after a much-improved performance like that.... the Polish veteran wasn't actually that convincing overall, had a number of very wobbly moments. I've always found it a bit frustrating that West Ham are the only club who have 'two No. 1s', two keepers who are both good enough to deserve the start, with no very clear priority between them. I wouldn't be rushing to bring in Fabianski, when he might suddenly get dropped for his younger rival again... (But a lot of FPL managers had gone for Fabianski anyway as a random cheap back-up choice, and are now reaping unexpected benefits from that selection.)

Sancho was dropped in favour of Pedro Neto in the last game. That might just have been to get him bedded into the side ahead of the hard-to-predict clash with Manchester United this weekend (for which Jadon Sancho, still a United player, is not available); but he had a stormer - so, you have to fear that Sancho could now be out for a while.

Did anyone give other cause to consider dropping them?

I've been thinking for a couple of weeks that Andy Robertson has been looking strangely out of sorts and a little slow, and that was even more evident last Sunday. Admittedly, having to deal with both Saka and Havertz, when both are on fire, is a thankless task. But I suspect he's been playing with some kind of injury problem, and might get rested in favour of Tsimikas for a little while now.

And, oh good grief, Muric - again!! The first time he produced a colossal shit-show of a performance, at least it was early in the season, and he was facing Erling Haaland in a particularly mean mood. But when he did it again against much weaker opposition a couple of weeks ago, the alarm bells began to sound. And then he threw the game against Brentford away - a fixture Ipswich could have and should have taken all three points from. I don't know who Ipswich's back-up keeper is.... but it's looking like one of the ball-boys would be less of a liability than this guy. This is a major test of Kieran McKenna's management. Perhaps he'll judge that Muric is basically sound enough in technique, and strong enough mentally, to bounce back from this string of catastrophic blunders. Or maybe he'll think that it might be better for team spirit to stand by his beleaguered keeper for a while longer, even if he does present a hazard to the club's fortunes. But I call bullshit on both those excuses: the guy is costing you points you can't afford to lose - he needs to be axed at once.

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

Well, paradoxically, pretty much the whole of the Manchester United side! And since there is typically a positive 'bounce' following a change of manager (and likely to be particularly pronounced, you would think, in an instance like this, where the manager has been a 'dead man walking' for 18 months or more, and had not appeared to be popular with the players, and was holding the team back with his perverse tactical system), you have to fancy that United might cause some mayhem for the next few weeks. But that might be a very short-lived phenomenon; heck, it might not even really happen at all. And if it does, it's impossible to predict which players will thrive most in the new atmosphere at the club. So, I wouldn't be rushing to buy any United players just yet; let's wait and watch for two or three weeks...

And yes, Nico Jackson was absolutely outstanding again. But he's been outstanding pretty much all season, so shouldn't only just be coming on to people's radars.  Pre-season, I wouldn't have fancied him to get anywhere near Watkins or Isak, or maybe even Mateta or Havertz or Solanke; but on current form, it's looking like he could give Haaland a bit of a run for his money, and is becoming a favourite to be 'best of the rest' among the forwards this term. Ditto, Chris Wood - I keep thinking that his 'streak' must surely be about to end; and yet it just keeps going and going. If he can sustain this sort of form, he too - incredibly - is going to be in the hunt for the Golden Boot (and might prove to have been one of the picks of the season).

Pedro Neto put in an eye-catching performance against Newcastle too; though there must be a continuing uncertainty about how far he might have to share minutes with Sancho (and Mudryk?), even if he does become a more frequent starter.

Mark Travers played a blinder in the Bournemouth goal - but surely won't displace Kepa as first-choice on the basis of that one performance. (Or will he...??)

And Lallana continues to impress as Southampton's most crucial player - but he's not likely to produce that many FPL points playing for Southampton.

BEST OF LUCK, EVERYONE!

So, farewell then....

 Alas - goodbye (at last), Uncle Erik.

Though few people, I imagine, will mourn his passing from Old Trafford. The overwhelming sensation, for most of us, is probably rather a sense of profound relief that we've all now been put out of his misery.

