The AssMan cometh....!

 (Sorry. I just couldn't help myself; I've been waiting to use that line for months...)

Now, while I absolutely detest the gimmicky novelty and incongruousness of this new bonus chip that the FPL Gnomes, in their unwisdom, have foisted on us this year, and advocate strongly for everyone to BOYCOTT using it (or indeed, to quit the game altogether - as I myself have done), I understand that the majority of FPL managers are willing to accept it (at least as a one-off experiment....), can't resist the curious challenges it poses. Hence, since I endeavour to be generally helpful to other players of the game in these posts, I have been willing to set aside my antipathy to the chip and offer some observations on when and how to use it in my weekly rundowns of selection issues, and also in this comprehensive guide to the so-called 'Assistant Manager' (though it's actually got bugger-all to do with managers and is simply a 'Team Results' chip).

And so, I will now proffer some additional thoughts on this new chip - as ITS HOUR appears to be nigh.

As I mentioned at the weekend, traditional 'Chip Strategy' has been thrown into turmoil by removing the usual clash between the FA Cup quarter-finals and the regular Premier League programme this year. However,... most people are still alarmed about the semi-big Blank Gameweek for the FA Semis in GW34 and - wisely - fear that they will need their Free Hit (or their 2nd Wildcard, if they've somehow used their Free Hit already...) to get through that. The likely Double Gameweek following on from that in GW36 or 37 could still be a strong option to punt the Bench Boost chip, if you've still got that; and even if you don't go for that ploy, it's probably the best time to use the 2nd Wildcard, to set yourself up as well as possible for the final few gameweeks of the season (which often get a bit eccentric, with some teams getting overcome by their nerves in struggling to achieve their season goals, while many others.... just have nothing left to play for) and to 'optimise' the first eleven as far as possible for that final double.

Hence, since you can only play one 'chip' at a time, for most people it's simply not going to be possible to play the Assistant Manager chip after Gameweek 33. (And FPL hasn't actually specified if you'd be allowed to choose to play it for less than 3 gameweeks at the end of the season - because you forgot about it, or felt too constrained by your plans for the other chips to play it any earlier; it's quite possible that it will cease to be available in GW37, if you haven't already activated it.)

But, fortuitously enough, it is looking as though the next few gameweeks could be the most appealing window to try to make use of the chip anyway.

Manchester United now have a run of 3 successive table-bonus opportunities - and those are HUGE for this chip: a draw with the table-bonus is worth as much as a win without one; a win with a table-bonus is enormous. Now, with United's form under Amorim, that still looks like a massive - and perhaps unnattractive - gamble; but it is worth considering as an option. If they can't pull off a good performance against Forest this week, you could switch to another manager/team for Gameweek 32. Brentford, always dangerous going forward, even though their defence occasionally falls apart, could have a good chance of getting something from their trip to Newcastle - also a table-bonus. And Everton could well manage another upset against their cross-town rivals Liverpool, at least to the extent of holding them to a draw perhaps - again, a table-bonus. And Marco Silva's already pulled off some table-bonus surprises: the chance of Fulham getting something from their London derby match-up with Arsenal shouldn't be written off. Spurs, even away from home, should be fancied to pick up a few goals against floundering Chelsea; and while they're probably not anywhere near favourites for a win, it's not too remote a prospect. And - although I admit it seems ridiculously unlikely - I would piss myself laughing if Leicester managed to get anything off City!! All in all, this is a very interesting week for the Assistant Manager.

However, things may get even better next week(end); and I think most FPL managers have planned all along that GWs 31-33 would probably be the best slot to try to use for this new chip.

Brighton might still be 5 places above Palace going into that week (though that's a bit touch-and-go); and then the following week, of course, Palace will have a table-bonus double bill against City and Newcastle (both away; quite likely to lose both - a double gameweek isn't always infallible magic, but... it's still somewhat tempting, three table-bonus fixtures in two gameweeks is the kind of mother-lode you look for with this chip). West Ham at home against Bournemouth in GW31 might perhaps be a more tempting option, quite a strong possibility of a table-bonus draw (and if they get some form going, perhaps they could even discomfit Liverpool at Anfield the following week?? Nah....!). Brentford away to Chelsea, or Villa playing Forest and Everton playing Arsenal at home could also be handy table-bonus prospects in GW31. Wolves at home to Spurs (maybe, if the gap widens), or Brentford away at Arsenal, and Everton away at Forest could also be tempting table-bonus punts for GW32.

