Are we not ENTERTAINED?

 Well, YES - I think we are!

At least if we're not Roy Keane - who only rated England's performance against Latvia as a 'C+'. But he is a curmudgeonly so-and-so, and slightly untethered from reality. And not an England fan!!

I'm more inclined to give our first two outings under Tuchel a solid 'B' score,.... very nearly a  'B+'.

Albania and Latvia aren't terrible sides; and they defended very resolutely (their keepers both had excellent games). It's fatuous to expect any longer that the smaller nations are invariably going to be a pushover, ever ripe for a 5-0 spanking. Dominating possession, creating plenty of chances, and ultimately coming out comfortable winners in both games is all that we could have wished for.

No, we didn't produce scintillating football - but you can't do that when the opponents just camp in front of their penalty box for most of the game. We did produce effective football: calm, patient, thorough - successful.

Even more encouraging was the clear evidence of a new approach from the new manager. Under Southgate, the national side had often seemed to lack any clear 'identity'; indeed, in the last Euros, the players often appeared to have not much idea of what they were supposed to be doing. Here they clearly did understand the system they were supposed to be playing, they bought into it, and it worked.

I'm particularly pleased to see that Tuchel was following the same kind of nominal 4-2-3-1 lineup I'd advocated last week, and largely the same personnel I'd predicted. I even liked the changes he made for the second game: not excessive - but thoughtful and useful: starting Bellingham deeper in midfield, giving Morgan Rogers a try-out as a No. 10.

I still have a few gripes and misgivings. I suppose Jordan Henderson and Kyle Walker were included for their 'dressing-room leadership' - but if they're not fancied as starters any more (and they certainly shouldn't be!), that seems a wasteful use of squad places to me. I'd rather see some more young players getting phased into the setup instead.

Reece James and Marcus Rashford seemed like 'charity case' selections to me. They didn't do badly, but... I feel they haven't yet played often enough and well enough for their clubs recently to merit an international call-up; they were being chosen on the basis of past glories and/or presumed future potential... and, I imagine, to try to give them a psychological lift by making a major show of confidence in them. A kind and noble gesture, I suppose; and it might work out,.... if it helps them to rebuild their careers and become valuable members of the national side again. But I'm very sceptical about the prospects for that: Rashford has always been too inconsistent, too mentally fragile; James, alas, too hopelessly injury-prone. I don't foresee any more of a future for these two with England than I do for the has-beens Walker and Henderson; and, as with them, I think their inclusion here was unfairly excluding other players who deserved a chance

And Levi Colwill?! That's a complete head-scratcher to me. I think the squad needed a specialist left-back as back-up for Lewis-Skelly; and at the moment that should probably be Tyrick Mitchell. And if he was viewed simply as a back-up centre-back, surely Jarrad Brandthwaite ought to be ahead of him in the pecking-order!

And where were Adam Wharton, Angel Gomes, Harvey Elliott? For me, those players need to become regular squad members soon.... and possibly regular starters within a year or two.

But heck, an England manager would be no fun if we could agree with everything he did, would he? Overall, I'm fairly impressed with Tuchel's debut; it's given England fans a lot of grounds for optimism.

If I ruled the world (2): the future of the England team...?

Apologies - I jest, of course. We wouldn't want to see the absurd cuts-for-the-sake-of-cuts that His Insane Dogeness is trying to inflict at the moment visited upon the England football team! And, while a new national manager sometimes needs a bit of 'new broom' ruthlessness, I don't see that as being such a pressing matter for Tuchel (yet). In fact, my current ideal of an England line-up (probably for the next Euros rather than the next World Cup) includes only a few changes from the team I suggested the other day for the recent World Cup qualifying matches (which wasn't too far from the ones Tuchel actually chose).

I am quite chuffed/relieved that The Gaffer didn't revert to three-at-the-back (as Gareth always seemed to when he was nervous about getting a result), and instead went with the sort of 4-2-3-1 structure and roughly the balance of personnel I'd suggested.

However, I said in that earlier post that I think the major challenge for the England boss at the moment is tiptoeing through the selection conundrums posed by having an over-abundance of talent at his disposal.... at least in the midfield positions. 

And I fear that it is a natural problem of the England job - probably of any national team manager job - that a large number of players have become so well-established in the side that it seems unthinkable to replace them: a new manager will generally keep picking most of the same players as his predecessor out of inertia, out of habit, out of fear. And that's what I think we need to guard against. No player should be considered sacrosanct. Not Kane, not Pickford. Not Saka, not Rice. Not TAA, not Foden. Hell, not even Bellingham or Palmer. (Although, actually, I would consider those the two absolutely essential picks, whenever they're fully fit and in form.) If there are questions about their form or fitness, about their aging, about how well they fit into the tactical plan for the next game,.... or there are just some emerging players who deserve a chance,..... then even those most honoured names should be gone - at least dropped to the bench for a game or two, if not gently eased out of the squad altogether. It has to happen to everyone eventually; it usually happens to the bigger players rather too late.

I've said on here before that I've grown into a major sceptic about Trent Alexander-Arnold's value to England (as Sir Gareth generally was too; I didn't think he was right about much, but perhaps he was about that). He's a serviceable but not great full-back (a serious lack of pace and an occasional disinclination to work are big problems); and he hasn't yet developed into a full-time midfield player. And his trademark long balls over the top aren't going to be of much use when he doesn't have super-quick and super-skillful forwards like Mo Salah to run on to them....  I would love to see Trent develop his game at Madrid, play regularly in midfield and become a commanding deep playmaker. But even if he does, I'm still not sure how he'd really fit into the likely setup with England (not as much pace in the attack to feed off those kind of balls, more of a preference for patient build-up through the middle...). As a full-back, I just don't think we need him.

However, he might be saved for a while by the shortage of obvious alternatives. While we've had a lot of good options emerge at left-back, over on his side of the pitch the pickings are much more sparse. I really hope Ben White can get over his snit with England and make himself available again; I think he would be by far our best option currently. Failing that, I wonder if Myles Lewis-Skelly could operate as well on the right as on the left. (Or, failing that, maybe Rico Lewis? Although I see him as really more of a midfielder than a full-back, and I think his slight stature - at the moment - undermines his defensive effectiveness.)  I suppose Aaron Wan-Bissaka may be coming back into the frame too, with his recent impressive performances for West Ham; but, while there's no doubt that he's one of the best one-on-one defenders in the Premier League, there's a long-standing question-mark over his attacking abilities (I think, somewhat exaggerated, unfair; but it is a perception he needs to displace if he is to get back into the international reckoning); and I've always fancied he'd do better as a centre-back anyway....  Tino Livramento or James Justin might do OK as back-up, but they haven't yet looked quite international class to me. I suppose Djed Spence and Harry Toffolo could be in the mix as well.

Tuchel's 'favourite' at right-back looks as though it's going to be Reece James, who impressed him favourably during his brief time in charge at Chelsea. And there might be a wave of popular support behind that pick for a while, after his impressive free-kick goal last night. But his injury record is a huge red flag, unfortunately. I don't think he should really be back in the international reckoning until he's been showing consistent top form for several months (and he's frankly looked pretty poor in recent outings for Chelsea; where Maresca looks as if he might be converting him into more of a midfielder anyway) and gone free of any muscle problems for a similar duration (so, call me at the end of the year....). Actually, I don't think even getting back to something like his best of a few years ago, before the long run of injuries, would be enough; he really needs to start producing world-class form for a 25-year-old defender who's continued to learn and develop over the last few seasons. Losing so much playing time from your peak development years in the professional game - I doubt you can ever fully make that up: it's pretty unlikely now that he'll ever be more than a shadow of the player he could have become. So, as with Trent, I'll happily wait and see on that one. And if he can stay healthy and start showing top form again, I'd much rather have him than Trent as a right-back - because he's a top defender, as well as offering a huge attacking threat. But I'd prefer Ben White to either of them.

