Luck-o-Meter (17)

Gosh - did The Christmas Fairy answer our wishes, and fix it so that the first day of the Holiday Fixture Mayhem passed off without the referees or VAR letting us down and ruining a game? Well, perhaps not quite; but very, very nearly....  We have to be thankful for that much.

The City meltdown continues. Villa didn't play all that well, and were content to let City have a majority of the possession, and yet looked like they could cut the visitors open at will; and without a couple of very sharp early saves from Ortega (the second, where he somehow clawed the ball out from under his crossbar when it was already behind him, 90% or 95% over the line, was little short of miraculous - possibly even better than Martinez's  slightly similar save last week), it could have been an absolute rout. Rogers had a very impressive game, his forward carries looking unstoppable; and, as his confidence surges, he's starting to look much sharper in and around the box as well (indeed, he's actually getting into the box much more now); he's finally evolving into the player his optimistic FPL boosters have been claiming he is all season - though he'll need quite a few more performances like this to convince me that he's a better prospect than Enzo Fernandez or Amad Diallo for the cheap 'fifth seat'. Pep's only answer to this was to take off his best defender (Stones) at half-time... for his worst defender (Walker); which, predictably, made things even worse. Now, admittedly, Stones is only recently back from a long layoff, so maybe there was some fitness issue underlying this change; but tactically, there was no conceivable rationale for it. As Pep casts around more and more desperately for 'solutions', he's starting to look a bit clueless; and this is perhaps the most worrying aspect of City's collapse for their fans, the realistion that their Messiah-coach has caused the problems... and can't fix them. Gvardiol again managed to pop up in the opposition box for one of City's best chances; but he probably should have been able to get the header on target from Grealish's absolutely sublime cross (the best ball of the game by far, from either side); and defensively, he was really looking pretty ropey again (would surely be a prime candidate for a benching, if they had any other fit defenders at the moment....). City defeats are no longer 'unexpected'. In FPL terms, the omission of DeBruyne and Watkins from the starting lineups here was far more momentous.

I had expected Forest to be strong favourites to get the win away to Brentford; but I had not expected them to dominate the game so completely - even with Wood in a little bit of a scoring slump for the moment. A worldie of a save from Matz Sels, beating away Ajer's crisp volley in the second half, was the only action of real note - in a game in which Brentford didn't really turn up, and the visitors just ground out a competent, comfortable win.

We didn't quite get a controversy-free first day of the weekend, because Jacob Murphy definnitely looked half a boot offside when he broke down the right wing to supply Isak's chance to open the scoring in the first minute; but, yet again, no defining lines were drawn on the TV pictures and no explanation offered for VAR's eventual determination to the contrary. I don't like to see good goals ruled out for such tiny margins; but, by the standards we are supposed to be following now, this goal definitely didn't feel kosher. And even if it was, the process which is supposed to reassure us of this again failed to operate correctly. It also looked very much to me as if Dan Burn's late 5th goal should have stood; surely the ball was passed back to him by Sam Morsy, and so he couldn't have been offside - again, no explanation was offered for VAR's unfathomable decision on this. Bruno G's superb angled header in the second half deserved better than to thud against the foot of the far post...  And Alexander Isak's first Premier League hattrick is long overdue, but I'm sure he'll bag many more now; however, he did need the assistance of another Muric Moment to secure this one! I really hope Kieran McKenna can turn things around a little for Ipswich - to keep the relegation battle interesting, if nothing else: Wolves and Southampton are gone already, beyond hope; but Everton and Leicester shouldn't be allowed to survive without having to put up a bit of a fight.

There were so many weirdnesses about the Palace v Arsenal game: Lewis-Skelly getting a start at left-back; Rice being left on the bench.... but coming on later, and scoring a screamer; the normally indestructible Saka pulling up with a hamstring problem early in the game; the normally impeccable Saliba actually having quite a poor game; Gabriel smashing headers against the woodwork twice (at least he got an 'assist' for the second one); Martinelli switching over to the right-hand side; Arsenal scoring 5 goals, but not keeping a clean sheet, and few of the 'usual suspects' among them actually contributing big points (I am smarting that Timber somehow picked up a booking and ended up with a measly 1pt!!);.... and Ismaila Sarr scoring the 'Goal of the Month', but doing very little else....  At least the refereeing was OK in this one; but a lot of FPL unexpectedness.

The VAR offside decision on Dunk for Wieffer's opening goal for Brighton at West Ham was also worryingly unconvincing; at least they'd drawn in the lines this time, but it wasn't at all clear why they'd been drawn where they were. The call on Estupinan's messy late challenge was also a bit dubious; admittedly, there wasn't that much force behind it, and it probably lacked malignant intent, but.... it was a rash, two-footed lunge, out-of-control, and it did catch Kilman dangerously high on the shin. I can't see how that isn't a red card. The only other incident of FPL note in a fairly drab match was the great Kaoru Mitoma somehow failing to prod home a goal from barely a foot off the line.... West Ham appear to be shoring themselves up a little in defence; but apart from Bowen's consistent liveliness in attack, they don't seem to have anything much to offer anywhere else on the pitch (and I still rather feel they need to ditch Lopategui if they're going to haul themselves away from the threat of relegation). Brighton, though, are going through a really poor spell themselves; at least with them, you can see they have the manager and the squad to quickly turn things around again; with West Ham, you can't help thinking they might still be shy of that fabled 40-points 'safety threshold' in the last  few games of the season.

I think Chelsea were perhaps unsettled by the brutally cold and blustery weather as much as by Everton's spirited and well-organised defence at Goodison on Sunday. If they'd managed to raise themselves to even 70% or 80% of their best, I think they could have won this game very comfortably; but unfortunately, they never really dragged themselves above about 60% and so it ended in a sterile 0-0. (To be fair, Everton have been making a commendable habit of this in the last couple of months; but I think it's often depended on their opponents having unusually poor days against them as much as on their own efforts.)  And Jordan Pickford was extraordinarily lucky to survive another of his berserker moments: his horrendous challenge on Gusto was presumably only forgiven by the referee and VAR because of the absurd amount of leeway currently being allowed to keepers (perhaps with an additional increment of sympathy for the hero of the England national team), and the fact that the Chelsea player managed to hurdle over the onrushing keeper without suffering much direct contact. If a penalty had been awarded for that, and the goalkeeper sent off (as he certainly should have been), then Chelsea would surely have gone on to win the game by a few goals. Since many FPL managers are now banking on Enzo and Jackson (or maybe Sanchez... and/or one of the defenders) as well as Palmer, and a large proportion of them had made Palmer captain this week, THIS was probably the biggest incident of the week for distorting FPL outcomes.

It looks as though Southampton left it too late to ditch the disastrous Russell Martin. Even under interim manager, Simon Rusk, they immediately looked a much better team.... arguably better, in fact, than hosts Fulham. And rushed-back-into-service goalkeeper Aaron Ramsdale played a huge part in preserving the first visitors' clean sheet of the season at Craven Cottage, with 5 saves (at least according to the official FPL stats), including one that might be a 'Save of the Season' contender. (And all this with a special glove, with the two middle fingers on the left hand fused together - which suggests that he's playing with those fingers taped together because the break isn't yet fully healed.)  Fulham's drab performance will disappoint a lot of FPL managers, especially those who've rushed in for Alex Iwobi in the past couple of weeks. Marco Silva's somewhat unexpected decision to drop Emile Smith Rowe for teenager Josh King and Rodrigo Muniz for Raul Jimenez will also have caused some FPL discomfort (especially as it's not clear that these changes were just 'rest rotations').

Leicester might count themselves a bit unfortunate against Wolves: in a free-flowing and evenly-matched game, it looked like they really had the better attacking chances.... but Wolves managed to convert all of theirs - thanks to some horrendous defending by Leicester, and a dreadful performance in goal by stand-in keeper, Danny Ward. Wolves looked a bit less all-at-sea than they have recently under Gary O'Neill, but against such poor opposition, we can't really judge if they're likely to benefit from a 'new manager bounce'. The big surprise - and, I would argue, injustice - in FPL terms here was the unexpected availability of Matheus Cunha, who was able to get on the scoresheet (and, somehow, to claim maximum bonus points too?!) in a game in which he should really not have been taking part. We know it's par for the course for the FA to sometimes drag their feet in reaching a judgement on such a big disciplinary issue; but for such an egregious offence as this, I think his club should have immediately suspended him (a gesture which ought to ameliorate the sentence ultimately handed down to him).