And then in GW33, of course, there's always the possibility that there could be another Double Gameweek (probably for City and Villa [unless they both lose; I'm writing this on Sunday, so don't know yet]: not very attractive teams at the moment, and not with very good fixtures in that week - but if they can get some scoring form going between now and then, perhaps they could make the AM punt worthwhile with goals alone. There aren't too many obvious table-bonus opportunities that week - Everton hosting City and Spurs hosting Forest, perhaps. However, it's too far away for us to have much idea of how the table gaps might have evolved by then; maybe some of the mid-table battlers will have pulled apart, giving a few more options.

Even more than with most aspects of FPL, this is sheer bloody ROULETTE: because the chip's life is extended over three weeks, there are just too many imponderables to try to assess, it's a complete shot in the dark.

However, it does now seem incontestable that you HAVE to activate the 'Assistant Manager' chip in Gameweek 30 or 31.

The final fuck-you from FATE and the FPL Gnomes (possible band name??) is that the decisive factor in choosing between these two possibilities ought to be the possible double-fixture(s) in Gameweek 33; but we almost certainly won't have those confirmed before the Gameweek 30 deadline on Tuesday evening, so..... just got to flip a coin, and keep your fingers crossed. (I think I'd probably go for the GW30 deployment, just because I like the already-known fixture options over the three gameweeks a little more. Also, if Gameweek 33 turns out to be the bigger - or only - additional Double Gameweek, you might want to use your Bench Boost in that.)

It's ANNOYING, yes. The better path would be to refuse to use the damn chip.

#DownWithTheNewChip

Do we MISS IT, now that it's gone...?

 

It's easy to 'forget', amid everything else that's going on in the world of football - and the wider world! - but.... this weekend is a momentous landmark for the game of Fantasy Premier League,

In the past, the FA Cup Quarter-Finals always clashed with the regular League programme; this is the first year in which Premier League games have been suspended on this weekend to accommodate the Cup.

For the last many years, we always had a HUGE Blank Gameweek around this time of year, usually in GW29 or GW30. Potentially, it could involve 16 EPL teams missing a fixture in the Gameweek because of their involvement in the FA Cup round. Usually, one or two lower-division sides would still be in the Cup at this stage; and occasionally some of the EPL teams in the quarters might have been drawn against each other in the League for that week, minimising the fixture disruption just slightly. But we'd always be missing 10 or 12 teams; sometimes 14 or 16!

It was pretty much impossible to navigate such a COLOSSAL HOLE in the fixtures without using the Free Hit chip. But the upside of this disruption was that a few weeks later, the missed games would be caught up in midweek - creating a HUGE Double Gameweek for all of those teams. Typically, you'd want to get a stacked squad with all 15 players having good double-fixtures for that week - so that you could Bench Boost. And to achieve that, you'd almost certainly have to use your 2nd Wildcard the week before. (But you might decide to forego that maximal Bench Boost possibility because you were likely to need the WC even more for the sometimes only slightly less calamitous Blank Gameweek on the FA Semis weekend a month or so later....)

Hence, FA Cup Quarter-Final weekend was the dominant factor in dictating chip strategy  for the season. [I flagged this as being one of the BIG changes to look out for this season five or six months ago.]

And a lot of FPL managers clearly can't shake these old habits of thought. They still seem to be convinced that you have to save your Bench Boost for the BIG Double Gameweek at the end of the season. Nope, there are no 'big' Double Gameweeks any more!

Of course, the focus for planning how to use our chips has now switched to the Semi-Finals weekend (GW34 this year), which can still be a major upheaval; but it's not nearly as big a hazard - as big a blank - as the Quarter-Final weekend was in the past; and it doesn't offer nearly such a big upside in its resultant double-fixtures (especially if, as is suggested, they may be split over two gameweeks this year).

I really did rather enjoy the annual challenge of the Big Blank and the Big Double. The game is a bit less exciting, a bit less demanding without it. (And there's arguably no real need to have a 2nd Wildcard chip at all any more: it's reduced to being a luxury makeover facility, rather than an essential life-saver!)

Weeks that seem like MONTHS....

 

It is a cruel and unusual punishment to suspend the League programme for the FA Cup quarters immediately following an internatioal break...

Two-and-a-half weeks without any EPL football!  Cabin Fever sets in....

Patience, my friends. Soon, soon....

Sheep Picks (10)

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.

So, for Gameweek 30 I'm going to nominate...... Bruno Fernandes (again!).

Yes, Bruno's a great player; and he's been in fine form lately; but......

1)  Manchester United are still a complete shit-show under Amorim; but for the utter hopelessness of all three promoted clubs this year, they would be in real relegation trouble.