As I said the other day, I think PIckford has got a lock on the goalie slot. Henderson is probably the best of the rest currently.

Similarly, Guehi and Konsa have quickly established themselves as our most commanding central defenders. I think Stones will still be in the reckoning for a while, because of his experience, and because of his composure on the ball (Pep has successfully converted him into a midfielder in the last couple of seasons, and that versatility is useful to have); but obviously his injury record is a huge problem. Maguire, I think, with so little club football in the last few years, must be thanked for his excellent service to the national team... and quietly let go. I think Jarrad Branthwaite must be very close to getting the nod over Guehi or Konsa. And I was glad to see Tuchel finally giving Dan Burn a chance; he, I think, will be a great squad player for a few years (will absolutely die for the shirt, and can probably do a job at full-back or in holding midfield, if needed - but probably not a regular starter). Tomori, and perhaps Chalobah or Quansah (or Max Kilman? apparently his hopes of switching his national allegiance to Ukraine have been rejected; he's lost his way a bit at West Ham, but looked a hell of a player at Wolves) look like decent back-up options.

At left full-back, I think Lewis-Skelly is already a clear favourite for a long tenure. Although Lewis Hall had started to look good with Newcastle before his injury. And Luke Thomas, Tyrick Mitchell, Taylor Harwood-Bells, and perhaps even Leif Davis (great going forward; not so convinced about his defensive qualities...) might all stake a claim as a back-up choice. And perhaps Ben Chilwell might get back in the frame too; I've always rated him very highly, but the ridiculous succession of injuries he's suffered in recent years (and Maresca apparently not being impressed with him?) have really derailed his career, and I fear it will be difficult for him to come back from this position. That, of course, goes even more so for poor Luke Shaw: a great player on his day, but he's spent most of his career in the treatment room; and so he doesn't now feel like someone you could rely on for a major tournament (yes, he's fit now - but for how long??).

Up front.... Kane should not be a sacred cow. Despite his tournament-leading goal hauls, he really hasn't done that well for us in most of our big games (anyone who picks up a few goals early on by virtue of having a fairly soft opening group will be a Golden Boot contender at a major tournament); in fact, he's usually looked miles below his best - sparking speculation that he's been carrying an injury of some kind, or suffering the effects of cumulative exhaustion after a long season; he's even faced calls to be dropped in some sections of the press. In the last Euros, he was really quite poor in the later games, not only offering little goal threat but giving nothing in leading the press either; the argument for replacing him with Watkins started to look overwhelming - but it didn't happen, because he's Harry Kane. That's the kind of thinking I hope Tuchel can break away from, if the need arises again. I also think it's quite likely that Harry will start to age out quite quickly in the next season or two, and it might be convenient for all concerned to plan for the 2026 World Cup being his international swansong. Harry's great tragedy for me is that because he's such a big lad and such a handy finisher, he's been typecast as a traditional No. 9 for his whole career - where actually he's more of a No. 10-with-above-average-goal-potential. I've often said that I'd like to see him playing permanently a bit deeper in that lynchpin creative role, perhaps - at least occasionally - with another striker like Watkins leading the line ahead of him. Sparing him the physical toll of constantly bumping up against hulking central defenders might add a few more years to his top-flght career.... And we really need to make more use of his exquisite passing.

Not that we have a great deal of alternative to Big H. I like Ollie Watkins, but he's already in his late twenties, and he's a solid 8-out-of-10 kind of striker rather than an obvious world-beater. Solanke's finishing isn't quite at the same level as Watkins's (yet; maybe he can still develop a bit), but he'll work hard for the team, is excellent in leading a high press  Toney I never rated that highly (and he's effectively retired from top-flight football by taking the Saudi money; you can't expect to keep your sharpness at the highest level when playing in such a low-quality competition); we haven't heard much of Tammy Abraham the last year or so; and I don't think poor Dominic Calvert-Lewin's career can now ever recover from one of the longest goal-droughts in history. We don't seem to have any Isak or Gyokeres or Sesko waiting in the wings (maybe Liam Delap, in a few years?? is that it??). But perhaps this does give us the opportunity to move away from a conventional striker for a while. Spain won tournaments with a strikerless system a decade-and-a-half ago; with our current similar super-abundance of attacking midfield talent, this looks like the time for us to give it a try too. And it may be the best use of Jude Bellingham: he's adaptable enough to play as an outright No 9, but I think will probably function best as a kind of 'false 9' or a highly mobile 10 who breaks into the box a lot.

It's in midfield that we are most spoiled for choice, and thus it's here that it is impossible to avoid some controversy. I think Bellingham and the astonishing Cole Palmer are the only absolute shoo-ins (YES - the only two!!); we are astonishingly blessed to have two such world-leading talents in our national side at the same time. But it then becomes an enormous challenge to discover how to structure the team around them, how to get the best out of them. I think we might perhaps use a fairly regular rotation, where there is no invariable 'best eleven'; with Gordon, Saka, Elliott, and Eze being probably the most frequently called on.

Yes, the one new addition to the national set-up I'd like to see established over the coming year is Harvey Elliott. Of all the great emerging midfield talents we currently have, he is the one (along with perhaps Adam Wharton) who strikes me as being - like Palmer and Bellingham - not merely very, very, very good, but something extra-special, a true world-beater: every moment of every game, everything he does - he takes the breath away. Phil Foden, alas, only has that quality in fits and snatches; all of the other contenders - even Saka - do; they are not people I feel I could absolutely rely on to turn a game for us, even with a short outing off the bench (we've seen Palmer and Bellingham do that for England; Elliott has done it often for Liverpool). I know it's difficult to make the case for Elliott's promotion to the seniors when he's still not getting many minutes for Liverpool (I hope that will change next season, even if he has to move elsewhere...), but he is the new selection I'd lobby hardest for.... and, actually, I hope he might become another regular starter, alongside Palmer.

Amongst the wide options, I'd incline slightly towards Anthony Gordon, for his combative spirit and his versatility (with Newcastle, we've seen him regularly swap sides quite effectively, and sometimes play through the middle as a 9 or false 9 - he doesn't thrive in that role, but he's willing to give it a damn good go; he'll even sometimes play rather deeper in midfield). Saka, though brilliant, is a bit of a one-trick pony at the moment: he's very good in wide positions on the right, taking a defender on, and either driving to the line to try to produce a cutback or a square ball across the six-yard box, or cutting inside on to his left foot to try to crack off a shot himself. Superb at that - but that's all he does. Arsenal's over-reliance on him has made them very predictable in the last couple of seasons - and very weak without him. I don't want to see England fall into the same trap. I'd like to think that Saka could be just as effective switching to the left occasionally, or even coming into the middle, into the No. 10 space (but it's difficult for him to develop that potential when Arteta evidently won't ever cosider playing him like that); ideally, I'd like to have my three attacking midfielders comfortable with freely rotating positions between them to keep the defending side constantly on the hop. If Saka can't offer that, I'm afraid (probably my most contentious suggestion here!!) he might have to be relegated to 'impact sub' status. And of course, we have a lot of new talent coming through in these flank roles too: Nwaneri, Barnes, Hudson-Odoi, Moore, Edwards, Chukwuemeka, Madueke...  (But a Rashford Renaissance?? No, sorry, I don't see that. I am open to being pleasantly surprised... But he's only ever been a fringe player for England; and his last few wilderness years have taken him a long way away from that fringe.)