It had indeed become embarrassing, painful to witness this ongoing slow-motion train-wreck over so many months....  It is baffling that the board did not get rid of him last summer (an untypically brilliant performance to clinch the FA Cup scarcely compensating for another dismal season in the League); or during the last international break. Van Nistelrooy has recently been much-touted as at least an interim option; but I suppose they didn't fancy handing the reins to him for any extended period, and thus weren't willing to do so until they had a substantive replacement finally secured. And Thomas Tuchel taking the England job may have thrown a spanner in the works. Even if he wasn't their prime target, he must surely have been in the conversation, and other managers they'd approached will probably have thought he might have been their preferred option - and hence that his apparent spurning of their overtures presented an opportunity for them to intensify their own negotiation over the position.... and so drag things out for another week or two.

Once upon a time, it would have been just about inconceivable that any top manager would take a post in charge of a national team in preference to the Manchester United job. But this, sadly, is how far they have fallen - from being 'The Greatest Club in the World' 15 years ago.... to an object of general derision now.  And the real reason for Ten Hag surviving the last 5 or 6 months may not have been that unexpected FA Cup win, but the fact that the United job has become such a 'poisoned chalice' that none of the several managers said to have been tapped up for it showed any interest in accepting the offer.

I never felt Ten Hag was a good fit for the position. United's fans expect an expansive attacking style of play - exciting to watch, even if not consistently successful; but the Dutchman's attitude seemed to be more dour and pragmatic. And the United job - even more than those at the other top Premier League clubs - really demands someone who's very media-savvy, who cuts a charismatic figure in interviews. Poor Erik always came across as stiff and pompous. And, over the last year or so, he, not unnaturally, increasingly had rather a hunted air about him - which did not inspire general confidence.

Yes, he came to a club with all kinds of structural problems, a squad that was a total mess, with a long history of under-performance. And he has had some ridiculous injury problems to cope with. But even when players were fit, he seemed to be constantly chopping and changing between them - never sure what his best starting eleven should be: particularly in defence, where Lindelof, Varane, or Maguire could never seem to get an extended run of starts, even when they played well (Lindelof, I thought, was particularly hard done-by); but he also couldn't make his mind up about how to juggle his attacking assets - Martial, Rashford, Antony, Garnacho, Elanga, Diallo. There was never any consistency in the selections, nor any clear 'identity' in the style of play; and very often, his players on the pitch looked lost, as if they just didn't know what they were supposed to be doing. This might be tolerable on occasion, early in a manager's tenure; but with Ten Hag, this never changed across two years! And he rarely seemed to be able to adapt his tactics, or use new personnel off the bench, to improve matters when games were going badly for them. That remarkable FA Cup victory gave a tantalising glimpse of what he might have been, should have been capable of - a shrewd gameplan to knock City out of their stride, and his players fully invested in it, all giving 110%. Why did he scarcely manage to produce any hint of such effectiveness in the 85 EPL matches he led United out for??

One suspects that his high-profile spat - which seemed petty on both sides - with Jadon Sancho was just the tip of an iceberg of poor player relations. It seemed he might have long since 'lost the dressing room', as most of his players rarely seemed willing to really 'put in a shift' for him.

Above all, it seemed incredibly perverse that he persisted in a tactical set-up that could never possibly work with the players he had available. If you're going to pursue an aggressive high press, you need to compress the play in the opposition half by keeping a high defensive line; but in order to do that, you need at least one or two very fast defenders who can get back quickly to deal with counter-attacks (Nope), atacking players, particularly in the wide areas, who are willing to run their arses off to get back and help out with thwarting a counter (Garnacho, Rashford?? Nope!), and, ideally, a highly mobile central defensive midfielder who can usually snuff out such attacks at source (Nope). Instead, because of the chronic lack of pace at the back and in the holding role (Casemiro reads the game superbly, but has no legs any more), and lack of reliable forward cover down the flanks,... his defensive line tended to drop very, very deep - leaving 30 yards of open space for opposing attackers to canter through at will (poor Kobbie Mainoo last season often being left with the thankless task of trying to police 25-30% of the entire pitch on his own...). And on a related point - really, what was the point of buying one of the world's best ball-playing goalkeepers if you never let him leave his area?  All of fhat was just self-destructive lunacy. So, YES, he absolutely had to go. It was long, long, long overdue.