I allow myself to wallow in a moment of smugness over the Old Trafford result - since the United fans in the FPL community (a grossly disproportionate number, given the club's lack of success over the last decade or more) were all crowing that this was going to be an 'easy fixture' for Amorim's men, while I had countered with the unpopular prediction that I expected it to be quite an easy win for Bournemouth (in fact, I was so confident of this that I started Kepa this week, previously only my back-up keeper). No-one apart from Diallo really showed much dynanism for the Reds; and even he couldn't continue his scoring streak when the rest of the side were so lacklustre. Amorim caused more FPL disgruntlement with his erratic selections, this time omitting Hojlund and De Ligt for no obvious reason, and switching Dalot over to the right to accommodate Malacia for a trial at left wing-back. And both managers made a raft of early substitutions, denying FPL managers their coveted full appearance points for some players - this becomes more and more of a hazard at this time of year, as teams seek to 'manage minutes' for their players around the congested holiday fixture schedule. Meanwhile, the Bournemouth defence is starting to look more worthy of FPL interest than their attack.

It looked for a long while like things weren't going to happen for Mo Salah in the game at Spurs: failing to convert when Forster obligingly passed the ball straight to him in the opening minutes, and shortly afterwards hitting the woodwork and forcing a couple of decent saves out of the beleaguered Spurs keeper; but of course, he eventually came good in the second half.... causing heartache to all those who had plumped for giving their captain's armband to someone else this week! And Spurs continued their habit of alternating between terrible and brilliant... in the same match. Big Ange did not endear himself to the FPL hordes by making substitutions just short of the hour; and James Maddison - their most dangerous player - was again one of them (he looked like thunder on the bench afterwards; things definitely do not seem to be good between him and his manager). Alexander-Arnold was extremely lucky not to be penalised for his unnecessary shove in Maddison's back on the edge of his own box in the opening minutes: that was certainly a foul, and possibly a penalty; but Spurs were so bad for most of the first half, it probably wouldn't have made any difference to the ultimate result. Mild complaints about Kulusevski's clash with Macallister before Spurs's first goal seemed utterly groundless, however; Macallister is presumably claiming that the Spurs man hooked his leg over the top of him when they were both sprawled on the ground, to impede his getting up; but there was nothing in it - instead of rolling over and complaining, he should have just got up and carried on playing. And oh, Szoboszlai should clearly not have been credited with an assist for Salah's first goal: his touch was a feeble prod, not really a 'goal attempt'; and it didn't ricochet off the defender - Gray trapped it and then tried to get it clear (unluckily steering it straight to the lurking Salah). FPL has been getting crazily over-generous with assigning 'assists' this season (while still being sometimes crazily inconsistent about it!). A 6-3 scoreline, even between two such free-scoring sides, is a high level of FPL weirdness all on its own. And Solanke's goal coming from both Robertson and Van Dijk falling asleep on an innocuous hopeful cross into the box is super-weird. A crazy, crazy game: entertaining to watch, but emotionally exhausting for the FPL enthusiast...

So, let's see - 2 penalties not given, 2 red cards not given, and at least of couple of extremely dubious offisde decisions... By the standards we ought to expect of our officials, this would be a pretty dreadful week. But by the standards we have, unfortunately, come to expect, it's actually pretty good - only 4 or 5 points on my 'luck' scale!!

However, there were some outstanding goals this week, and a few quite amazing saves too.... and a number of astonishing defensive errors (even from the mighty Liverpool!). In the 'Team of the Week', only Salah and Isak are popular picks. Surprisingly poor performances from Manchester United, Spurs, Fulham, Chelsea, Brighton, and Leicester, Saka's early injury and the rarity of a fairly anonymous performance from Cole Palmer, in addition to the large number of unpredictable player selections.... I think that all just about gets this Gameweek up to a 7 out of 10 on the Luck-o-Meter.

The biggest PROBLEM with the 'Assistant Manager' chip

 

I've already explained why I so dislike this vile novelty chip the FPL powers-that-be are foisting on us this year - briefly here, and in elaborate detail here.

There are a number of irksome obstacles to deploying the damn thing at all (which may perhaps be enough to dissuade some people from bothering to use it). 

Many on the online forums have been bitching most about the 'transfer charge' for your selected manager for the chip, complaining that it overstrains an already inadequate player budget. I think that's a greatly overstated complaint: the sums are relatively trivial, and shouldn't have much of an impact on your squad strength. But the initial purchase of your manager is likely to necessitate you having to sell at least 1,... maybe 2 or 3, or even 4 players in order to free up the necessary cash; and that is a substantial irritation.

A rather greater irritation, to my mind, is the restriction of your per-club player quota - meaning that you will be denied the opportunity to bring in a third player from the same club as your selected manager.

However, both of these annoyances pale into insignificance beside the three-week duration of the chip - coupled with the prohibition of using more than one chip at a time (it was not originally specified that the new chip would be bound by this old rule; but that point has now been clarified - to everyone's disadvantage). Being blocked from the possibility of using any other chip for three whole gameweeks is a HUGE handicap - one that should perhaps make all of us question whether we want to use this chip at all. Its potential rewards are indeed enormous (game-distorting, unfair), but the risks attendant upon it could also prove to be quite disastrous.

There are TWO 'blank gameweeks' in the latter part of the season (when some teams will miss their scheduled league fixtures because of the League Cup Final or the FA Cup Semi-Finals), followed by a pair of Double Gameweeks, in which the clubs who had games postponed will make them up by playing twice in a few days, within the same gameweek. There will now be an additional Double Gameweek, just for Liverpool and Everton (replacing the fixture cancelled a couple of weeks ago because of Storm Darragh). There may yet be others added to the schedule, because of more severe weather or other unexpected events.

Blank Gameweeks can affect multiple teams, and can easily wipe out half or more of your squad. And so, you really want to try to keep your Free Hit available to help protect you from the potentially devastating consequences of a big - and perhaps quite unexpected - Blank Gameweek.

Double Gameweeks are prized as particularly good occasions to try to take advantage of the game's regular bonus chips, the Triple Captain and Bench Boost. And it is often desirable to 'set up' for the Bench Boost by playing the second Wildcard a week or so before the target Double Gameweek, to optimise the squad (getting in as many players with double-fixtures as possible, and as many players as possible with the best fixtures) and to try to ensure that you will have a full bench for that week (which is the first essential for a successful Bench Boost).

Rescheduled fixtures typically only have their dates confirmed a fairly short time ahead. At the moment, there is still no date fixed for the postponed Everton v Liverpool match. It seems likeliest that it can be slotted into Gameweek 25 or Gameweek 28, or perhaps even as late as Gameweek 33.  But it is very possible that we still won't know when it is to be played when the 'Assistant Manager' chip first becomes available (after the deadline of Gameweek 23). Since almost everyone who hasn't yet used their Triple Captain chip is now hoping to play it on Mo Salah in that unique Double Gameweek for Liverpool, those people will probably feel precluded from trying to use the new chip until a new date for that missed Merseyside derby is announced.

Having the Free Hit available to help negotiate the Blank Gameweeks in GW29 (League Cup Final) or GW34 (FA  Cup Semi-Finals) is probably even more valuable - if not essential. 

And the 'BIG' Double Gameweek following the postponements for the FA Semis (probably in GW36 or 37, but possibly earlier; GW33 also looks like an 'available slot') is the prime opportunity this season - the only obviously good one - to use the Bench Boost chip.

Because we don't know exactly when these Double Gameweeks will be - and we might not know for sure until just a week or two beforehand! - it's pretty much impossible to plan how to use the 'Assistant Manager' chip..... either to take advantage of them with that chip, or to avoid them so that we can use other chips instead. The bloated three-week duration of the chip makes it completely unmanageable.

So, many managers would probably have preferred to use a multi-week chip straight away in January. After that, there are few if any convenient gaps in the schedule that would allow you to play it without messing up your plans for your other chips. But the churlish FPL gnomes have strangely decided to delay the launch of the new 'Assistant Manager' chip until the beginning of February - so, it is now really difficult to identify good opportunities to use it without compromising, or completely abandoning, your original chip strategy. Most of us are looking at trying fit 7 weeks of chip play into just 15 gameweeks - and that's a huge headache.

Now, as I mentioned the other day, the 'Assistant Manager' chip is going to be worth far more than either of the two existing bonus chips - and probably far more than both of them combined - so it might be worth sacrificing your previous plans for these other chips in order to try to maximise your return from the new chip. Some folks have conjectured that it could be worth more to play the 'Assistant Manager' chip in a Double Gameweek (although I think it would probably not yield as much as a good Bench Boost return from a DGW; and perhaps not even quite as much as a really good Triple Captain return, unless you manage to successfully exploit the bonus for a result against a much higher-placed team in at least one of the two fixtures).

But this all becomes insanely complex to try to calculate. Because.... there are very limited opportunities to get a good return from any of the bonus chips; and so, where it seems that the 'best' week for two (or now, all three) of them might be the same, you have to try to estimate whether 'Chip A in Best Week' + 'Chip B in Second Best Week' is likely to be worth more or less than 'Chip B in Best Week' + 'Chip A in Second Best Week'. That's plenty hard enough with just two bonus chips that both benefit from Double Gameweeks; adding in a third - which has a longer duration, and might conceivably wipe out two opportunities (two Double Gameweek opportunities!) to play the other chips - makes it close-to-uncomputable.