Phil Foden, though I rate him very, very highly, is alas in danger of dropping out of the reckoning for England altogether, after repeatedly failing to make much impression in his international performances over the last two years (and having a pretty wretched time with City this year; I really feel Pep has ruined him, and he ought to look for a move elsewhere to re-energise his career). He clearly doesn't like playing out on the flanks and is not very effective there; but in the No. 10 space, he's clearly not quite as good as Palmer (or Bellingham!); or Elliott, who I feel could also be excellent in that central area; or probably Eze or Maddison (a bit of a 'forgotten man' in international terms at the moment, but surely deserves another chance - if he can persuade Ange to trust him with regular starts again...), either; or maybe even Gibbs-White or Rogers. It is the young man's tragedy that in another era he might have been the sole outstanding England talent in his position - but in the 2020s, he's not even clearly in the top three or four.

In central midfield, I would usually favour a pair - one more combative, one more creative. And, currently, Angel Gomes (excellent in his couple of runouts under Lee Carsley) and Adam Wharton look the pick of the crop for me. Although Curtis Jones is looking a very strong alternative, and I'm sure will be the regular back-up in that area. And in a couple more years we might have Archie Gray and Lewis Mileyand maybe Alex Scott putting these three under a bit of pressure. Forest's Elliott Anderson is also starting to look another very strong contender for that engine-room role. (A few years ago, I would have fancied Everton's Tom Davies as a possibility as well, but he seems to have lost his way.)  This is my final - and for many, no doubt, the most outrageous! - provocation in these observations: I don't see Declan Rice as an automatic starter for much longer. As with Harry, I feel he's been typecast by his physique; but he's just not really a holding midifelder - he's much, much better in advanced positions (but, given our wealth of options for attacking, goalscoring midfielders, he's not likely to get a regular look-in there either...). When Arteta tried to play him 'in the hole' last year to cover for Partey, it just did not work out at all, and was the major reason for Arsenal's misfiring so badly in the early part of the season. (I have very similar reservations about Kobbie Mainoo. At least he's a bit more press-resistant than Declan: comfortable receiving the ball in deep positions, facing his own goal; able to spin around a pressing opponent and set off on a surging run upfield. But again, he's more of a very physically robust creative player than a stopper...)  I think Rice should remain part of the set-up - for his dressing-room leadership, and for his versatility (his game-reading and physical bulk make him capable of filling in as a centre-back or a full-back in an emergency; that can be invaluable in a tournament squad). And he's always likely to be useful to bring on for the last 10 or 20 minutes to close a game down and hold on to a lead (although I hope we won't be doing that as much in the future: bloody Southgate rarely looked like he had any confidence that we could win any game by more than one goal and would try to sit on a narrow lead even against a team like Slovakia.... Ugh!). But sorry, no, excellent player though he is, I don't think, in an ideal world, Declan Rice should be starting for England.

Hence, my vision of what our starting line-up should be starting to look like - certainly after the coming World Cup - is this:

As I noted for my thoughts on the current team, I imagine that Bellingham would in fact play rather deeper much of the time, sharing the Number 10 space with Palmer; and all of those forward players would hopefully be able to rotate positions fairly freely to keep the attacking threat fresh and varied. There is also the option, in some games, for him to start further back in midfield, replacing one of the pivots (though still likely to push far forward from time to time), making room for an extra attacking mdfielder like Saka or Eze to join the starting lineup, or a conventional forward.

I think that's a set-up that could accomplish a lot. Exciting times to be an England fan....

A little bit of Zen (34)

 “The amount of positive vibration you have radiated in life is all that matters.”

Amit Ray

If I ruled the world

 

So, finally, the new man in the England job gets to pick a team and run a match....

But, of course, every other football fan in the country is imagining how they'd do it differently, including me.

In a way, I think injuries have made Tuchel's job a lot easier in this instance. One of the biggest problems England face is an over-abundance of talent in certain positions, and a challenge in trying to fit certain players together into the starting eleven (I fear a multiple repeat of the classic Gerrard-OR-Lampard dilemma which hamstrung our progress in the Noughties). With Alexander-Arnold, Palmer, Saka, and Mainoo all missing, that conundrum can be kicked down the road for a while.

Here's what I'd go with:

Pickford, obviously has made the No. 1 jersey his own. And I think Guehi and Konsa are looking like our strongest central defensive pairing for now (although Stones is still in contention, when fit again; and I imagine Branthwaite and Tomori will be providing some competition going forward; Branthwaite, for me, should have been in this squad, ahead of Colwill). Lewis-Skelly has made an outstanding debut for Arsenal this season, and looks our strongest option at left-back now (again, injuries really make it a forced choice); Livramento has been rather less convincing for Newcastle, but deserves a chance - ahead of Walker, who now appears to be past it. (I hope to god Tuchel hasn't included Colwill and Walker because they'd fit a possible back-three better; I really do not want to see us playing that system ever again!)

Rice and Jones are a fairly obvious double-pivot midfield, from what we've got available (though again, I would prefer Gomes and Wharton, and I don't know why they weren't selected this time).

Kane - for now - has to continue as the main striker. We have to see if we can find a balance of players to support him, who can compensate for his chronic lack of pace. With Palmer and Saka missing, the selection becomes more straightforward: Foden and Gordon on the flanks, and Bellingham in a free role in the middle.

The main variations I'd be intrigued to explore would be to have Kane mostly drop deeper, lining up more alongside Bellingham as a pair of '10s' or 'false 9s', perhaps inviting Bellingham to move into the centre-forward space on occasion; or... to drop one of the pivots (probably the less experienced Jones) and have Bellingham play in the centre alongside Rice, allowing Kane to occupy the No. 10 space on his own (mostly; I'm sure Jude would still push up there quite often!), while using Watkins as a more advanced forward. I think we need to make more use of Kane as a playmaker rather than just a battering-ram striker, and this could possibly extend his playing life by a few years too; and it would be useful to see if we can find a way of - sometimes - fitting him and Watkins into the same line-up. However, I suspect that these tactical riffs are both a little too bold for an initial outing - even against a team like Albania. Perhaps Herr Tuchel will become a little more adventurous and experimental over the coming monhs. I do hope so. (I may have more to say in a while about my ideas for how the England squad might develop going into the next World Cup, and beyond...)

The always amusing 442oons Youtube channel marked Tuchel's entry into the fray like this:

A cruel, CRUEL game indeed

This is not me (I've quit playing, in protest at the obnoxious and pointless 'Assistant Manager' chip); it is a rival in one of my mini-leagues over the past few years, who generally seems pretty shrewd in his choices - and usually runs me pretty close!