As usual, my man Adam Clery at FourFourTwo is largely in agreement with me. He's been very swift to put out a video on Ten Hag's departure.

He's done one on Ruben Amorim as well now - thanks, Adam.

How's it going SO FAR?

 

Since we're just about a quarter of the way through the season, this seems like an appropriate point to pause and assess our progress so far.

As I noted right at the start of the season, a bad start can scupper your chances for the year. Being quick out of the blocks is pretty much essential to a high ranking at the end of the season - or, certainly, gives you a HUGE advantage in chasing that dream. Picking the first squad is a real lottery. After even a few weeks, we start to get a pretty good sense of who the players (and teams) in the best form are, and we can narrow down the pool of potential picks quite dramatically. But in that opening week, no-one really has any idea; we're all just making hopeful guesses. And if you happen to have an outstanding Gameweek 1, chances are you'll continue to do pretty well in Gameweeks 2 and 3 as well, since you've guessed correctly on who the majority of the most productive players in the opening phase of the season are going to be; and you won't have to worry about using up transfers, perhaps even resorting to an early Wildcard, to fix problems in your squad, which is an enormous additional advantage. So, a strong Gameweek 1 can leave you galloping off gleefully into the distance, with an intimidating lead over the chasing pack right from the outset; a lead which is very likely to get even bigger over the next few weeks, because that opening advantage will continue for a while and compound itself. The rest of us, the unfortunate ones who didn't make such successful guesses, are not playing catch-up..... we're just desperately trying to stop falling even further behind as soon as possible.

I tend to have very weak starts to the season. In fact, I've had two or three really AWFUL ones (last year was a particularly egregious disaster, which I might share some details of on this blog one day); so, this year doesn't feel so bad by comparison. (A sense of perspective can be a great comfort in times of trouble.)

I was pretty happy with my squad: it looked strong and well-balanced. And most of the players I'd picked would come good soon. But, unfortunately, almost none of them picked up anything in that first week. And I'd put my captain's armband on Isak rather than Salah. And I didn't have Haaland (although that wasn't yet such a calamity as it was about to become). So, I kicked off my season a few points below the global average, and outside (just) the top 50%. Horrendous.

Going without Haaland was a risky though viable strategy. But then the bugger went and got back-to-back hattricks in the next two weeks (which was hardly to be 'expected'; City had started sluggishly, with Rodri recovering from a muscle injury sustained at the Euros; and West Ham had looked as if they should be a decent mid-table side, while Ipswich seemed likely to be the best of the promoted sides, and had given a very good account of themselves at Anfield in GW1). Some folks even punted their Triple Captain chip on him in one of those weeks! So, those of us who'd bet on the non-Haaland option were irrevocably screwed by the end of August.

I'd decided to steer away from Arsenal attacking assets too, being doubtful that they could build on last season's success after a disappointing summer transfer window, and an early spate of injuries. But Saka and Havertz both had an excellent opening week (and, although Havertz soon faded a little, Saka continued strong until he picked up a short-term injury in GW7). That choice also harmed me in the early part of the season.

I'd also failed to anticipate that Chris Wood and Danny Welbeck would start the season so strongly. (Come on; did anyone anticipate that??)  And I remained hesitant to bring either of them in, since I always had other pressing issues to use my transfers on; and their advanced age, poor injury history, and record of never keeping a hot scoring streak going very long, all suggested that their early-season form was likely to be a flash-in-the-pan (every week I've thought that; and every week, they keep banging them in!). If my crystal ball had told me that so many (virtually all!) of the cheaper forward options would start the season so strongly, I probably wouldn't have bothered to go with Watkins and Isak as my strike force, and could have saved a bit of money for elsewhere in the squad. Watkins had some kind of fitness issue at the start of the season, failed to have much of an impact in the first few games, and kept getting subbed off perilously not-far-past the hour mark; but he has finally started to come good with 5 goals (and 2 assists) since then. I still have concerns about him, though, as I've found Villa's form a bit unconvincing so far (it seems as if they're saving their best efforts for their debut Champsions League campaign). Isak also seemed to be impaired by a slight fitness issue at first; and then broke a toe. And for my cheap back-up, I'd gone for Muniz at Fulham - who struggled to regain his excellent form from the end of last season, and was rather hastily dropped in favour of Raul Jimenez - yet another 'old warhorse' improbably recapturing his best form after years in the doldrums. Watkins, Isak, and Muniz had looked like a very strong attacking trio before the start of the season - but none of them came through for me.