Moreover, it can be really valuable to stay flexible - and opportunistic - in your approach to the bonus chips. It may be that at a certain point in the season, you find yourself with an unexpectedly strong bench, and suddenly - for the first time in ages -  everyone appears to be fit and likely to start.... in a week (though only a regular Single Gameweek) where almost everyone has a really good fixture. When circumstances come together for you like that, it's probably going to be your best chance to use the Bench Boost chip - much better than gambling on getting good fixtures in a Double Gameweek (because you don't know for sure who's going to be playing who until very shortly beforehand) and that you're going to have everyone still be fit for it (even if you 'set up' with a Wildcard in the week before, you can still be hit by a rash of last-minute injuries); this is particularly so when, this year, there's seemingly only going to be ONE 'big' Double Gameweek, and it doesn't fall until the very end of the season.

Something similar might happen with a Triple Captain opportunity. Although it's obviously much more difficult to get 15 fit players in your squad in a week when nearly all of them have good fixtures than it is to ensure that one of your handful of star players is fit to play in one of his most promising fixtures, and there are thus usually several tempting opportunities to risk the TC chip in a season,.... nevertheless, unexpected shifts in team form can suddenly make it appear that your best player's best chance of a big haul is in a different game to any of the ones most anticipated in the early part of the season.... perhaps it may even be in the next game.

Thus, I would argue, ruling yourself out of being able to play either of your bonus chips for three weeks at a time may have an enormous - and perhaps quite unforeseen - opportunity cost.

But ruling yourself out of being able to play the Free Hit could be.... absolutely catastrophic. More widespread and serious 'extreme weather' events than Storm Darragh could very conceivably wipe out most or a weekend's fixtures (or, occasionally, even all of them; but at least that's the same for everyone; and we'll all later enjoy an extra - HUGE - Double Gameweek!). So could other forms of disruption, such as a major terrorist incident or widespread industrial action or another pandemic scare, or.... well, King Charles is 76 years old, and hasn't been in the best of health; as we saw with his mother's death two years ago, the passing of a monarch could lead to major fixture rearrangements over two or three gameweeks across a season. 

Such eventualities might be relatively remote, but they're extremely possible. And if such a thing were to occur in a gameweek where someone has their 'Assistant Manager' chip in play..... they are terminally screwed. Small though the risk may appear to be, it's not one I'm sure I'd be willing to take.

But I really don't want to spend any time even attempting to address these endless conundrums. For me, the 'Assistant Manager' chip is a game-ruining abomination - and, in order to make sure that FPL does not try to make it (or, god help us, perhaps some other innovation that's even worse...) a recurring feature of the game, we really need to protest against the idea as strongly as possible, in as many different ways as possible.

I like the idea of simply refusing to use the chip. But I fear it will not be an emphatic enough gesture to have much impact on the FPL hierarchy. (Many FPL managers might simply forget to use the chip, or be too daunted by its complexity; and more and more managers get disillusioned with their progress and drop out of the game during the later stages of the season. So - a mass refusal to use the chip would not become apparent until the last opportunity to deploy it [GW36] has passed; and it might be largely masked by all these other reasons why the chip might have gone unused by many people.)

No, if we are to make the FPL 'bosses' take notice, I think we need to encourage as many people as possible to drop out of the game at the moment that this horrendously gimmicky new chip comes into force - immediately after Gameweek 23. [I did so, quitting after GW23 in hopes of setting an example for others.]

#QuitFPLinGW23         #DownWithTheNewChip

Dilemmas of the Week - GW17

Throughout this hectic December, the main uncertainties are likely to surround 'rest rotations' - and the sudden realisation of 'totting up' suspensions -  rather than injuries. These problems will surely intensify, now that we've moving into the crazily hectic holiday schedule.

So, what are the conundrums we face ahead of Gameweek 17?

Does anybody need to be moved out because of injury?

The big losses for FPL this week are Eberechi Eze (doubtful, with a sore foot), Ruben Dias (who has apparently suffered quite a serious muscle injury this week, and looks set to be out for at least a month), Ederson (who's picked up an unspecified 'leg injury' in training, and is now a doubt for this week at least), Nick Pope (who succumbed to a knee problem just before last week's game, and is also likely to be missing for at least a month), and Dwight McNeil (who's had another flare-up of his oingoing knee problem).

Danny Welbeck seems likely to be out for some time, with an ankle injury picked up in training just before last week's game. (The only surprise here is that he managed to last so long this time....  Maybe Evan Ferguson will get some regular game time now.)

Ethan Pinnock had to come off with a hamstring problem in the League Cup tie against Newcastle on Wednesday evening: not too serious, but will probably keep him out over Christmas. Sepp van den Berg suffered a groin strain in the warm-up for that match, so Brentford are looking very stretched in defence now. And Thiago looks likely to miss out again, suffering from a mysterious problem recently described by Thomas Frank as a 'joint infection'(??). This probably means that Schade (or Carvalho?) might get a start this week.

Romeo Lavia also picked up a hamstring problem just before last weekend's game, and doesn't look likely to be available for Chelsea this week.

Mason Mount had to go off early on in the game against City, and will apparently now be out for several weeks (although the injury is as yet unspecified). Victor Lindelof also had to go off in that game with a muscle problem and will be unavailable for a while. And Matthijs De Ligt is also doubtful, having missed Thursday's Cup game against Spurs with 'illness'.

Kenny Tete suffered a knee injury in an awkward collision at Anfield last week, and is set to be absent for 8-10 weeks.

Leicester goalie Mads Hermansen went off at half-time against Newcastle with a groin strain. Van Nistelrooy is apparently hopeful that he might be able to return this week, but that's very much a 50-50. I doubt if anyone is eager to take a punt on his deputy Danny Ward, though - even if he is the only potentially starting keeper at 4.0 million.

Murillo and Ryan Yates are both doubts for Forest, having had to go off with knocks last week.

Kyle Walker-Peters missed the League Cup tie against Liverpool on Wedneday night with a calf strain, but might be back this weekend.

Destiny Udogie (fatigue) and Timo Werner (illness) also missed the Cup game on Thursday, but should be OK for the Liverpool game tomorrow.

José Sá is still recovering from his minor shoulder injury, and might again yield to Sam Johnstone in the Wolves goal.

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

Marc Cucurella and Rayan Ait-Nouri are suspended this week, after getting themselves 'sent off' for second yellow card offences after the the final whistle in last week's games. (Cucurella's up to six cards now, so will miss the next game week as well with a totting-up ban.) Amazingly, Ait-Nouri seems to have escaped any additional punishment for the touchline fracas he got inolved in at the end of the Ipswich game last Saturday.

Daniel Munoz, Andreas Perreira, Joelinton, Liam Delap, and Carlos Soler all serve one-match bans for clocking up five bookings. At least Rodrigo Betancur has reached the last game of his 7-match ban at Spurs.

Armando Broja, on loan with Everton, is precluded from selection against parent club Chelsea (though he hasn't been starting anyway).

Mykhailo Mudryk is 'provisionally' suspended, pending further investigation into why he failed a test for a 'prohibited substance' this week (might just be that he's been taking the wrong cold medicine, rather than being a coke fiend... no details as yet). Hardly matters for FPL, since he hasn't been starting in the Premier League.

Matheus Cunha has apparently been spared sanction so far for his assault on an Ipswich staff member at the end of last week's game. A lengthy ban is surely inevitable (and indeed, the incident might also result in criminal charges against him), but the FA are dragging their feet on deciding on an appropriate sentence in this matter. It seems unlikely that they will announce a ban on Saturday morning - but new Wolves manager Vitor Pereira said on Friday afternoon that he was still 'unsure' if Cunha would be involved against Leicester.

And Dele Alli has been released by Everton this week. He hasn't appeared for them for two-and-a-half years, so hasn't been relevant in FPL; but let's hope he's now able to revive his career with the rumoured move to up-and-coming Como, newly promoted to Italy's Serie A.

Did anyone give other cause to consider dropping them?

Rasfhord and Garnacho were both dropped from United's match-day squad to face City last week. Amorim insisted that this was a one-off selection decision, that they would be considered for selection again this week; and he has subsequently added this week that everyone potentially "has a future" at the club. However, this decision was a pretty emphatic declaration of dissatisfaction with the pair. And Rashford has apparently acknowledged in an interview this week that he expects to be leaving the club in January. I would be very surprised if Garnacho does not join him, as he is the player in the squad most obviously unsuited to Amorim's style of play. However, at the moment, that's all still a bit speculative; and even if they are headed out the door, they might still get some starts over the next few weeks - and be eager to 'put themselves in the shop window', apply their maximum efforts to try to secure a better move for themselves. Though I really don't think they - or United - have been playing well enough to inspire anyone to give them a chance in FPL at this point.