I just noticed that he had a particularly horrific Gameweek 29, with what looks in fact like a perfectly decent squad. OK, giving the armband to Rayan Ait-Nouri was a risky punt - but not completely crazy, given how many attacking returns he picks up in games where his side dominates, and how near-certain of at least a clean sheet Wolves appeared to be in facing hopeless Southampton. Being caught out by Palmer's unexpected injury absence (in a week where the Blank Gameweek had left him without bench cover) was a misfortune shared by many. As was the failure to anticipate that Elanga and Fernandes would be the big haulers of the week (Fernandes was a stronger bet for such success; but even so, it was reasonable to conclude, with United's dreadful recent form and daunting run of fixtures ahead, that it was not worth taking a hit to bring him in for probably one week only....). Ange deciding not to start Brennan Johnson was a harsh blow on top of that. Only Arsenal coming away with a clean sheet?! Milenkovic rather than Aina picking up the attacking return for the week amongst Forest's defenders was further salting of the wounds! And having Wood, Joao Pedro, Mitoma, and Kluivert ALL fail to contribute anything - in matches their sides absolutely dominated - was, well, downright WEIRD, positively freakish. And bookings for Pedro, Mitoma, and Gabriel too??  The Fantasy Gods were having a laugh with this one....

It just goes to show: this game of ours is overwhelmingly dominated by LUCK. And the weekly twists and turns of fortune can be strange, unexpected, cruel, UNJUST. You can often swing from a wildly successful haul to a wildly unsuccessful one in consecutive weeks, with exactly the same squad. There is no accounting for it, no way to predict what's going to work out for the best.

You just have to roll with the punches, suck up this sort of punishment, and hope for something better a little further down the line. This looks like a pretty good squad to me: fairly close to what mine would have been at this point, if I'd hadn't quit playing six weeks ago. Maybe his luck will even itself out a bit over the next few weeks. (But very often... it doesn't....)

Normal 'service' will be resumed.... LATER

I am of Irish heritage, and hence struggle to resist the temptation to a once-yearly indulgence on this day in what an old college friend of mine once termed 'the Celtic melancholy' - drinking too much, listening to emotional music, and getting all weepily maudlin and nostalgic... for hours on end. 

For several years in my youth, I was quite interested in horse-racing, and lived fairly near Cheltenham; so, that was sometimes a happy pretext for even further alcohol-related revelries. (The Cheltenham Festival, a four-day steeplechase and hurdles meeting in mid-March, more-or-less coincides with St Patrick's Day every year, and traditionally draws huge numbers of Irish racing fans to the small West Country town for the week. The event thus becomes as much about the peripheral craic to be enjoyed in the evenings as about the races in the afternoons...)

Also, my mum's birthday was the day following, so for much of my younger life I was dutifully travelling long distances by train or bus the next day to see her - generally looking very much as if I'd slept in my clothes, if at all, the night before. I believe she was duly impressed by this reliable display of filial devotion, even if she might also have fretted that I might be "going to the bad...."

All of which is simply to say.... that posting might be a bit light for the next day or two, while I indulge... and then (hopefully) recover.

Of course, the Australian-Scots folk singer Eric Bogle (a splendid chap, who I once had the great pleasure of meeting, and seeing perform - in an intimate setting in Toronto) said it best....

Luck-o-Meter (29)

Although it's been known all season that GW29 would be a Blank Gameweek for (probably) four sides, and for the past month or so it's been known what those blanking sides would be,.... still a Blank Gameweek is itself a huge hassle to navigate, and - arguably - a major element of 'luck' impacting this week's outcomes in all sorts of ways. However, with relatively few top picks affected, it really should have been possible to dodge around this one using just regular transfers (and risking an empty bench, full of rested blanking players, for one week); but in combination with injuries, drops in form, and a number of promising fixtures that looked possibly ripe for exploitation this week, many people were tempted to use their Free Hit (or theie Second WildCard( this weekend. If they chose well, that almost certainly would have given them a substantial lift over everyone who was getting by without a chip. But the fact is that the Free Hit, in particular (but possibly also the WildCard as well), is likely to be much more valuable in the bigger blank week of GW34 (or, if not there, in the one or two adjacent Double Gameweeks we're expecting to result from that); you can't yet say you've done 'well' from using one of the rebuild chips, because they're not a one-week deal; they have to be evaluated also in terms of 'opportunity cost', of the points potentially lost in other weeks when they might have worked better. But with so many people getting a points lift from this ploy (and a good number having the 'Assistant Manager' in play too, though, really, god knows why) weekly points tallies and rankings mean even less than usual.

Everton and West Ham both seemed somewhat below their best, and produced a fairly dour encounter. Everton stepped things up at the end, and looked like they really wanted to snatch the late win - nearly did so, with Carlos Alcaraz screwing an effort just wide in injury time. The penalty denied to Beto in the first half was fair enough.

Ipswich again showed some threat going forward, but were often woeful at the back. The big surprises here were really that Forest didn't score more, that they didn't keep a clean sheet (two superb goals from Ipswich, late in the game, out of nothing....), and who the goals fell to. There really was no reason for any FPL manager to prefer Anthony Elanga (who hasn's scored, or come close to doing so, in nearly three months, and has never scored a brace in the Premier League before) over creative lynchpin Morgan Gibbs-White or recently dangerous again Callum Hudson-Odoi; or to prefer Milenkovic (his chance was set up by a miscued defensive header from Delap going right to him) over any of the other defenders; or for supposing that this season's 'Mr Reliable', Chris Wood, would somehow not get on the scoresheet in such an easy win. So, even though the general result was much as predicted, there was still a lot of FPL 'luck' in play here! But at least there doesn't appear to have been anything for the referee to mess up in this one.

Despite the advantage of an early penalty (and an early opposition goal being ruled out for Mitoma; one of those decisions that was probably 'correct' on a strict application of the rules, but nevertheless feels harsh - I don't think Ortega had the ball fully under control in his hands, and he kind of 'dropped' the ball on to the forward's head rather than being dispossessed by a 'challenge'...), and then taking the lead again wih a wonder-strike from Marmoush, City were never really able to get on top in this game. As I'd expected, Brighton often looked able to cut them open at will on the counter, and had way the best of the chances - really should have been able to win the game by 2 or 3 goals. The opening penalty may have been a little harsh; Webster must presumably have caught Marmoush with his trailing leg, because the leading foot wasn't anywhere near him; but that was not clearly visible on the angle shown on the BBC. Baleba was possibly a bit lucky to escape a red card for a heavy contact on Gvardiol (VAR presumably thought that he had 'accidentally' trodden on the City man's ankle rather than catching him with a reckless follow-through; but the reasoning was never publicly explained). And Pep was very unhappy about Doku getting a card for 'diving'; I have mixed feelings on that one - a 'diving' charge was harsh, since he legitimately needed to jump over Van Hecke's high-speed sliding challenge; but you can jump over a player's legs without nearly doing a somersault...  In FPL terms, it's more of a shock that the mild-mannered Kaoru Mitoma somehow picked up a yellow card, leaving him with only 1 point... in a game in which he might easily have been 'Man of the Match'!!

Siuthampton v Wolves was another game like the Ipswich one where a dominant visiting side failed to fully capitalise on their superiority, and somehow conceded a goal out of nothing, to make the match seem closer than it had been - and to frustrate the legions of FPL managers who had been hoping for a clean sheet somewhere from one of these teams against the relegation-bound sides.

Bournemouth v Brentford was another topsy-turvy one, where the home side appeared to have done more than enough to win the game comfortably, but couldn't capitalise on all the great chances they had.... and then they fell asleep in defending a corner and a long throw to toss the game away.