I'm pleased that I was on Salah and Palmer (and Mbeumo and Smith Rowe) from the outset, who have been paying off quite nicely. I also got on Robinson and Lewis, and Davis and Delap quite early; although they haven't yet brought huge rewards, I am at present fairly content that they look like smart and prescient picks that may do quite well for me. Alas, I keep guessing wrong most of the time with my captaincy picks: only Super-Mo, in GWs 2 and 3, has given me a decent return on the armband so far.

I had been thinking that this season hadn't been too bad for injuries, really (at least, not compared to the record-breaking number I suffered last year!); but on reviewing my transfer record so far, I am reminded that I lost Ben White - my premium defensive pick - almost immediately to a knee problem; also Mykolenko. And when Luis Diaz started getting left out in favour of Cody Gakpo, I brought in Dwight McNeil, who immediately got injured. I also gave Eddie Nketiah a try; he started brightly at Palace, but quickly faded... and then got injured.

Other strokes of ill-fortune I suffered in my early selections included: punting on Valentin Barco as an 'investment pick' at the start of the season (he had been widely expected to start the first two or three games, as there were so many injuries elsewhere in the Brighton defence; but instead he was suddenly packed off to Spain on loan [at least his price was - unexpectedly* - frozen, so I didn't have to worry about getting rid of him immediately; but I did as soon as possible, because I didn't want to risk having an empty seat on the bench for long]); going for Henderson and Munoz, but finding that they and Palace were in flakey form at the start of the season, and deciding I needed to offload them quite quickly; then going for Areola (a mainstay of mine for most of last season) to replace Henderson, and have him promptly suffer two minor injuries... and then lose his place. And I've had Bowen for a while - who's played really, really well,... without actually producing many points so far.  Oh, and I brought in Haaland on an early Wildcard... and his goals immediately dried up. (Hope springing eternal.... I just made him captain against Southampton - while three of my midfielders returned much better points. Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.)

At least.... starting from such a low point, I was easily able to maintain 'green arrows' of upward progress through the next five gameweeks. But then, I hit a couple of disastrous returns in GWs 7 and 8 (just wretched luck: very good teams put out, but almost no-one returned anything!). My only 'good' week so far was GW6, where Palmer's monster haul helped me to get 18 points above the global average (many people didn't yet have him??); but even there, I'd failed to make him my captain. Oh, woe!

So,  NO, my personal 'Report Card' is not showing A+ at the moment; more like C- !!!  Just about everything that could go wrong has gone wrong for me so far. But.... things can only get better...!!  Right?

* That Barco thing was very weird. I've never noticed a player being kept in the game, but have his price frozen before. Usually, when players get loaned overseas, they're removed from the player roster altogether. Although it would actually make more sense to retain them, but leave their price subject to change. Loan agreements typically have a clause providing for a player's peremptory recall, if the parent club feels it might need him after all - particularly if they're hit with a bit of a mid-season injury crisis. And it would actually be rather fun to occasionally have the opportunity to bring in a recalled loan player like this, whose price might have dropped well below 4.0 during his absence.

Luck-o-Meter (9)

 

Vardy fell a little too spectacularly, under light contact - but that did look like a penalty to me. How was there not enough in it for VAR not to suggest a second look?? And then Hudson-Odoi hit the screamer of the week - straight against the post! Early twitches of the Luck-o-Meter needle immediately in the Friday evening game...