Given that even fairly trivial 'violent conduct' against a fellow player during the match has routinely been punished with a minimum 3- or 4-game ban lately, I can't see Cunha get anything less that a 5-game suspension for roughing up a 'civilian'; and 8 or 10 is not inconceivable. I don't see that it makes much difference, though (except to a possible purchaser in the January transfer window!), since Wolves don't have another likely winnable game until around the end of February.. And, given that they've lost their last 3 'easy' games, it's difficult to fancy their chances even against Leicester this week. Definitely long past time to sell Cunha and Ait-Nouri (and any other Wolves assets!), I think.

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

Amad Diallo has been on the brink of becoming one of my 'Picks of the Week' for about three weeks now...  He single-handedly stole the late win in last week's Manchester derby. And he just had yet another stormer in the eventful League Cup quarter-final against Spurs on Thursday night. I still hesitate on him because it's not yet absolutely clear that he'll start every game (or what position he'll start in!) - nor indeed, if he is necessarily one the best three picks from United (Bruno Fernandes, Onana, Mazaraoui, Dalot and De Ligt are all popular picks at the moment) or if he is absolute leader in the crowded 'budget midfielder' space (Enzo Fernandez, Rutter, Iwobi, Kluivert, Schade, Buonanotte, Hudson-Odoi, and perhaps Szmodics, Jota Silva, Ismaila Sarr and Jacob Murphy as well, all making strong claims recently).

Newcastle, especially Gordon and Isak, and Lewis Hall (bouncing back strongly from an utterly horrible performance the gameweek before), were looking sharp again. But my enthusiasm is tempered by their likely loss of Pope for a month or so (they did look much less settled when they had to rely on Dubravka in goal through the second half of last season), and by the fact that their away form has always tended to be quite disappointing.... and their dreadful lack of consistency so far this season. All three of them are going to be worth having at some point this season - but maybe not quite yet. [Cue immediate hattrick from Isak! I think that was not reasonably foreseeable...]

A lot of people seem to have been getting quite excited about Ismaila Sarr's brace (nearly a hattrick!) against Brighton last week. But I still haven't seen any evidence of consistency from him; and he isn't likely to be nearly as effecitive with Eze out of the team.

BEST OF LUCK, EVERYONE!

Let the Revels commence!

 

I've always been rather fonder of the Roman Saturnalia than any of the later - more piously theistic - winter festivals that have grown up since: just a solid week or so of heavy partying (and assorted debauchery, as often as not), to take one's mind off the grimness of the shortest days of the year.

The holiday schedule in the English Premier League seems to be even more crazily compressed than usual this year, with four full gameweeks shoehorned into barely more than a fortnight over Christmas and the New Year.... and then, after a rather token 'winter break', two more in the space of 5 or 6 days in mid-January.  Try not to get caught out by any of the FPL Gameweek deadlines.

They are as follows:

Gameweek 17:  Saturday/Sunday 21st-22nd December - DEADLINE Sunday 31st, 11am UTC

Gameweek 18:  Thursday/Friday  26th-27th December - DEADLINE Thursday 26th, 11am UTC

Gameweek 19:  Sunday/Monday/(Wednesday)  29th-30th December (and 1st January) -

DEADLINE  Sunday 29th, 1pm UTC

Gameweek 20:  Saturday/Sunday/Monday  4th-6th January - DEADLINE Saturday 4th, 11am UTC

Gameweek 21:  Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday  14th-16th January - DEADLINE  Tuesday 14th, 6pm UTC

Gameweek 22:  Saturday/Sunday/Monday  18th-20th January - DEADLINE  Saturday 18th, 11am UTC

I don't know about the players, but I think I'll need A REST after all that!

Happy Holidays to all (such few readers as I yet have here...)!!!  

And may the New Year bring us all better fortune in our dratted addiction. Fantasy Premier League!!!

A little bit of Zen (21)

 

"We have to continually be jumping off cliffs and developing our wings on the way down."

Kurt Vonnegut

This is a fabulous short video - made as a Master's graduation project in computer animation in 2006 by Dony Permedi.  A little Christmas treat!

Not (quite) a 'Pick of the Week'

I had thought of nominating Amad Diallo as one of my 'Picks of the Week' two or three weeks back. I hesitated because 'Ruben Roulette' was always likely to be a problem in the new manager's early days, and United's fixture schedule didn't look great. And indeed, young Diallo was dropped to the bench for the first half of the defeat by Arsenal, while United were beaten by Forest next time out after that, and only just squeaked a late win against an ever-deteriorating City last week. So, I feel my caution was well justified.

However, he's now racked up 44 points in the last 6 games, and his price has shot up by 200k in the last week-and-a-half, and he might be due for another bump at any moment. I do rather fear I might have missed the boat on him. Indeed, with over 400,000 new owners piling in for him so far this week, he looks certain to receive the (usually ill-omened!) accolade of being the week's 'Most Transferred-In Player'. Now, that rush of enthusiasm for him might make him a candidate for one of my less laudatory 'Sheep Pick' posts; but as I said last week in regard to Enzo, sometimes a mass surge of enthusiasm is well justified. Diallo, for me, is looking much the most promising pick from Manchester United at the moment. While there have been some other impressive performances under Amorim so far - notably Mazraoui and De Ligt, and of course Bruno - I think they're all simply good players, doing what they normally do; and, although they might be playing in a slightly adapted role, a different area of the field to what they're more used to, they are essentially playing in the same style and making the same sort of contribution to the game as they had under Ten Hag.... as they would under any tactical system. Diallo is the only United player who looks like he's absolutely playing his socks off to impress the new manager.... and is actually thriving under Amorim's system of play.

And he only costs 5 million (well, 5.2 now... and counting...).

So, yes, he's definitely worth considering for a cheap fifth midfielder. However, I'm still slightly wary of getting him just yet.

Although the worst of United's December fixture speed-bump is behind them, I think Bournemouth this weekend won't be an easy game for them; and they still have to face Newcastle and Liverpool either side of the New Year. And they're really not yet playing all that well as a team. They're still adapting to Amorim's tactical ideas; and the selections are still all over the place - never the same lineup up two gameweeks in a row (Ruben, my boy, I'm afraid this is being dangerously overdone!).

Moreover, a lot of the boy wonder's new purchasers are getting rather over-excited about the (probably unfounded) notion that he'll be even more of an attacking threat 'now that he's being played as one of the 10s rather than as a wing-back'. Um, he's not. Not yet. That was a one-off experiment in the City game. Amorim wanted to try Bruno out in a deeper role (which he might not want to do again); and he wanted to deliver a wrist-slap to two of his more obvious No. 10 candidates, Rashford and Garnacho (which he might or might not want to do again...). Diallo might well be back at wing-back this weekend (on either side!). Or dropped to the bench again. With Amorim's selections so wildly unpredictable at the moment, you just can't have any confidence in who he'll pick or where he'll try to play them.

Yes, this sudden switch of position actually alarmed me, more than anything: it made me think that if the erratic new coach hasn't yet decided where to play Diallo, maybe he hasn't even fully decided that he wants to play him (regularly) at all....  And it should be noted that in a lot of his comments before and after that City game, he was stressing that it was unfair to ask too much too soon from young players. Now, he might just have been talking about the psychological burden of inflated expectations; but he might also have been thinking in terms of minutes, of physical stress and the drain on stamina. So, I don't think we can yet trust that Diallo is an absolutely nailed starter.

Competition for FPL squad places is also a deterring factor. Bruno Fernandes has also been in excellent form in recent weeks, and a lot of people (over 14%) now own him. United certainly aren't yet good enough for anyone to be doubling up on their midfield, so that's an either/or dilemma. Even more importantly, Chelsea's Enzo Fernandez, with his form and upcoming fixtures, has become clearly the best of the sub-6-million-pound midfield options for now. And, although I tend to feel that you shouldn't need or want more than one budget midfielder, there are a number of other very tempting options in that price bracket: Rutter, Kluivert, Iwobi, Hudson-Odoi.

So, I'll be keeping a very close eye on Amad Diallo. And I think I'll be moving in for him as soon as my current 5th or 4th midfield picks falter at all. (Or maybe as soon as he gets another double-digit haul, and his price threatens to jump even higher!)  But for now, I find him - just about - resistible. [Damn - he scored another goal last night in the League Cup quarter-final against Spurs. I am so tempted....]

The Thai commentators I have to endure for most of my live coverage at the moment rather amusingly pronounce his name as Armadillo - hence my opening photo.

I HATE the 'Assistant Manager' Chip (EXTENDED version)

When the FPL Facebook page first announced the new chip last week, I was so appalled that I left a comment likening the revelation to.... waking up on Christmas morning to find a turd in your stocking.