In a dreadfully drab game at Arsenal, the home side dominated without creating many decent chances. Roibert Sanchez just about justified his - to many people, questionable - selection with a couple of very smart reaction stops, clawing shots back from his line.... but continued to look a liability every time he had the ball at his feet. Marc Cucurella was very unlucky not to continue his short scoring streak, when his crisp half-volley somehow squirmed through Raya's hands, and spun agonisingly. across the face of the goal, going only inches wide of the far post. And Chelsea still can't get a penalty! Here, Saliba clearly stomped on Nkunku's heel with a follow-through and brought him down; any argument that he might have got something of the ball (he didn't, as far as I could see) should have been irrelevant, since he'd clearly kicked his opponent. But the biggest surprise - and hence 'luck'-factor - here was the surprise last-minute omission with a previously unannounced training injury of the (still massively owned) Cole Palmer.

Fulham v Spurs was another dour, unexciting encounter. Spurs were predictably hamstrung by Postecoglou's unfathomable decision to rest most of his best players (OK, they had just come through a tough European tie on Thursday; but they've got two-and-a-half weeks to get over that - some of them are not even involved in the internationals, and they're out of the FA Cup...): the BBC struggled to find any 'highlights' until Son and Johanson were introduced early in the second half (Maddison didn't get on until a bit later; and Porro and Van de Ven not at all). They did enough to control the game, without creating very many chances; although they got increasingly jaded and sloppy in the last quarter of the game - inviting Fulham to come after them. Tel had earlier had some good moments, and Solanke lashed over an open goal when Leno's parry fell kindly at his feet at the near-post - and then he had a good effort saved in the closing minutes. Two goals out of nothing late in the game nicked it for Fulham (Vicario will probably feel he should have been able to save the first, from Muniz). And Spurs probably feel a bit aggrieved that Bassey's blatant trip on Bergvall in the penalty area was somehow adjudged 'an accidental collision' by VAR.

Leicester weren't utterly terrible against Manchester United: they created as many decent chances as the visitors - they just couldn't convert any of them; whereas, for once, United did. (And, to be fair, they might have had 4, but for a very tight offside against Garnacho.)  Bruno Fernandes left it until the dying seconds of regular time to come up with his scoring contributionn; while his two 'assists' were unspectacular balls, supplying teammates who went on to carve brilliant solo goals - so, those who crowed about what a shrewd FPL pick he'd been (just for this gameweek) were riding their luck more than somewhat. A trio of superb individual goals and a lot of huffing-and-puffing was all this game offered us.

Recently improving Spurs should surely have been fancied for a win against Fulham, who really haven't often looked very convincing for the last few months,.... if they hadn't fielded a 'B Team'. Brentford's win over Bournemouth, away, was also a bit of a turn-up for the books! Brighton were desperately unlucky not to claim a deserved win at Manchester City. And United, on recent form, really can't have been expected to come through quite so comfortably, even against dismal Leicester. While the biggest disappointment of reasonable FPL expectations for the week was Forest's and Wolves's failure to keep clean sheets against the other two relegation-bound sides (a clean sheet is always a precarious thing to pin your hopes on, but.... these two should have been about as 'guaranteed' as you're ever going to get!). So, quite a few 'upsets' in the results this week, compounded by Uncle Ange's bizarre omission from the starting lineup of most of his best players (a decision which probably cost them the match; though we shouldn't really be surprised by this sort of vexing eccentricity from the big Aussie any more: his quirky selection policy has destroyed James Maddison's value in FPL this season...) and the surprise absence with injury of still-popular Cole Palmer. 

There were some very surprising goalscorers too. While Strand Larsen, Marmoush, and Bruno Fernandes were reasonable enough picks for the week, it was a huge surprise that Fulham managed to win, keep a clean sheet, and have Bernd Leno chip in an assist - to make him by far the week's top-scoring goalkeeper; and almost nobody will have owned any of the other 7 outfield players in this week's 'Team of the Week'. It was also notable, I thought, that this week's top scorer was so far short of the 'Team of the Week' potential maximum: even with a very handy (and VERY lucky!) Bench Boost lift of 40 points, and a near-optimum captaincy pick of Fernandes, he was still 22 points adrift of the theoretical maximum. [Kudos to him, though, for an excellent team name: Tea and Busquets.] It occurs to me (not for the first time...) that there may be some correlation between the gap between the theoretical and actual maximum in a given week, and the overall amount of 'Luck'. I may look into that further. (Though it is an investigation likely to be stymied by the fact that FPL doesn't publish weekly rankings, and so it is difficult to find top performers other than the advertised No. 1 Highest Score - which, as this week, has usually been obtained with the benefit of a bonus chip, rather than just a regular selection.)

I also noticed, in reviewing my (small) country league and a few of my larger mini-leagues, that there was a heavy skew towards the low-end of the points scale this week: many managers got substantially below the global average - while there was a very, very elongated 'tail' of high scorers at the other end of the graph: a few people did astonishingly well (were outrageously lucky!), while the majority had a spectacularly terrible week (in most cases, through no particular fault of their own). It was one of the weirdest and cruellest gameweeks I can remember for a long while - and it made me quite glad and relieved that I am no longer playing this year!

The refereeing, however, didn't turn out to be too awful this week. There were a couple of very tight offside decisions, a mildly contentious disallowed goal, and a couple of penalties wrongly turned down (one of them, yet again, for Chelsea: that is getting beyond a joke!); but, compared to the welter of outrageously bad decisions we've suffered in most weeks, that's really nothing. (Of course, there were 20% fewer games his week; that helps somewhat!)

Ultimately then, I rate this gameweek 7 out of 10 on the 'Luck-o-Meter', on unexpected selections, results, and goalscorers, rather than dire refereeing.

DON'T FORGET The Boycott.  The dratted 'Assistant Manager' chip is in play now. I took the high road by quitting playing the game for the rest of the season. [I worry that, if people don't do this, the new chip may become a permanent feature of the game - and it will completely ruin it.]  If you don't feel like joining me in such an emphatic gesture, please at least think about refusing to use the Assistant Manager chip.

Please also criticise and complain about it online as much as possible. And raise objections to it with any football or media figures you know how to contact, and - if possible - try to find a way to protest about it directly to the FPL hierarchy (and let me know how, if you manage that!).

#QuitFPLinGW23         #DownWithTheNewChip

Sheep Picks (9)

I quite often snipe at 'The Sheep' element among Fantasy Premier League managers - by which I mean the substantial numbers (possibly, alas, an overall majority) who don't really understand FPL that well, or even follow the EPL that closely, and so make most of their decisions based on an impulsive reaction to last week's results... and/or at the promptings of FPL's own vapid pundit 'The Scout' or the many similarly unimaginative 'influencers' out here on the Internet.... or indeed just following whatever seems to be a popular pick being mentioned a lot in online discussion forums. This often coalesces into a kind of collective hysteria - where the HUGE numbers of managers rushing in to buy a certain player bears no relation to his true worth, his likely points potential over the next handful of games. The player in question might not be at all bad (though often he is); but he is not the irresistible bargain, the must-have asset that so many people seem to think.

Hence, I created this occasional series of posts highlighting players I think are deangerously over-owned, are the subject of a sudden and misguided enthusiasm.

Now, I know I'm going to risk getting egg on my face with this one, but..... I'm sorry, I can't resist.

Yep, for Gameweek 29, I'm going to say..... Erling Haaland.