The disallowing of Villa's first goal seemed a crazy VAR decision to me. You really want these decisions to go the attacking side's way if there's any 'element of doubt'; and this certainly didn't seem like a 'clear and obvious error' in the original on-pitch decision for VAR to overrule. I'm not even sure of the definition of 'ball in play' in the rules these days (I'm not confident the rule is clearly and sensibly written; so many of them now seem not to be!); but if we're following the example of tennis, where the outside edge of the ball touching the line is still regarded as being 'in play', then it really looked like Watkins had retrieved the ball just in time. There certainly wasn't any clear daylight between the ball and the line. (And the stills shown on TV appeared to be either side of the moment the ball would have been at its furthest over the line; this is another problem with trying to make decisions this tight - a 24-per-second framerate on video footage is often not going to give you a precise enough picture of what happened. And then there are problems with pixel-size/screen resolution, parallax distortions, optical illusions [the bright whiteness of the pitch markings can make them seem larger... and the ball smaller!],... and the fact that the shape of the ball changes when it's kicked or bounces or is rolling quickly... If the the ball's not clearly out of play, it's not out! As with off-sides, it's impossible to judge these things to the millimetre - and it's foolish to try.)

The denial of a penalty for Cash's challenge on Semenyo was also an egregiously poor decision (compounded by the fact the referee chose to penalise Semenyo for 'simulation'), and really one where VAR should have intervened to recommend a second look. Chris Kavanagh clearly thought that Cash had got his toe to the ball and/or that he had made no contact with Semenyo; but both of those assumptions were plainly wrong. Yes, of course Semenyo was 'looking for' the foul, dragging his foot - but a forward's entitled to do that; there was contact, it was enough to bring him down: penalty. And then, damn, there was a second one when a high ball dropped on to Bailey's arm in the penalty area. Yes, he was 'looking away from the ball' - but he knew exactly where it was falling, and could have moved his arm to avoid the chance of touching it... rather than moving it the other way, to bat the ball out of the penalty area. I don't usually like to see penalties given for handball - but this was another clear penalty. 

Brentford's penalty felt like the right decision. But it was a very contentious one: we've so often seen those long tussles adjudged not-penalties because the contact started before the players entered the box (Saka had a good shout turned down for that early in the season). And again it seemed rather weird that on this point, VAR felt able to adjudicate directly, without inviting the referee to take another look. What exactly are the protocols?? And Clarke's sending-off with a second yellow? Ridiculous: he clearly played the ball. But VAR apparently can't interfere in those?? Why not?? A sending-off is a sending-off: it's a huge, game-changing event. In fact, it really ought not to be difficult for VAR to make an almost-immediate judgement on every yellow card, if the referee has clearly thought there was contact with a player, when there wasn't (or no contact with the ball, when there was). And Delap hit a post right at the death!

It was unfortunate to see yellow cards for Flynn Downes and Russell Martin for complaining about a 'foul' award that plainly wasn't a foul. Doesn't have much of an impact on game outcome or FPL returns, but it's still an injustice, and a worrying example of how bad our refereeing can often be.

That crazy turnaround in the dying seconds at Brighton has to be considered a major luck-quake too: two turnovers within a few seconds, a four-on-one overload on the edge of the penalty area not being converted; then a swift break up the other end, a soft shot, big deflection, keeper watches it loop in off the underside of the bar.... Not an everyday occurrence!

We also had the bizarre FA decision to belatedly award Wissa a second goal. And although the FPL rules appear to be quite unequivocal that no points changes will be implemented after the end of a Gameweek, they apparently allow themselves to ignore that principle 'in exceptional circumstances', and might do so here. Now, I don't really begrudge Wissa owners such a windfall (no, I do....), but it just seems a bonkers decision on two levels: a) it clearly wasn't Wissa's goal; and b) if the FA is going to take so long to revise an attribution like this, it ought to fall outside of FPL relevance - since we really need to know definite scores by the end of each gameweek. The occasional 'injustice' must be suffered in this game; it's much better than having constant uncertainty about points and rankings... and how the rules are even going to be applied.

The offside against Calvert-Lewin looked very, very tight; and it took a long time to decide. And I didn't see VAR producing their 'drawing the lines' graphic - why not? The two stills widely shown on later TV coverage gave a very different impression of whether he was onside or not (my initial impression when watching the game was that he looked safe by a good 6 inches or so....). If that goal had been given, the whole course of the match, and perhaps the final result, could have been transformed.