I explained briefly the other day why I didn't like the newly announced addition to Fantasy Premier League this year - the 'Assistant Manager' Chip to be made available in the second half of the season.

Today I thought I'd take the time to enumerate my objections to it more fully:

1)  It is a radical departure from ALL previous chips introduced in this, or any similar game, or even just mooted for possible introduction.... or dreamed of in jest! Fantasy games for international tournaments have typically had a chip where you can get a doubled-points 'captain' bonus without needing to designate a captain, automatically receiving the addition for your highest-performing player in the gameweek (I like that one...), or a suped-up 'Free Hit' where you can remake your squad for a single gameweek with the additional advantage of having the budget cap removed (just a slight riff on the two 'squad makeover' chips we're familiar with in FPL). Over the past year, FPL has been running occasional 'side games' under the 'Fantasy Challenge' banner, which have offered novelty points systems such as defenders getting more points, or forwards getting more points, or players from particular clubs getting more points - inviting you to consider a major squad makeover for one week, to adapt to this modified points weighting. And this has prompted many FPL managers on the forums to joke about even wackier new bonus possibilities.... such as extra points for players with beards, or players with double-barrelled names (Definitional problem: Does a double-barrelled name have to be hyphenated? Sorry, Emile, yes it does!). But the point about all of these is that they are just small modifications to the existing structure of the game, simply allowing you to earn more points - for one week only - for things you already earn points for.

Sometimes, variations in the rules might allow you to earn points in slightly different ways, for different kinds of game actions. In the last Fantasy Euros tournament, additional points were awarded for 'ball recoveries'; although it was rather unclear how this was defined or tabulated, it did add an interesting extra wrinkle to the game, potentially giving a big boost to the points returns from defenders and defensive midfielders. And the popular Swedish Fantasy Football game, Allsvenskan, does something similar, wtih additional defensive points available for actions like this, and additional attacking points awarded for every 2 'key passes' (rather than faffing around with the obscure and often perversely erratic 'Bonus Points System' that FPL inflicts on us!). But again, these are just small modifications to the points structure: we're still getting points for defined game actions by individual players week by week.

By offering points for team results over a number of weeks, this new chip falls completely OUTSIDE the current scope of the game.

2)  By extending the duration of the chip far beyond that of 'normal' chips (which have until now, without exception, been effective for one gameweek only), by adding in 'charges' for it (a sum of money to be deducted from squad budget and an impact on your club quota for players!), by making it variable from week-to-week (this wasn't mentioned in the early posts about the chip, and I think might be part of a series of subsequent 'revisions' they've made to the rules: you can now change your choice of 'assistant manager' in each of the 3 weeks that the chip is in play). by awarding points for such a swathe of different things (wins and draws and goals and clean sheets.... and additional bonuses for getting a result against teams 5 or more places higher in the table!!), they have made the new chip absurdly over-complicated - needlessly difficult to understand, difficult to evaluate (this alone may, I suspect, put many people off using the bloody thing at all).

3)  The imposition of a 'transfer cost' for your chosen manager is particularly irksome. Although the sums of money demanded are relatively trivial (from 0.5 to 1.5 million), you will - if you're making as close to full use of your budget as possible (which you should always be striving to do!) - find yourself obliged to make at least 1 or 2 transfers to free up some extra cash before you can activate the chip... and make do with a slightly suh-standard squad of players while the chip remains active. Moreover, they've added in (this feature appeared to be absent in the first published version of 'the rules') the provision that subsequent changes of manager choice within the three-week period of the chip being active will cost you a transfer.... so, that's a bummer too.

4)  The additional bonus for team performances against clubs higher in the table seems to me to be a particularly unnecessary over-elaboration. Originally, there was no explanation offered of how the 5-place gap between clubs was to be defined. It might have been at the time of kick-off of the game in question, at the deadline of the Gameweek in which the match is played, or at the deadline of the Gameweek in which the chip first becomes active,.... or at the moment that the chip is played (all perfectly possible, and all potentially very different!!). 

It now seems that they intend that the gap is measured at the start of the Gameweek in which the indiviidual match is played (although the wording still isn't absolutely clear on that point: "at the start of the Gameweek" isn't enough, when a number of different Gameweeks mght be understood as relevant to the applicaton of the rule; they really need a few more words in there to specify what they mean with absolute precision). And the (late added?) ability to change 'assistant managers' from one Gameweek to the next potentially gets over the problem that it would be nearly impossible to predict where or how big gaps in the league table would be more than one week in advance (particularly with the middle of the table so congested as it is so far this year: there are currently only 8 points separating 3rd and 13th positions, and only 5 points between 4th and 12th!). However, I think most FPL managers were originally expecting - and probably hoping - that this would be a set-and-forget deal where you simply chose one manager for the chip for all three gameweeks. (The 'club quota' rule will restrict the extent to which anyone can take advantage of this facility: you're not going to want to waste transfers on removing someone from your squad when you happen to have three players from the club with the most promising manager for that gameweek; you'll probably rather pass on that manager option than use a transfer, and sacrifice a top player [when you treble up on a club, it's because you regard all three of those players as extremely valuable....]. Hence, most FPL managers will have at least one, maybe two or three clubs whose managers are effecively excluded from consideration for this chip.)

And one final potential problem on this: the league's ranking is occasionally determined on alphabetical order alone. Now, this is really just a formatting convention; I believe there are 'tie-break' rules in place - even if it's ultimately just a coin-toss?! - for deciding the crucial European qualification and relegation places at the end of the season. And in practice, everyone considers teams with equal points, goal difference, and goals scored to be in a tie - even though one of them will be listed higher than the other. It would seem rather unfair, for the application of this aspect of the chip, if two such clubs were not to be treated equally - i.e., that they're not both regarded as 5 places above your manager's team, even though one of them is listed only 4 places above. It might be an unlikely eventuality, perhaps one that won't arise this year; but it is something that the FPL gnomes ought to have considered and clarified in framing the rules for the new chip - and they have omitted to do so.

5)  There is, I feel, a dangerous lack of proportionality about this chip. It is potentially worth 2 to 3 times as much as the other two bonus chips combined! And since it is offering points for team results as well as game actions, and over a number of weeks rather than just one, its minimum return will certainly be far higher (as the other chips carry a significant risk of returning zero points, or close-to-zero; the 'Assistant Manager' chip clearly does not); its average return is likely to be far higher too. And it's difficult to gauge what its upper-end might be; but certainly far, far more - perhaps over just one week, and certainly over its full three-week span - than the Triple Captain chip... and substantially more than the Bench Boost (unless you manage to get a very, very good return from that in a Double Gameweek).

Thus, it will be the single biggest determinant of FPL rank outcomes this year. (Well, after terrible refereeing decisions, anyway....)  And that, to me, does not seem FAIR.

6)  There are still a number of lacunae in the 'rules', unexplained gaps about how things are supposed to work with this chip.

They seem to have now added in a gloss about a manager leaving a club having no impact on the chip: you will continue to get the points from that manager's (former) club, unless you select a new manager. (Thus, it's not really a 'manager' chip at all, but a 'club' chip.) That seems somewhat illogical and unfair: if you're supposed to be getting points for the manager, you would expect to stop getting points for him if he loses his job... or start getting points for him from a new club, if he switches clubs.

And this still doesn't address the issue that there can be a number of other ways in which the manager may not actually be 'managing' the club, without having left it. If his assistant has taken over because he's absent with illness or a personal problem - why should you still get points for your manager? If he's serving a touchline ban and not able to coach the team directly this week - why should you still get points for you manager?  If he's been suspended because of allegations of misconduct - why should you still get points for your manager?  Most people would surely feel that you shouldn't (just as you shouldn't - but apparently will - when he's been sacked by his club!). 

However, at the moment, I suppose we must assume that the intention is that this is really a 'club' chip, and you keep getting points from the designated club, regardless of the status of the manager - but this hasn't yet been explicitly stated. And I suspect this has the potential to cause some controversy later on - particularly if we had a manager suspended by his club in a 'Me Too' case.

Moreover, the rules also fail so far to specify whether you can choose to go without an 'assistant manager' during one of the gameweeks that the chip has been activated for (if you perhaps decided that you'd just much rather bring a more expensive player into your starting eleven than continue with a manager that week). I suspect that the interface won't let you remove a manager without adding a replacement; but they don't appear to have said as much (yet). 

In addition, the rules appear to remain silent thus far on whether there is any possibility to cancel the chip before its three-week span is up. As I went on to elaborate more fully here, a raft of unexpected postponements could be devastating if you're not able to to use the Free Hit to create a workaround squad. And if you had your 'Assistant Manager Chip' in play in such a gameweek, you'd almost certainly want to cancel it, if you could. And to me, it would seem fair that you should be able to do so - voluntarily giving up the benefits of the remaining weeks of the chip (perhaps even all three of them!) for some more immediate advantage. However, I imagine that the absence of provision for this in the rules is intended to mean that it won't be possible. [This point was subsequently clarified; but it had not appeared in the first published version of the 'rules' for the new chip.]