Quite a lot of people seem to be bringing the big Viking back into their squads for this week: he's one of the 4 or 5 most transferred-in players for the week, with just over 200,000 new owners coming in for him already (with a day left before the deadline). Now, that is probably mostly those benighted souls who are unwisely using their Free Hit this week; and not even all of them - only perhaps something between a half and two-thirds of them. Still, that's a pretty substantial phenomenon, which could have a big impact on relative outcomes this week.

I acknowledge it is dangerous for me to pooh-pooh their optimism. And I must state that I am by no means a detractor of Haaland: I admire his talent, and I believe he could be one of the most potent points-producers we've seen in FPL for a decade to come. He is the sort of player who comes up with some mighty BIG GAMES, often out of nowhere; he could produce a huge haul at any time, against anyone. So, yes - he might have a big game this weekend, and make all those 200,000 people who've just rushed in for him (and the getting on for 4 million who have - unaccountably! - been hanging on to him anyway; though many of those are probably extinct accounts, people who became disillusioned and abandoned the game during the first half of the season) feel very smug about themselves.

However, are there really any persuasive reasons to suppose that this weekend is likely to be one of those big games for our Erling? I can't see any. City's form continues to look extremely flakey; last week, against Forest, they managed to shore themselves up somewhat in defence (though they still weren't great), but at the cost of failing to produce any attacking threat at all. City are not looking like a side in contention for the Champions League places; they're looking like a side that are desperately scrapping for a chance of any European football at all next season. And now they're facing Brighton, who, although they've often been a bit defensively flakey this season, do appear to have been on a strongly improving trend again in the last few weeks. They have a brilliant - if somewhat eccentric and over-bold - young coach, and they're almost always very dangerous in attack, especially in swift counter-attacks down the flanks: i.e., exactly the kind of threat City have looked most vulnerable to this year. This is a game that is tough to call, could easily go either way; but it does not look likely to be a straightforward and emphatic win for City. If anything, on recent form, I'd make Brighton narrow favourites for a win.

So, why are so many FPL players suddenly so enthusiastic about Haaland's (non-)prospects this week? Well, in this post on the mechanics of the 'sheep' phenomenon, I warned against the malign impact of online influencers. And one of the worst of these is FPL's own anonymous tipster, 'The Scout', whose output is mostly so lame, superficial, and obvious - and occasionally so bizarrely eccentric and divorced from reality - that I increasingly suspect this content is largely or wholly AI-generated. This week, The Scout has somehow seen fit to not only recommend including Haaland in the starting eleven, but to make him captain. WTF???

Many people are feeling a little bereft and directionless, with so many top picks missing this week, including of course the man who's become most managers' almost invariable default captain this season, mighty Mo Salah. In circumstances like this, they may be even more easily suggestible than usual; and so, when The Scout comes up with his bizarre suggestion of a Haaland captaincy, The Sheep run bleating eagerly and gratefully towards it.... even if there is a sheer cliff of DISAPPOINTMENT adjacent that they might be about to run over the edge of......

Of course, yes, it might work out. But it looks to me like a very big risk - one that really does not deserve to work out.  I wouldn't even rate Haaland among the 3 best forward picks on this weeks' fixtures; in fact, I think I'd probably favour his opposite number on the visiting team, Joao Pedro, over him. But certainly, with the much easier opponents they face, and the much more convincing team and individual form behind them, Wood, Evanilson, Beto, and Strand Larsen look more promising prospects; just returned-from-injury Dominic Solanke, against an up-and-down Fulham, probably does as well. And if you're going to play a third forward (though most people are surely keeping Isak on their bench this week...), Raul, Vardy, Wissa, or perhaps even Rasmus Hojlund might be worth gambling on. But Haaland???  There is just no strong rationale for that pick - in the context of City's form, or the week's other fixtures.

Well, this one probably ended up in the mid-range of expectations: Haaland did play quite well, and did pick up an early goal (albeit only from the penalty spot) - which is rather better than some pessimists might have projected for him from this game; but City again weren't very convincing, didn't manage to dominate the game,... and didn't win - which is exactly what I, and the other 'pessimists', were correctly predicting. Some managers might feel well satisfied with a 7-point haul for their captain, but that is severely unambitious. Haaland's return here has to be viewed in the context of who else did well this weekend, and who else might have been expected to do well; he was, frankly, extremely lucky that the in-form Wood, Beto, and Evanilson - against very vulnerable opposition - somehow didn't manage to get on the scoresheet this weekend; but, among forwards, Hojlund, Muniz, and even Southampton's Onuachu did as well, Wissa did slightly better, and Strand Larsen (and, of course, his own attacking teammate Marmoush) did substantially better - which was not at all unexpected. When 3 forwards, and 14 more players in other positions (especially midfielders: there's rarely a strong argument for giving the captain's armband to a forward rather than a 'midfielder'...) all outscored him this week, you can't make much of a case for even having put him in the starting eleven, let alone making him captain.

Dilemmas of the Week - GW29

Hmm, after a few weeks of the Napoleonic battlefield.... it seems as if the rate of injuries is finally slowing up a bit: not such a terrible week this week! (Although some problems emerging from the midweek European games probably haven't been publicly acknowledged yet...)

I'm trying to streamline these weekly round-ups, as they had been getting dangerously over-long. I'm aiming to confine myself to just the injuries to players that are likely to have a major significance in FPL. [I currently find the 'Injuries & Bans' summary on Fantasy Football Scout the most reliable resource for this kind of information - go check that out for more comprehensive coverage.]

So, what are the conundrums we face ahead of Gameweek 29?

Does anybody need to be moved out because of injury?

It looks like Trent Alexander-Arnold is the only high-owned player (in just over 30% of squads) to be ruled out this time, after having to come off in the defeat to PSG on Tuesday with an ankle injury; Arne Slot now thinks he'll be out until May.

Leny Yoro also picked up a foot injury and had to be withdrawn against Arsenal last weekend, but is only expected to be out for two or three weeks.

And Wolves's Zimbabwean midfielder Marshall Munetsi, a winter-window signing from Reims, was feeling a problem and had to come off at half-time against Everton last week; however, Vitor Pereira seems optimistic he could feature again this week. (This one might seem to be pushing the definitional limits of my 'relevant to FPL' threshold, but the big guy has made quite an impression since his introduction, with a goal and an assist in just three starts. Because nobody had any idea who he was, he was only priced at 5 million. And he'd be facing top punchbags Southampton this week, so.... there is a fair amount of interest in whether he might be available.)

Raheem Sterling, of course, is ineligible to appear for Arsenal against his parent club, Chelsea - though that is probably of zero relevance to FPL managers.

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

No new bans this week (um, for maybe the first time this season?): but Will Hughes, Sasa Lukic, Anthony Gordon, Patrick Dorgu, and Matheus Cunha are still serving extended suspensions.

And, of course, the Aston Villa v Liverpool and Newcastle v Crystal Palace games have been moved because of the League Cup Final between Liverpool and Newcastle on Sunday. (Villa v Liverpool was already played - early - in Gameweek 25; and Newcastle v Palace has been rescheduled in Gameweek 32.)  Potentially missing players from FOUR teams is a bit of a speed-bump: but we've known for quite a while that these were going to be the affected teams (and I really don't see why anybody would have had any Villa players anyway...), so it should have been easy enough to move excess players from these sides out over the last few weeks, or saved up the Free Transfers to do so now (while leaving a few of the highest-priced on the bench for the week, to avoid losing money on them to the dreaded 'transfer tax' with a sell-and-buy-back). As I argued in detail a couple of days ago, there is absolutely no reason to be using the Free Hit chip this week (but it seems well over 300,000 people - so far - are doing so anyway!).