Palmer having a fine early goal ruled out for a marginal offside was a bitter pill. And you really feel he ought to qualify for discretionary additional bonus points for his absolutely sublime pre-assist for Jackson's goal. Isak's equaliser was a very, very, very tight offside call - and I was rather surprised it went in his favour. Neto's powerful header against the post, and Isak uncharacteristically fluffing his chance after rather too easily walking the ball around Sanchez might also have been turning points in a tight match.

Spurs undoubtedly had a moment of bad luck when Johnson's instinctive flick-on crashed against the post, and then somehow didn't ricochet in off Henderson. But they had a huge moment of good luck when Van de Ven somehow escaped a red card for bundling Sarr over when he was clear through on goal. It was much worse than Saliba's offence last week; what we want here, above all, dear PGMOL, is some consistency. The argument that the Palace man was running towards the corner was nonsense: he was only at a very slight angle to the straight path to the goal line, and could easily have cut back inside again once clear of the chasing defender. He was closer to the goal than in similar incidents we've seen recently, and there was no other Spurs player anywhere near him - so, it was in fact a much more clearcut 'goalscoring opportunity' than the Saliba incident, or any other similar one I can recall this season.

Garnacho smashing one against the woodwork, Fabianski's fingertip save of Casemiro's angled header, and, most tauntingly of all, Dalot blazing over the top of an empty goal after easily getting past Fabianski in the first half could have turned that West Ham match - and possibly the whole course of United's future - around. And I cannot understand how David Coutt reversed his original no-penalty decision when the pitchside review clearly showed that Danny Ings had been kicked by his own teammate... That was one of the worst of the many dire penalty decisions we've seen this season! (And then Onana very nearly saved it... You have to feel for Erik a little bit.)

Virgil van Dijk was very lucky not to get himself sent off for a bit of needless argey-bargey with Havertz early on - appearing to flick both an elbow and a foot (twice) at the irritating German. We've seen much less aggressive movements interpreted as 'violent conduct' in the past. And Arsenal can feel even more rightly aggrieved about having their late 'winner' chalked off because of Anthony Taylor's unfathomable decision to whistle for a non-foul against Szoboszlai. Even if you feel that these were correct calls, or forgivable errors, to have two such big points of contention in the biggest match of the week is unfortunate.... and a heavy swing on the Luck-o-Meter. And, while I feel it was probably the 'right' decision under the current ridiculous formulations of the rules (but also, in this case, for the good of the game - since we never really want to see good goals ruled out for minimal 'offsides'), I was irritated by the huge delay in evaluating the possible offside against Merino for Arsenal's second goal; all of this trying to identify whose toe is nearer to the goal-line in a crowded box is just ridiculous - if the attacking player's torso is not clearly behind all of the defending team's torsos.... it's not offisde. That's what the rule used to be: it was easy to understand and to implement, and could almost always be judged accurately with the naked eye. Can we please go back to those innocent times??

There was no spate of wonder-goals, or near-misses, or shots hitting the post (some, but not nearly as many as some recent weeks); and while there were some outstanding goalkeeping performances, perhaps not so many spectacular saves either, overall. And there were no big upset results (except, perhaps, Palace nicking a win off Spurs). And most of the big names returned some points this time. So, not a lot of 'luck' in the expectedness or otherwise of general results and points-hauls - although.... the 'Team of the Week' includes Casemiro, Chalobah, Iwobi, Wissa, and George Hirst (who??), who were probably owned by just about no-one.

This didn't seem like such a terrible week for refereeing on the whole, nor were there a lot of unexpected events or particularly stupendous pieces of individual skill; so, we might have been heading for quite a modest Luck-o-Meter score. But the two penalties not given against Villa, and the AWFUL decision to award one against Manchester United push this week's score up to a.... well, I'm tempted to say 8, but I'll go with 7 out of 10, since there were relatively few other instances of unusual luck this week.

GW9 - What did we learn?