I think there's potentially also some doubt as to whether you could choose to use the 'Assistant Manager Chip' for less than the full three weeks by playing it right at the end of the season. Again, I suspect the chip will cease to be available after Gameweek 36; but this hasn't been specified as yet.

7)  There is also - as yet - no reference to whether the chosen manager would be subject to penalties for receiving yellow or red cards in a game. The commonsense answer would be YES, since the chip is represented as making the selection of a manager directly analogous to that of your players. But since the rules omit to say anything about this, we should probably assume that the answer is in fact intended by FPL to be NO.

8)  For some unstated reason, the launch of the chip has been delayed until Gameweek 24, at the beginning of February (originally it was said that it would become available at the beginning of the second half of the season - i.e. from Gameweek 20). Because of the chip's bloated duration, this actually leaves fairly little time in which to take advantage of it; and it will be difficult to juggle it around other priorities for using the other chips. [I discussed this problem much more thoroughly in a further post a few days later.]  

Also, of course, with the late-season reschedulings around the League Cup Final and the FA Quarters and Semi-Finals, we often don't get three weeks' notice of the new fixture dates. So, trying to plan how to use this new chip alongside the existing ones is just going to be horrendous.

Again, there was originally no explicit statement as to whether the new chip would follow the usual rule that only one chip may be played at a time. Since it is utterly unlike any of the other chips in any other respect, it was not unreasonable to suppose that it might not abide by the one-at-a-time rule - and that is what many FPL managers seemed to hopefully assume at first. But now there has been a clarification that other chips will not be available during the three weeks this chip is active. And that..... is a HUGE pain-in-the-arse.

This 'Assistant Manager' Chip is just a HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE, HORRIBLE idea - ill thought-out, clunkily implemented, unclear in its details, maddeningly over-complex, utterly divorced from the usual format of the game we so love. It actually threatens to ruin the game this year.

And I would strongly recommend people to boycott using this silly chip.... or to give up the game altogether, before it starts being spoiled by people using the chip - in Gameweek 23.  

#QuitFPLinGW23         #DownWithTheNewChip

I HATE the 'Assistant Manager' chip (Short version)

 

Last week, FPL unveiled its big innovation for the second half of this season: the new 'chip', previously identified only as a 'Mystery Chip', is now revealed as the 'Assistant Manager' chip.

In the intitial announcements on the FPL Facebook page, there was a terrifying lack of detail about how this - insanely complicated - new bonus was actually going to work. And although they rushed to revise and amplify the rules concerning it, I fear there are still a few holes in them. I think I will have a more extended rant enumerating the many insanities and inanities of this silly new gimmick soon; but I will try to keep this initial response to the news fairly brief.

What I love about this game of ours is its simplicity. It is closely tied to the game we love to watch every week, English Premier League football. It makes you a virtual 'manager', allowing you to assemble a squad of players and choose a starting eleven each gameweek, and to earn points for specified game actions by the individual players you've chosen within each gameweek.

I've said before that I don't particularly like the game's current 'bonus chips' (a relatively late introduction), as they are superfluous to the regular gameplay, and an irksome additional element of randomization (you only have about a one-in-three chance of getting much from them, and perhaps only a one-in-ten chance or less of doing really well from one of them). However, they do at least fit within the regular structure of the game: they simply give you more points for things you already earn points for.

This new bonus chip is something completely different, it falls entirely outside the points structure of the game as we know it. Instead of points for individual player performances in a single gameweek, it gives us points for team results over a run of gameweeks. So, it is essentially a completely separate side-game crudely grafted on to the game that we enjoy at the moment. 

Moreover, with the existing bonus chips that I don't like, there is at least some proportionality: the chips can be worth little or nothing if you get unlucky with them, and rarely yield much more than 15-20 points for each. This new chip is potentially worth such a HUGE number of points that it will completely distort the outcomes of the game - and will thus, alas, be impossible for most FPL managers to resist using (though I'd really love to see a mass boycott of this abomination).

To make things even worse, the new chip doesn't just offer points for one thing, but for a whole range of things: not just for wins or draws, but also for goals and clean sheets. And it offers yet a further set of potential bonus points for gaining a win or draw against a team currently well above your chosen manager's team in the league ranking. And, unlike any of the other chips that have ever been tried in this or any similar game, they want to impose 'charges' for it. You will need to give up a small amount of your player budget to play the chip, and also sacrifice part of your player quota from the club you pick for it - over-complication upon over-complication upon over-complication, all completely needless.

It might be an intriguing challenge, but... it has absolutely NOTHING TO DO WITH THE REGULAR GAME. It is a gimmicky side-game idea that would be better accommodated within the occasional 'Fantasy Challenge' series.

Luck-o-Meter (16)

Credit to Everton for frustraing Arsenal so effectively. Pickford played an especially crucial role (in denying those of us who'd given Saka the captain's armband for this one our expected points bonanza...), pulling off one especially smart save from Saka at the foot of his near post, and then, minutes later, cutting out a fierce square ball across the six-yard box from him that was destined to be a tap-in for Havertz. And oh my god, what was that penalty decision near the end?? Partey gets clattered by two Everton players, Mykolenko both tripping him with his extended front leg, and dangerously flattening his standing leg with the knee of his trailing leg as he dives in from recklessly far away, and then as Partey is starting to fall, Doucoure runs into the back of him - which should have been a foul in itself, even if the first challenge wasn't. Presumably, the referee and the VAR official felt that Mykolenko 'got something on the ball' - well, maybe (very, very doubtful in the initial challenge; he toe-poked it away after flattening Partey, in a separate movement, so that obviously can't count), but that's not an absolute defence if you completely take out an opponent's legs. That is one of the most obvious and unarguable penalties I've seen all season. (And I don't say that merely because my boy Saka would obviously have converted the kick, and earned 7 or 8 more points for the match, doubled.... Athough, damn, YES, that rankles.)

Credit to Fulham too, for - yet again - having the organisation and the desire to upset one of the 'big boys' (strange, though, that they're often so much less impressive against their mid-table peers...), but.... Andy Robertson should not have been sent off. And, as far as we could tell, VAR didn't even consider the referee's decision on the foul, only whether the whole passage of play might have been rendered moot by a possible offside against Antonee Robinson when the ball was initially released to him down the right flank. That was yet another of those that was decided on a ridiculously narrow margin, and the screen resolution on the still frames shared on TV just wasn't good enough to confirm a gap of an inch or two (as with so many of these calls we've seen this year, it was so close that the issue of the timing of the ball being played would be crucial; and it's highly doubtful whether the correct still frame had been chosen, or indeed whether any single frame could have been definitive). To the naked eye, he certainly looked offside; and it was impossible to see why the decision 'lines' had been drawn where they were. I strongly suspect that this one might have been swayed by an optical illusion, by a mere assumption that Virgil Van Dijk's toe was further back than it actually was - as you expect the defender's foot to be pointing towards the byline, but Virgil's foot was actually turned inwards quite a lot, so it was almost parallel to the byline. Anyhow, the decision on the foul was ridiculous: the ball was running away from Harry Wilson, he was chasing it towards the middle of the pitch, not directly towards the goal, and there was another defender in the middle who could have put in a challenge or a block if he had recovered it to have an attempt at goal himself; but the ball did break to Raul Jimenez, and the ref played an 'advantage' to allow him to try to score (and he really should have done) - so, clearly there was no question of a 'denial of a goal-scoring opportunity'. (And I'm really not sure of the rules on this any more, but doesn't an offence like that have to be 'deliberate'?? I honestly thought Robertson's 'challenge' looked accidental, as if he just ran into Wilson.)  So, yet another huge refereeing cock-up, which might well have turned the course of the game - and maybe even the championship. (Not that I have much sympathy for Liverpool: they've definitely enjoyed the 'rub of the green' so far this season, with a lot of dodgy decisions going their way; this really felt like a fair evening out of their luck.)

After a bright start to Van Nistelrooy's stewardship at Leicester, they're back to their old selves again, defending like a gaggle of old washerwomen...  It didn't help that they lost their outstanding goalkeeper Hermansen (to a groin strain, apparently) at half-time. Newcastle were somewhere near their best again, especially Anthony Gordon (another BPS travesty that he somehow missed out on any bonus points here) - although the absence of Pope will be a worry, since their form did drop off while they had Dubravka in goal last season. And although the BBC pundits were strangely criticising Bruno Guimaraes for a supposed 'dive' in the penalty area, I thought Westergaard clearly ran into the back of him - more than enough contact for a penalty.