2)  Bruno's actually been more than a little bit fortunate in his last few games. Everyone was expecting him to score against dreadful Ipswich and Leicester; but he failed to in the first of those games, and only nabbed one against Leicester in the very last minute - having had a fairly quiet game. (I kind of feel, too, that there ought to be a subjective element in the awarding of 'assists': you should really only get them for incisive pieces of play that really set up the chance - the inch-perfect cross, the defence-splitting pass; not just being the last person to touch the ball before a teammate carves out a brilliant solo goal - which was the case for both of Bruno's 'assists' in his belatedly huge haul against Leicester!)  The draw away at Everton in February was a travesty, marred by a welter of poor VAR/refereeing decisions; and the home side were so absolutely dominant in the first half, they really should have won the game by 4 or 5 goals. And that free-kick against Arsenal?? Very nicely taken, yes: but the ref had the wall 12.5% too far back: that's a massive error. And the normally flawless David Raya was hugely at fault on that one too - far too far over to the right side of his goal: the effort should have been comfortably saveable.

3)  Lately, Amorim's often been playing him in deeper midfield rather than as one of his 'joint 10s' - where he's likely to have rather less of an attacking impact.

4)  The fixtures now turn sharply against United - with Forest, City, and Newcastle their next three opponents. In fact, they don't have an easily winnable-looking game for the rest of the season.

If you got Bruno in three or four Gameweeks ago - perhaps to replace faltering Cole Palmer - Fate smiled on you. But NOW is the time to be offloading him again, not bringing him in.

And yet Bruno is currently the most acquired player for the Gameweek, with over 250,000 managers transferring him in. That makes no sense at all.

He's back!

Like many football fans, I've been feeling rather bereft over the last few weeks - since the unhappy news broke that Adam Clery was quitting the FourFourTwo Youtube channel that he'd made essential viewing over the last 18 months.

Now it's emerged that, in partnership with The Independent newspaper, he's launching his own Youtube venture, The Adam Clery Football Channel (ACFC), where we'll be getting more of the chirpy, irreverent tactical analysis videos we've come to love. (It looks like he might still be working with FourFourTwo occasionally as well - but on more 'magazine'-type pieces, mini-documentaries rather than game analysis.)

I'm pleased to see that his first posting on the new channel concurs with my own positive impressions of Thomas Tuchel's debut in charge of England....

For those who don't know.... Adam is, as we say in Britain, a top bloke: unpretentious, down-to-earth, a regular guy - but also very shrewd about his football. He's become the 'gateway drug' for tactical analysis videos. There are other guys out there who will go into more detail about particular patterns of play, or how a team seeks to morph its formation between different phases of possession and so on; but if you just want to understand why Team X is doing so well recently, or how Team W has fallen away, or why the weekend's Y-Z derby game ended as it did... Adam's your man. He's brisk, breezy, accessible - with just the right amount of silly, self-deprecating humour to help hold your attention across a discussion that will often stretch to 12 or 14 minutes or so. His videos - sometimes on teams, sometimes on individual players, but mostly breaking down particular big game outcomes - are always both entertaining and enlightening, and I cannot recommend them highly enough. Do go and check them out.

The engagingly daft little 'teaser' vid for the new channel that he posted a few days ago is a fine example of the man's unique style.

A little bit of Zen (35)

"All effort is vain, in that a thing strived for can never be fully attained. 

All effort is not vain, in that the expense of effort, and the will to do so, is in itself noble."

GW

Wildcard THIS week??

 

Hell, NO!!!

The 'chips' in general, and perhaps - strangely - the Wildcard in partcular.... well, it seems to burn a hole i people's pockets: they grow impatient to get rid of it.

So, although there are still 9 more gameweeks in which one might play the 2nd Wiildcard,.... an awful lot of folk seem to be intent on activating it for Gameweek 30.

There are several reasons why this probably isn't a great idea:

1)  As I pointed out some months back, in relation to hazarding the Triple Captain chip in the gameweek after an international break, it's non-ideal to play a chip straight after a break because of the additional uncertainty that now surrounds the next batch of fixtures. After the long hiatus from Premier League football, teams and individuals have been knocked out of their usual rhythm and 'form' may suddenly be dramatically different when things resume. Plus, of course, there is enormous scope for new injuries to have arisen in the two-and-a-half weeks since everyone last played a league match. And in fact, those who were not involved in international duty nor in this coming weekend's FA Cup ties might be the most problematic - because clubs often keep quiet about training-ground mishaps until the very eve of the next match. You really don't have much idea how the GW30 matches are going to go, or who's going to be available (and there might be a few nasty surprises that emerge only after the deadline, since the matches are staggered over three days). Making even one or two regular transfers in these circumstances is nerve-wracking enough; hazarding a whole squad rebuild is.... utter INSANITY. 