 

Vardy is probably his own worst enemy, for going down so often and so easily in the penalty area - but his shout for a penalty against Forest on Friday night looked like it was at least worth a second a look. I keep thinking Chris Wood's streak must surely end soon, but then he comes up with another couple of excellent finishes. If he can keep this up, he is going to be in the hat with Haaland and Jackson (and Watkins... and Welbeck...?!) for the Golden Boot at the end of the year - fairytale stuff! Both keepers had great games in this one. But yes, a gap in class is emerging: for the last two seasons, Forest looked like they really deserved to be relegated; they no longer do. Leicester, however..... (Sorry, Gary Lineker.)

Bournemouth's last-gasp winner felt deserved on the balance of play, for me. In fact, they can probably count themselves unfortunate that they didn't win, after having two strong penalty shouts waved away. And back-up keeper Mark Travers played a bit of a blinder. (I doubt if it was enough to keep him the start if Kepa is soon fit again; but it will cause a little anxiety to anyone who owns Kepa in FPL.)  Villa were perhaps a little heavy-legged after their midweek exertions against Bologna; but, for me, they just haven't yet recaptured the verve they were showing for so much of last season, and despite their current high league standing, I'm doubtful they'll claim a Champions League place again. The absurdly popular Morgan Rogers had a fairly subdued game, and was pulled off only 10 minutes into the second half; I wonder if that will trigger a big sell-off. (Well, not huge so far: but he had dropped over 100,000 owners by the following Friday.)

Brentford v Ipswich was a crazily entertaining game: it often felt as though a goal was likely every time a team started to break towards the opposition end. This is what happens when you have two teams who can't defend to save their lives at the moment; and the two worst keepers in the league (OK, they both pulled off a couple of very good saves; but they also had many, many horrible moments, and filled the defence in front of them with anxiety; I really think they're both ripe to be dropped). And then Liam Delap crashed one against the far post in the dying seconds?!  Crazy game! A 3-3 or 4-4 draw would have been a fairer result. I had thought Ipswich had the talent and the manager to survive their debut season with a certain amount of comfort, but it is not turning out like that at all; and McKenna is starting to look a bit harried and desperate, like he doesn't know how to fix things. And if Brentford keep leaking goals like this, they'll be in the relegation conversation too.

It was great to see Evan Ferguson playing and scoring again at last, after a long string of injury problems. I wonder if he might now be entering the crowded field of very tempting budget forward picks?! I hate to say this, but Welbeck is surely bound to succumb to an injury again sooner or later. And when Ferguson's on song, I really think he's one of the best finishers in the league, and has a lot about his game that is reminiscent of Haaland - a kind of Erling Mini-Me. And what a ridiculous end to the game - Brighton nicking the ball in the dying moments and finding themselves four-on-one, surely certain to claim a third goal to seal their victory.... and Wieffer somehow misplaces his pass to the sole Wolves defender, Tommy Doyle, who gratefully punts it upfield for a counter-attack that improbably results in a last-gasp equaliser. Brighton, for all their attacking flair, have looked very vulnerable on the counter this year; and I think that is going to make it a struggle for them to bag a place in European competition. Wolves, with Cunha looking particularly lively, may find this remarkable (and probably not really deserved) comeback the inspiration they need to start turning things around. They do have a much kinder run of fixtures ahead now, but.... they are in very deep trouble.

Russell Martin's Southampton have always looked potentially dangerous going forward (they need a better striker), but they appear to be finding some defensive rigour as well now. And Adam Lallana was absolutely outstanding for them. If they carry on like this, they might yet emerge as the one-in-three survivors amongst this year's promoted sides. I had an inkling that they would show up at The Etihad with a top performance, and was trying to discourage The Sheep this week from hazarding their Triple Captain chip on Haaland. Now, of course, there's an unreasonable backlash against Haaland because he only scored one....  Some people are never satisfied. A couple of worrying things I noticed in this game, though, were Kovacic repeatedly being blindsided by Lallana or another Southampton player breaking in behind him (while he might bring some attractive attacking elements to City's game, he is a very poor replacement for Rodri as a central defensive lychpin) and Foden looking frustrated with his teammates, waving his arms around frantically as they repeatedly ignored him for a cutback (I wonder if they've just forgotten how to play with him, because he's been frozen out for so much of this season; or if he's had some kind of dressing-room falling-out).