Wolves did well to get themselves back into the game against Ipswich in the second half, but they should never have let a visiting team - particularly a fellow bottom-end struggler - get so on top at the beginning of the game. And they yet again got caught out at a set piece to throw away the hard-earned point at the death. Ugly scenes after the end of the game saw the ridiculously over-popular Ait-Nouri (still somehow at 14% ownership, despite just 4pts in 3 straight defeats prior to this match) receive a second yellow card after the final whistle for getting involved in a scuffle on the touchline (with whom? not sure!); and I suspect he might end up with more than a one-game ban for that. His teammate Cunha also piled in to some argey-bargey with one of the Ipswich staff and was lucky to escape a card - a red card. TV cameras clearly show him slapping the guy across the back of the head with his forearm, then shoving him in the face and ripping his glasses off; I think that will probably land him with a lengthy ban too. At least all of this isn't likely to be Gary O'Neill's problem much longer.

More controversy - and bad refereeing - at the City Ground in the late match. First off, we had Morgan Rogers's penalty appeal being rejected. That, I thought, was fair enough, on balance: the contact - the defender grabbing his wrist to pull him back - had started well outside the area; and Rogers should already have been penalised for grabbing handfuls of the opponent's shirt just before this. But the VAR determination of the incident on the basis that the holding 'did not affect play' was ridiculous: it clearly stopped Rogers reaching the ball. Villa fans are also probably a bit miffed - although, strangely, none of the players seemed to complain about it at the time - that Anderson had bundled over Cash to win the ball at the start of the move that produced Milenkovic's late winner. The referee was unsighted; but VAR is supposed to review potential fouls in the build-up to a goal, and conspicuously failed to do so here. That was a bit of an odd goal too, in that Martinez was perhaps a bit lucky not to have it credited against him as an 'own goal', since he caught it... and then dropped it over his goal-line. We don't like to see those taken away from the attacking player, and it was an awkward one to handle, a firm header directed into his midriff - perhaps never fully under his control as he fell backwards trying to gather it more securely; but we have sometimes seen those called an 'own goal'. Still, the away fans will probably pardon this rare bit of clumsiness from the Argentinian because he had earlier pulled off a truly remarkable instinctive save to claw a ball back from behind his goal-line. But good grief, yet another of those ridiculously tight - and unconvincing - offside decisions against Elanga to deny Chris Wood a goal! It's not just the technical shortcomings of VAR at fault here; we really need a radical rule change to make these incidents more effectively police-able - including the recognition that you simply can't make accurate determinations to a matter of inches, and shouldn't try.

Brighton, facing their 'derby' rivals, Palace, produced a strangely flat performance - and some more dreadful defending - to allow the visitors to get well on top. But for Munoz having a goal ruled out (surely correctly) for Sarr having pushed over a Brighton defender in supplying the assist for it (and what a surprising 'Man of the Match' he was!!) and Nketiah fluffing a late one-on-one,... and Guehi suffering a really unlucky ricochet to gift the home side a late consolation own-goal, this might have been a real landslde. Although Brighton did mount more pressure in the second-half, with Enciso being their main inspiration - and Henderson had to pull off a string of sharp saves to preserve the clean sheet for most of the game. Palace are finally starting to build some positive momentum, with the back three, in particular, now looking very robust. A knock for Eze could be a bit of a worry, though.

The only real excitement from the City v United clash came in the pre-match news, with Garnacho and Rasfhford being omitted from the squad (a chatter-inducing 'statement' from Amorim, though scarcely a 'surprise', as these were obviously the two players who least fitted his preferred system of play, and hence the two likeliest to be sold or loaned out next month; this development was certainly not as much of a shock as the abrupt falling-out with Dan Ashworth at the start of the week), and Ederson being suddenly restored to the City goal, apparently without a word of explanation from Pep. The game itself was a bit stale, an uninspiring clash of struggling 'mid-table' sides! United should surely have had an earlier penalty when Dias hung his leg out across Hojlund without getting anywhere near the ball; it was a weird challenge, more of an attempt to block the attacker's path than a trip; and Hojlund made it look as if 'he went down easily' - but there was definitely contact, and you can't fling your leg across a player like that and escape consequences. It didn't make any difference to the ultimate result; but a lot of FPL managers who were on Bruno this week can feel a little aggrieved that he only registered 1 goal rather than 2 (although perhaps the match's most surprising moment was him squandering a golden chance to grab the equaliser from open play when he was put clean through by a delightfully weighted reverse pass from Hojlund). Well, there was also, of course, a huge slice of luck in Gvardiol's opening goal, since DeBruyne's cross took a massive deflection (how does Kevin still get the assist for this?!) off Diallo's attempt to block it, and looped rather fortuiitously straight on to his head - even Pep looked dismayed, embarrassed rather than celebratory at getting the breakthrough this way. And then a superb late winner from Diallo!!! Lots of surprises here. And yes, there is a strong case that Walker should have been sent off in the first half: one yellow card for the petulant, violent shove on Hojlund, and another for then pretending that the Dane had headbutted him in response. It's a pity that kind of shameful play-acting can't earn a straight red; but a double-yellow here would have been quite justified.

Chelsea perhaps weren't quite at their best in the evening kick-off, but still dominated Brentford - and could have won more comfortably if Jackson hadn't muffed a sitter in the first-half. But Carvalho nearly got Brentford back in the game when he smashed a close-range effort against the underside of the crossbar. However, Chelsea should probably have had at least one penalty before that; there were a number of instances of heavy 'wrestling' going on in the Brentford box at set-pieces, one with Colwill being pushed to the floor (by Lewis-Potter, I think?) that looked a stone-cold penalty - but VAR, taking the weekend off, apparently didn't even glance at any of them. Cucurella getting himself a second yellow for an altercation with some Brentford players after the final whistle was a bitter pill for those who - like me! - have recently brought him into their squads. Palmer once again played a fantastic game, without picking up any FPL points for himself; this will no doubt precipitate another mass sell-off by 'the sheep' (I hope they will be duly punished by another huge haul from him against Everton next week!!). It was also a bit of a disappointment for many that Mbeumo was able to steal a consolation goal with a late breakaway - and so wipe out what had looked a certain Chelsea clean sheet (many managers now have Palmer and Enzo - or perhaps Madueke - and one of the defenders or Sanchez; so, that one little lapse by the Blues was a 6-point hit for them!!).

Spurs were not immediately missing their preferred central defensive pairing against largely toothless Southampton, and indeed felt able to field a 'B Team' for their visit to the south coast, with youngsters Bergvall, Gray, and particularly Djed Spence all having impressive games; and inspirational captain Son able to be taken off for a rest at half-time, with the result already safely beyond question. Southampton did rally slightly in the second half, managing to prevent any more leaks, and actually creating a few decent chances of their own through Tyler Dibling. But after this embarrassing demolition, it was no surprise that Russell Martin's departure was confirmed shortly after the game. No, the big surprise for me is that BBC's match report fan poll only ranks the outstanding James Maddison as Spurs' thirteenth best player on the night! WTF???  I wonder if some of the fanbase have turned against him, after his occasional benchings over recent weeks? He was clearly, by any conventional measure, the 'Man of the Match', scorer of two absolutely stunning goals, and involved in the creation of the others. This massive win made it a good week in FPL for Spurs fans (who often loyally hang on to the full quota of three of their players, regardless of the team's form or fixtures!). This was obviously a fixture that presented an excellent opportunity for some huge hauls; but the essence of 'Spursiness' is to constantly confound expectations, to surprisingly outplay better teams while often floundering against weaker ones. And their performances have been so flakey over the last few weeks, almost no-one other than diehard fans wanted to take a chance on their players this week - a reluctance we now regret!

A sharp performance from Lukas Fabianski in goal seems to have kept West Ham in the game at Bournemouth on Monday night (although match reports all seem to indicate slightly fewer than the '8 saves' he was credited with by FPL; and the highlights I just watched showed only 3!); however, Bournemouth's finishing was again poor, with a huge number of attempts on goal but most well off target. Apart from one neat curler from Bowen that hit the top of the crossbar, West Ham didn't generate much of an attacking threat, and their late penalty seemed unjust on the balance of play, as well as for the decision itself; the TV replays I saw did not even clearly show that the ball had touched Tyler Adams's hand; but the cross was fired at him from such close range, there wasn't much he could have done to get his hand out of the way. (And how does Wann-Bissaka earn an assist for that? That doesn't seem right, either! If a defender deliberately 'saves' a goal-bound shot, you deserve an assist for shooting, sure; but when you just play a hopeful ball into the box and it happens to hit someone's arm??) Fortunately for Bournemouth, they managed to win a free-kick a few minutes later, and Enes Unal managed to convert it from nearly 30 yards out, and bang in the middle of the goal.