Did anyone give other cause to consider dropping them?

Well, cause for not buying anyway.... Manchester City last week were, I thought, much improved; but they still couldn't mount any sort of attacking threat, and quite deservedly - if only very narrowly - lost the game. I really can't see any grounds for rising confidence in their prospects, especially with their not-particularly-easy fixture run to the end of the season. Because Salah and so many others are missing this weekend, there is a rush of enthusiasm among The Sheep - fuelled, as so often, by the FPL website's own inane (probaby AI??) pundit, The Scout - to get Haaland back (and make him captain - WTF??), if only for this one gameweek. Yes, he's good enough to produce a big week at any time. But it helps a lot when the team behind him is firing on something like all cylinders, and at the moment it's plainly not. And Brighton have been rediscovering their mojo again over the past few weeks; they must surely be favourites - if only by a little - in this fixture. Nobody seems to be making an argument for getting in Foden or DeBruyne, or Savinho or Doku, for this one; without those guys on top of their game, Big Erling isn't likely to do much.

The Sheep are starting to bolt away from Cole Palmer after his penalty 'miss' last week as well - although not in such great numbers as I would have expected, so far: only about 300,000 deserting him this week, which still leaves him with nearly 55% ownership. I think there's still a case for hanging on to him a little longer - if only because there aren't too many obvious alternatives showing themselves just at the moment.

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

Rashford and Asensio impressed in Europe again, and a lot of people (including Thomas Tuchel?) are perhaps getting a bit overexcited about that. It's worth remembering that was only against Club Brugge, probably the weakest team to make it into the last 16 of the Champions League. And a 10-man Brugge at that, after they'd unluckily had a defender sent off in the opening minutes (I've watched that replay half a dozen times at least, and I still can't see any contact on Watkins). In that context, it was not, I think, a super-impressive performance - by Villa generally, or by these two players. And they've got a Blank Gameweek this week, anyway.

As for the goddamned AssMan.... well, not a lot of 'excitement' this week, as all the fixtures are quite closely matched and hard to call, and none of them seem obviously likely to result in a comfortable win, with a big goal margin - even the relegation teams are drawn against fairly weak teams (or in Ipswich's case, a less prolific - though still very good - team). And there are no 'table-bonus' points available (unless you fancy Ipswich to pull off a huge upset against visiting Forest!); Spurs and Brighton are only 4 places behind their opponents this week, alas - otherwise, they would have been prime contenders. If you're stuck with that chip in play this week, I would say Spurs, Wolves, or Bournemouth are the best bets for scoring a few goals.

BEST OF LUCK, EVERYONE!

DON'T FORGET The Boycott; the dratted new 'Assistant Manager' chip is in play now - and I am urging everyone to please consider quitting the game, or at least refusing to use this silly chip. 

And if you can't bring yourself to do either of those things, please do criticise the Assistant Manager chip as vigorously as possible on any relevant social media channels you use, raise objections to it with any football or media figures you know how to contact, and - if possible - try to find a way to protest about it directly to the FPL hierarchy (and let me know how, if you manage that!).

#QuitFPLinGW23         #DownWithTheNewChip

A little bit of Zen (33)

“There is only one way to happiness, and that is to cease worrying about things that are beyond the power of our will.”

Epictetus

To Free Hit, or not to....?

 

A lot of people seem to be pondering resorting to their Free Hit chip this week. Is that a good idea?

NO.

1)  You keep your Free Hit (and the second WildCard) in reserve for as long as possible, in case you might need it to deal with an unexpected emergency like a sudden multiple injury/suspension crisis (can happen at any time, but becomes more likely as the season wears on) or a last-minute postponement (of more than one game - because there are other ways of dealing with a loss of only 4, 5, 6 players...).

2)  If you're lucky enough to escape any such unexpected crises, the best use for the Free Hit - which most people plan for - is to deal with the expected crisis of a 'big' Blank Gameweek. (However, this year there is no longer a really big blank, since the FA Cup Quarter-Finals - which could potentially wipe out up to 8 EPL fixtures - no longer clash with the EPL schedule. And the newly introduced facility to store up to 5 Free Transfers also gives you much more flexibility in addressing occasional fixture speed-bumps. Hence, for many people, it might be possible to get around even Gameweek 34 - the FA Semi-Final weekend, when 3 or 4 EPL matches could be missing, and hence the occasion when most FPL managers have provisionally planned to use their FH chip - without needing the Free Hit.)

3)  If you find you don't need the Free Hit for a Blank Gameweek, or any less expected emergency, there can also be a case for using it to 'optimise' a squad for a Double Gameweek. (Indeed, many managers in the past have asserted that this is a preferable approach to using it on a Blank Gameweek; but that is a perverse delusion.)  However, as with the Blank Gameweeks, there are no longer any really 'big' Double Gameweeks in the calendar; and any Double that is 'big' enough to be worth optimising the entire squad with doubling players is more worth playing the Bench Boost on - so, the better strategy is to optimise the week before with the 2nd WildCard (if you can't do it adequately just with regular free and paid transfers). But NOTE that a Double Gameweek is really only valuable for good players/teams with good fixtures; there's no point loading up the squad with weaker players who are likely to lose twice (just because they'll get double 'appearance points'....?!).

4)  If you don't hit any unexpected crises and are able to negotiate the only two Blank Gameweeks left in the regular schedule simply with transfers... it can be quite useful to hang on to the Free Hit (and the 2nd Wildcard) to 'optimise' a team for one of the last few weeks of the season (particularly if that might help you progress in one or more of your Cup competitions).

Thus, the Free Hit is almost certainly likely to be more needful and useful in the much larger Blank Gameweek of GW34.... or the Double Gameweek(s) that spin off of that, GWs 36 and/or 33. Even those might very well be able to be navigated without needing to use a chip; in which case, it's still useful to hang on to the Free Hit for a possible emergency that may come up in the last 9 gameweeks of the season... or simply to have some fun with as a late-season 'smart bomb'.  There is NO WAY anybody should be considering using the Free Hit this early in the season, for a Blank Gameweek that involves only 4 teams.

 

Moreover, these aren't even 4 very good teams for FPL. Even Liverpool, with too much rotation in midfield, too many injuries in attack, and an overpriced defence, don't have any obvious picks apart from Mo Salah; few people have had more than two of their players at a time, and most were struggling to think of a third to bring in for their recent successive Double Gameweeks (most went for Cody Gakpo, who'd suddenly hit form; but he got injured again, so could have been relinquished before this blank weekend). Newcastle have had alarmingly yo-yo form all season, and again Isak is looking like their only must-have at the moment; Gordon's returns have been slightly disappointing this season, especially over the last few months (when he's been struggling with a few knocks, and has often looked rather tired; and now he's picked up an extended suspension....); Hall has done surprisingly well at full-back, and became a popular FPL pick... but got a season-ending injury a couple of weeks ahead of the Blank Gameweek. Palace have only recently started to come good, and still don't look strong enough to be trebled up on. And Aston Villa have struggled in the league this season, look a pretty unconvincing mid-table side (doing much better in the Champions League!): there are really none of their players that have been worth having - even for that recent Double Gameweek!