Everton deserve credit for battling to the end, in a game they never really looked to be in. Smith Rowe's owners will probably have taken some encouragement from his lively and varied performance in this one: he was head-to-head with his main FPL-rival-pick Dwight McNeil, and - probably to most people's surprise - came out of it on top, ir only fairly narrowly. The game might perhaps have gone differently if Calvert-Lewin's early goal had not been disallowed; that was (yet another decision) that looked harsh to the lay viewer - and took far too long to reach.

Chelsea v Newcastle was as open and entertaining as we might have expected. Palmer's early goal being 'offiside' by a kneecap was a hard blow for his FPL owners. He's really had rotten luck so far this year (so many near misses, so many assists to teammates not converted, so many penalties not given...): he could easily have nearly twice his current massive total - frightening thought! But at least we saw an appropriate VAR intervention here, with Simon Hooper being given the opportunity to walk back his silly decision to award a penalty for Nkunku's slipping over in the box. Newcastle continue to be so-near-and-yet-so-far-away.... not playing terribly, and yet just not bossing games or putting away their chances as they did for so much of the last two seasons.

It was nice to see Palace back to winning ways. I've often felt they have not been too far off it so far this season, and have possibly been the unluckiest team of the season so far (Chelsea and Bournemouth have strong claims also); and but for a trio of smart saves from Vicario, they might have won this much more comfortably. Though, more importantly for Glasner, they were finally starting to show some of last season's defensive cohesion again, as well as some more coordinated and effective pressing in the final third; that's what they need to get back up to mid-table. It's good as well to see Jean-Philippe Mateta looking sharp and hungry and happy again; it's taken a long time for him to shake off the effects of the injury problem he picked up at the Olympics, but now he looks as though he might be about to recover the form he showed at the end of last season. I've also often felt that Spurs, despite their promising start, have felt like merely a good mid-table side - who were perhaps slightly over-performing - rather than convincing 'top six' candidates; and in the last few games, they've started misfiring badly. I don't know what's going wrong with them, but I imagine there will be a mass FPL exodus from Spurs assets after this (I never felt confident enough to go in for any of them anyway...). There were a few nice balls in behind down the left from new teenage sensation Mikey Moore, but overall he had quite a quiet game - and is clearly not yet an adequate replacement for Son.... or even Werner.

Could Ten Hag's job have been saved if those efforts from Garnacho, Casemiro, and Dalot had gone in? I doubt it; but if so, it's probably all for the best that they didn't. It is a cruelty of Fate, though, that United could be so on top for most of this game and end up losing it. It's a pity that poor refereeing again dominates the headlines in this one (the penalty decision was one of the worst I can remember in a long, long time), as it was actually a cracking game: one of the best performances we've seen from United this calendar year; but West Ham were also very much improved defensively, and really looking good value for the draw, despite having to ride their luck a bit.

Arsenal v Liverpool was a fascinating tactical battle, with The Gunners clearly having the better of things in the first half: Havertz's mobility (not just dropping deep to link up with his midfield and leaving a perplexing hole in front of the Liverpool centre-backs, as he often does in his 'false 9' mode, but also drifting out on to the right a lot, to help Saka double-team a weary-looking Andy Robertson), in particular, was causing all sorts of problems. But Slot revitalized Liverpool in the second half, particularly with his tactical substitutions on the hour, the greater physicality of Szoboszlai and Gakpo giving his team more long out-ball options... while Arsenal progressively unravelled with injuries to Gabriel and Timber, and were left hanging on for their lives in the last 15 or 20 minutes. Arsenal can feel rightly aggrieved that the referee's bizarre award of a foul on Szoboszlai denied them a late winner; but on the balance of play, a draw was a fair result. However, this game has left FPL managers in even greater uncertainty about how secure Luis Diaz's minutes are in the face of strong competition from Gakpo. And Alexander-Arnold's lack of impact in the game - apart from the sublime pre-assist for Salah's equaliser - may be causing worries to those who've invested their life savings to bring him into their defence. (Ben White reminded us that he's a very strong alternative as the top premium defender this year, with an almost identical early ball to set up Saka's opener.)