Another poor week for refereeing, with the the denial of Partey's penalty one of the worst decisions of the season so far - but two or three other strong shouts ignored in other games as well; and the ridiculous sending-off of Andy Robertson changing the course of the Liverpool v Fulham game, while a couple of other red cards probably should have been shown elsewhere, but weren't; the penalty against Bournemouth probably shouldn't have been given, Forest's second goal should have been disallowed - but their earlier effort from Wood had been ruled out for a non-existent offside.....  Ugh!  Just a mess of really bad decisions.

There were some goalkeeping heroics from Martinez, Pickford, Henderson, and Fabianski - and also an almighty goalkeeping cock-up from Martinez. And some fantastic goals from Diallo, Cucurella, Maddison...

Everton's and Fulham's draws against the title front-runners, and also probably Palace's win over Brighton count as pretty major upset results this week.... and TWO post-game red cards (and a retroactive third certain for Cunha)... a very weird week. The three most fancied captains, Salah, Palmer, and Saka, all failed to produce very much. And the 'Team of the Week' was once again just ridiculous, with Ismaila Sarr becoming the expected-by-nobody 'Player of the Week', and among the rest, probably only Isak and perhaps Son featuring in more than a handful of sensible FPL selections at the moment.

Thus, I have to give Gameweek 16 another very strong 8 out of 10 on my Luck-o-Meter.

THIS is why you shouldn't TripleCap in December!

 

As I warned a couple of weeks ago, December is a very bad time to play your Triple Captain chip.

Fixture congestion and miserable weather (and perhaps even the distraction of the looming holidays: footballers too need to plan for family gatherings, and get their Christmas shopping done!) tend to reduce performance levels and increase the risk of unexpected, upset results.

And sure enough, here we are at the start of the GW16 weekend, with players like Salah and Saka the most favoured captaincy picks for the week, playing at home and facing much weaker opposition..... and both players produce not very much, both sides are surprisingly held to a draw. I now rather fear that Palmer will have a rare stinker today, and Chelsea will somehow get turned over by Brentford....

In addition to all the factors I listed in that earlier post which can make results at this time of year more unpredictable, we also have to endure the impact of poor officiating (does this get worse in December too? perhaps referees are also preoccupied with thoughts of their Christmas shopping??). Bukayo Saka (my captain choice this week!) was not only denied a goal and an assist by some excellent work between the sticks from Pickford, but, near the end of the game, was robbed of the chance to convert a penalty by possibly the worst refereeing/VAR decision of the entire season so far. The only small consolation I can cling to is that this injustice would have pained me even more if I'd had my Triple Captain chip riding on him....

This is a Season of Craziness, my friends. Hang on to your bonus chips until the New Year....

Dilemmas of the Week - GW16

Throughout this hectic December, the main uncertainties are likely to surround 'rest rotations' - and the sudden realisation of 'totting up' suspensions -  rather than injuries. Although, with the final round of European games for this year taking place in midweek, I suppose there are bound to be a few knocks and niggles complicating the picture. Fingers crossed for no major disasters (or last-minute postponements)!

It's still early morning in the UK as I put this together. I'll add updates as necessary if any major news breaks on Friday or Saturday.

So, what are the conundrums we face ahead of Gameweek 16?

Does anybody need to be moved out because of injury?

Leon Bailey went off with some kind of hamstring strain in the match against Southampton last weekend; although described as a 'mild' injury, it seems it might keep him out of the reckoning for the rest of the month. And now Ollie Watkins has hobbled off with a knock in Tuesday night's game in Leipzig; he's a pretty resilient guy, and I suspect he'll be OK for Saturday - but this is probably the biggest FPL worry of the week, with around 24% of managers still owning him (despite his and Villa's iffy form for most of this season?!). Some, though, are no doubt getting excited about the possibility of a start for Jhon Duran in his place.

Of Brighton's numerous 'walking wounded', only Joel Veltman yet seems close to being able to feature this weekend; and it might be doubtful he'll immediately replace Tariq Lamptey, who was outstanding last week.

Marcos Senesi has just had surgery on his thigh injury, and is now likely to miss most of the rest of the season. (Good news, at least, for early adopters of his promising understudy, Dean Huijsen, one of my new 'Picks of the Week'!)  Marcus Tavernier also picked up a hamstring problem in Monday night's game against Wolves, and could be out for weeks at least. (This probably makes more room in the starting line-up for recently back-from-injury Dango Ouattara, and will perhaps allow more creative space to Kluivert and Semenyo to earn FPL points.)

Callum Wilson has reportedly picked up yet another hamstring injury in training this week, and could be out for a couple of months or so. (Presumably no-one owned him anyway; but the news could slightly enhance Alexander Isak's perceived value, by reducing his risk of rotation or 'managed minutes'.) Joe Willock also dropped out of last week's squad to face Brentford with a hamstring problem, but said to be 'minor' - and he might be available again this week.

Disasters mount for under-pressure Ange Postecoglou: his central defensive pairing of Cristian Romero and Micky Van de Ven, both rushed back perhaps a little over-hastily from lengthy injury absences last week, both broke down with new hamstring problems in last week's game, and both now seem likely to be out until at least sometime in January.

Michail Antonio seems likely to miss the rest of the season after suffering a broken leg and other injuries in crashing his Ferrari a week ago. (It is at least fortuitous for West Ham that Niclas Füllkrug has finally got himself fit at the same time.)

José Sá's unexpected absence last week was apparently only due to a minor shoulder problem picked up in training, and he could be back between the sticks for Wolves this weekend. Pablo Sarabia might also be able to take part again, after missing a couple of weeks with a calf problem.

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

Alexis Macallister, Yves Bissouma, Calvin Bassey, Emerson, Joao Gomes, Boubakary Soumaré, and Pedro Neto all miss this gameweek after clocking up their fifth bookings (which is going it some for Neto, given he's only registered 7 starts this season). And Southampton's Jack Stephens is starting a 4-game ban for a 'violent conduct' sending-off last week. Rico Lewis, of course, is also stuck with a 1-match ban for his ridiculous sending-off, because you can't appeal against double-yellow cases.

Alex Moreno, only on loan at Forest, is ineligible to play against his parent club Villa this week (although he hasn't been getting regular starts anyway, so this is probably of just about zero FPL relevance).

In better news, Alisson is now back in goal for Liverpool, and looked pretty much straight back to his imperious best in Tuesday's Champions League game at Girona. I just about never see a goalkeeper change as an urgent priority, though; and I'd probably wait a week or two, just to make sure he doesn't break down again - muscle problems like this have a habit of recurring. [His return is an unwelcome, though hardly unexpected, development for those who've been relying on Caoimhin Kelleher for the past two months.]

Did anyone give other cause to consider dropping them?

There's obviously something amiss between James Maddison and his manager, and I wouldn't be taking any chances on him - even in what is generally perceived to be the 'easiest' fixture in the calendar (I would argue that Wolves and West Ham currently look even weaker than Southampton); remarkably, some 7.6% of FPL managers still would.

And I would be tempted to say... the whole of the Manchester City team! (If anyone still had any of them anyway....)  However, I expect they'll rouse themselves to best efforts against their cross-town rivals, United; and they have a long run of pretty soft-looking fixtures from here. But damn - Foden is strangely out-of-sorts (and maybe out of favour with Pep?), DeBruyne is trying to play through a hernia problem, Ederson is unfathomably dropped, Gundogan looks hopelessly off the pace, Lewis is suspended this week, Walker's pace and stamina are failing him, and Stones and Ake and Akanji all seem likely to be missing again, while Gvardiol is starting to look desperately weary from constantly having to cover for everyone else. So, their prospects this week don't look that great.

And Wolves, alas, are on the 'highway to hell', and I find it impossible to fancy their prospects even against fellow-strugglers Ipswich (surely a last chance game for poor Gary O'Neill??). After this, they don't have another likely winnable game until the end of February. Cunha appears to have put his scoring boots into storage already anyway; and, as I predicted two months ago, Ait-Nouri is now mostly being held in a more defensive role and so rarely threatening attacking contributions even in games where they have been briefly able to get on top. Thus, I wouldn't be keeping these two any longer - or any other Wolves players, obviously.

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

Well, Minteh and Lamptey both came up with cracking goals for Brighton last week, but they're both 'minutes risks', uncertain starters. Sancho also looked very lively for Chelsea, but again isn't likely to be an invariable starter when Neto and Madueke are also competing for inclusion on the flanks.

I think the whole of the Bournemouth defence - even including Kepa in goal - are starting to look very promising, and they have a good run of fixtures through the rest of December. (Kepa might perhaps gain additional value if he gets recalled from his loan in January to replace the very unconvincing Robert Sanchez; but I suspect his bridges are well burned at Chelsea.)

BEST OF LUCK, EVERYONE!

A little bit of Zen (20)

 

"Intelligence is not making no mistakes, but quickly seeing how to make them good." 

Bertolt Brecht