2)  At the moment we have the further complication that a couple of top players are poised to return from injury soon (Saka and Jackson [and NO, I don't put Jackson on the same level as Saka; he might not even be in contention for a squad place himself, but.... his reintroduction for Chelsea could have a huge impact on Palmer's productivity!), and a couple more from extended suspensions (Cunha and Gordon). If they start producing their best form again, you might want them... And their contributions could have a major impact on the value of certain of their teammates too. But we won't know about this for a few weeks yet. Having some of the most important selection decisions of the remainder of the season looming over us like this is another reason to defer using the WildCard, if possible.

3) There can't be much legitimate pretext for most people to need to Wildcard now. There haven't - yet - been any major new long-term injuries. And there aren't any major turns in fixtures happening that might make you want to consider wholesale squad changes on grounds of fixture-difficulty. (OK, Fulham, Everton, Brentford, and Manchester United are now facing tough runs of fixtures; but they're not clubs you should have had many - or any! - players from anyway.)

4)  There are clearly much stronger tactical occasions for using the 2nd Wildcard still to come. If you've blown your Free Hit already, you'll almost certainly need your Wildcard instead to help you get around the looming catastrrophe of a big Blank Gameweek in GW34. If you've still got the FH in hand for that, there's going to be at least one more - perhaps also a second - Double Gameweek in the final weeks of the season, with the resheduled games from the FA Cup Semi-Final weekend. Many FPL managers traditionally regard such Double Gameweeks as a prime opportunity to deploy the Bench Boost chip; this year, those doubles are probably going to be too small to make that a particularly attractive play, but still, even without the bonus chip staked on it, a DGW will benefit from a major squad shake-up that week (or the week prior, if you are going for the Bench Boost) - that's what you should be keeping your Wildcard for. (If you don't have the Bench Boost still to use, but you do have both the Wildcard and the Free Hit, you enjoy the leeway to decide which order to play them in. If you don't fancy your doubling players that much for the other remaing gameweeks, it could make more sense to use the Free Hit for that Double Gameweek and play the Wildcard in GW34 - rather than vice versa.)

5)  Some people want to try to 'set up' for the coming Double Gameweeks by Wildcarding NOW - but it's way too early. At the time most of these folk were activatig the chip, they didn't even know which teams would have progressed to the FA semi-finals (and thus be blanking in FPL in Gameweek 34); and we almost certainly still won't know when those missing GW34 games will be rescheduled before the GW30 deadline on Tuesday evening. It's really too early even to think about 'optimising' for the already setttled Double Gameweek in GW32: that's still two weeks away, and players you bring in now might not still be available then (and some of them might not be ideal for the two intervening gameweeks...). Rebuilding a squad with a Wildcard even one week in advance of a big gameweek (most commonly, because you want to play Bench Boost in a BIG double) can backfire, with multiple injuries and suspensions hitting in the intervening week. Trying to do it two or three weeks ahead is asking for trouble.

6)  Some years.... the Cup fixtures break in such a way that you can thread your way through the end-of-season blanks and doubles without needing to use your Wildcard or Free Hit (without needing to use both of them, anyway!). In that happy circumstance, it's rather nice just to be able to drop a remaining 'rebuild chip' in the last week or two of the season to enable you to blitz one of your cup competitions...

As so often, the blame for this mass delusion spreading over the Interwebs seems to lie with FPL's inane anonymous 'pundit', The Scout, who's published a 'Wildcard squad' for this week - and that seems to have given all The Sheep the idea that this is a good week to play the Wildcard.  It's NOT, not at all.

Occasionally, Fate craps on you from a great height and you are obliged to play a Wildcard at such a non-ideal time just because of a sudden combination of injuries, fixture swings, and losses of form. Ultimately, you play your Wildcards when you need to - whenever you have urgent squad changes that have to be made all at once, and the total is at least 3 or 4 more than the number of Free Transfers you have available. (Even a surplus need over Free Transfers of 3 or 4 is very borderline: you probably ought to consider whether you can defer one or two of those changes for another week or so.... or eat the extra 'hits'!)

But it's very difficult to envisage why anybody would be in such a predicament now. You really ought to hang on to your Wildcard a bit longer...

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.