So, there was really no excuse to have ever had more than 6 or 7 players from the affected clubs; and a number of the likeliest picks have already been eliminated by injury or suspension in the last weeks before the Blank. You can carry 2 or 3 players (even 4, if one of them's a keeper) on the bench for a week (well, assuming you haven't got a terrible bench: this is why you need to keep a good bench, to give you the easy option to switch out players who are going to miss a week or two - or just face one tough fixture - without needing to burn through transfers, and possibly lose a lot of squad value on 'transfer tax' with short-term sell-and-buy-backs): and of course you'd like to hang on to players like Salah and Isak, because you'd probably lose A LOT of money on them if you sold them and immediately bought them back. Any remaining essential changes, you should be able to comfortably deal with using saved Free Transfers. 

If poor forward planning leaves you in a situation where you still have more blanking players (and other absentees through injury/suspension) than you can carry on the bench or replace with stored Free Transfers, then you have to bite the bullet and take 'hits' - pay points for extra transfers - to get around the problem. You might compromise, and consider putting out a team of only 9 or 10 players, to keep your transfer points-spend down, (It can be difficult for defenders to earn you more than 4 points.... unless you're really, really confident in their clean-sheet prospects - and that's a very precarious hope to bank on. In all other positions. however, good picks should be capable of earning you at least 4 points, hopefully 5 or 6 or more - so, taking a 'hit' to replace a non-playing first-team member, except perhaps in defence, should always be worth it.)

If, somehow, you find yourself in a really deep hole this week, you might consider instead using the 2nd Wildcard to get out of it. This chip is a bit of a luxury, something that can be held on to for emergencies, but doesn't have any compelling 'tactical' use in the way that the Free Hit does. So, although it would be preferable to be able to save it longer, there's not as much risk with using it early as there is with the Free Hit.

Time to say goodbye?

Cole Palmer has hit a bit of a lull in producitivity, and The Sheep have lost confidence in him. Actually, The Sheep were losing confidence in him after only one or two blanks: after only one return in his last 7 outings, and a 'missed' penalty against Leicester, they're positively up in arms about his supposedly 'awful form'. And there is, unfortunately, likely to be a big sell-off on him this week. In fact, he's already lost nearly 800,000 owners from his peak ownership level of nearly 7.7 million at the turn of the year, and slipped back in price from 11.4 to 11.1 million. However, that's still 600k higher than he was at the start of the year when everyone bought him, so.... you do need to be confident that you won't want him for the rest of the season. If he suddenly rediscovers his scoring boots, and you decide you want him back in a few weeks, you might have tossed away quite a bit of money. (Of course, there is also a possibility that if the stampede away from him gathers more pace, his price will soon drop below its starting level, or at least below what you're selling him for now, so the possible loss of squad value won't be a worry; that is a big gamble to take at this point, though.)

However, I think it might be worth holding on to him just a little bit longer, for these reasons:

1)  He's not 'playing badly'; his team is. But that might soon change.

Romeo Lavia's absence for the past few months has been devastating to Chelsea. He gives them much more security in the middle of the park, and allows Enzo Fernandez to play higher up the pitch, helping to give the high press more cutting edge and otten winning the ball back near the penalty area. Nicolas Jackson has also been a big miss: his finishing was vastly improved in the early part of this season, and he'd formed a great understanding with Palmer - frequently providing assists to him, as well as gratefully accepting several sublime assists himself. Noni Madueke also gives the side a much better range of attacking options - and is the other player who's most often assisted and been assisted by Palmer. All three of those players look like they could be back in action soon.

2)  He's still eager, busy, involved: there's no sign of a loss of energy or confidence.

I always counsel against listening to people who try to cite 'underlying numbers' in support of a position. But in this case, I believe it's justified. Although Palmer has had a few 'quiet' games, and a number of his stats have fallen a good way from what they've been at their best,... they're still not bad. Indeed, his overall involvement - number of touches, number of touches in and around the box, pass completion - is holding up pretty well; he's still central to Chelsea's creative efforts, on the ball more than any other player (and, if the BPS weren't such complete crap, he'd be getting 1 or 2 bonus points every week, even when they don't win; that's how influential he is in this team). He's still getting a fair few scoring chances as well. In fact, he's just been desperately unlucky on many occasions - throughout this season, really, not just during the recent 'slump': he's had efforts go narrowly wide, smack against the woodwork, or bring smart saves out of the keeper in almost every game.

3)  Chelsea's LUCK has got to change eventually, right?

Palmer didn't 'miss' that penalty. OK, he might have telegraphed which side he was putting it, and he didn't tuck it right inside the post, as he usually does; but it was cleanly hit, firm and low, well to the keeper's left - it needed a really good save to keep it out. And it was an illegal save: Hermansen was fully airborne before the ball had left Palmer's boot; the kick should have been retaken, but VAR seemingly didn't even look at that. Moreover, he should have had at least one other penalty, possibly two in that game. And Chelsea have had good penalty shouts mysteriously ignored by the officials several times this season. The overall number of penalties is well down on last year, mainly because of a more generous interpretation of the Handball Law favouring defenders. But Chelsea have been awarded barely a third as many penalties as they were last year; that is a freakish phenomenon - and very, very unjust. Surely, referees can't continue to be this 'biased' against them all season: the luck needs to start balancing out a little at some point.

4)  The fixtures are still looking quite good

Apart from Arsenal this weekend (and they've got problems of their own at the moment; I wouldn't write off Chelsea's chances of an upset win in this one), Chelsea have a pretty soft run through to the end of next month. If the team is soon back to full strength and starts firing again, there could be some big results in prospect.

5)  There's a shortage of really convincing replacements for him

Bruno Fernandes comes up with a great goal once in a while, but Manchester United's form is just awful: he feels like a bit of a risk even for the Leicester game this week, and certainly not a strong prospect for the remainder of the season. City are still looking pretty dreadful too. Arsenal are struggling in the absence of Saka and Martinelli: Trossard and Merino have not lived up to the hopes people had for their attacking potential. Brentford and Bryan Mbeumo appear to be going off the boil again (he was so anonymous in last week's game that I had to doublecheck the match reports to find out if he'd even been playing!), and they have a horrible fixture-run from now on. Son and Bowen haven't really been lighting any fires. Jota's perpetually injured, Diaz is too much of a minutes-risk. and Szoboszlai's a bit too up-and-down in his FPL returns. Though Iwobi, in particular, often looks dangerous, Fulham have been dreadfully inconsistent. And the hour of the Bournemouth attacking midfielders may have passed, now that Evanilson has resumed the primary goalscorer duties there (Kluivert still looks in white-hot form; but the argument in favour of Ouattara or Semenyo, or Brooks or Tavernier, has abruptly faded). Anthony Gordon's been looking jaded, exhausted lately; and now he's picked up a three-game ban. Only Mitoma, Eze, and Hudson-Odoi/Elanga/Gibbs-White have recently staked a claim to inclusion in FPL squads; but none of the 'big name' midfield prospects are looking any better than Palmer at the moment.

I confess I am really torn on this (well, I would be, if I were still playing; I quit in protest at the absurdity of the 'Assstant Manager' chip - that detachment perhaps enables me to view this situation a little more calmly). The drop-off in Palmer's points returns is certainly concerning, especially for such an expensive player. And I think that, if Chelsea don't start to turn things around in the next 2 or 3 games, the case for dropping him will become overwhelmng. But it's not quite that yet. I suspect people who've dropped him now might soon find cause to regret the decision.