What is 'Form'?

 

Well, it's not this.

FPL defines 'form' - as in the screenshot of their Stats page above - as the 'average FPL points return over the last 5 gameweeks'. While this is a moderately useful number to keep in mind (though, if you watch football regularly, you ought to be fairly continuously aware of this, without needing to check up on the FPL figures very much...), it's obviously a very flawed metric - and it's not really how any of us conceive of 'form' in football.

For one thing, FPL returns can be pretty random: they're not always an accurate reflection of how well a player has played. For another, this ranking doesn't take account of how many gameweeks in this run the player might have missed, or only played short minutes in (at least, I don't think it does; it's not explained anywhere, and I've never been bothered to check more deeply; but it appears to aggregate the same last five gameweeks for everyone, not the last five that each player actually played in... or started in). [CORRECTION: FPL is now specifying that the timeframe is 'all League games played in the last 30 days'; but I think that might be new.]  Moreover, it doesn't consider 'form' in other recent games - European and domestic cup competitions. 

Even more importantly, it doesn't capture any of the small details of each game that might give more meaningful context to a performance: it is, of course, mainly reflective of goals and assists - but they often come very much against the run of play, sometimes as complete flukes,... or from unjustly awarded penalties,... or when the opposing side has been reduced to 10 men. 

And 5 gameweeks is an arbitrary cut-off anyway - why not 4, or 6? I'd suggest that 5 gameweeks is in fact an awkward compromise, too long to properly reflect very recent shifts in form, but too short to do justice to more consistent, longer-term form. So, I don't look at the FPL 'Form' table very often....

First, we need to bear in mind the important relationship between team form and individual form. In FPL, we're mostly interested in individual form - but we have to assess that in the broader context of the overall form of the team a player represents. I commented last week that I think Cole Palmer has been continuing to play very well - but his FPL returns have dried up over the last 4 or 5 months because Chelsea's form has collapsed. Likewise, Kerkez, Robinson, and Gvardiol were popular defensive picks earlier in the season, but their teams' form got so flakey in recent months that their attacking returns dwindled, and clean-sheets almost disappeared - making them no longer top options in that position.

If a player is playing well, and is part of a team that is playing well, and that is playing in a style that supports and enables that player to perform at his best,... and this good play is the kind of play that is likely to produce FPL returns fairly often,... and there are good reasons to suppose that this good play is not just an ephemeral one-off but has good chances of being a continuing trend for some time,..... THAT is 'form'.

A player in this sort of form won't always produce FPL returns for you (because no-one, not even Mo Salah, produces FPL points every week, even if they play well!); but he'll give you a much better chance of fairly regular returns - which is what you're looking for in this game.

Then, I think it's useful to identify THREE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES of 'Form':

1)  Established, medium- to long-term form.  If a player (or a team) has been playing fairly consistently well over a period of several gameweeks, that's certainly something you should be taking notice of. And it can be a persuasive sign that the good form has solid foundations and is likely to endure for some time further (although, of course, form can turn at any moment....).

2)  Emerging form.  Form can shift in a single game, even sometimes in a single moment: occasionally you can see that a coolly taken goal, or a heroic last-ditch block, or a flying save has completely re-energised a player who'd been having a bad spell and lost confidence in themselves. But that's very rare; and it's a risky thing to bet on. In general, I feel it takes 2 to 3 games of good all-around performance to be persuasive that someone's form has turned for the better. (Or, equally, 2 or 3 disappointing games - not just 1!! - to convince that someone's form is badly faltering.)  

I've always rather liked the proverb: 'Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.'  (Possibly invented by Ian Fleming, who uses the phrase and the idea as a structural device in the plot of Goldfinger.)  One good game might be a freak; two on the bounce is very encouraging, but it still might mean nothing; three.... is form. 

3)  Turning form.  Ah, but while it might usually take at least 3 games to firmly establish a trend in form, you probably do want to trust your instincts and take an early gamble occasionally on the first signs of a change in fortune for a player. Here, a full appreciation of the overall context for a player's performance is especially crucial. If you can see that a player is mad keen to make a mark after returning from an injury absence or a spell out of favour with the manager; if you can see that a tweak in the tactics or the return of a key supporting teammate is likely to particularly suit your player's style; if you've spotted an approaching 'turn' in the fixtures towards some softer opponents; if you can discern strong underlying reasons why a player just played so well, and why his performances might now continue to improve,..... why, then you might consider diving in for him after just one good game, or certainly after two. (I'd be warier of dumping out players too hastily for a 'poor' performance, though. It's usually much harder to determine why a player has 'lost form', or when it might return.)

[It is notable that the recommendations of FPL's lamebrained pundit 'The Scout' usually only call attention to players who've been producing good returns for a few weeks, if not slightly longer: players whose form is certainly more 'emerged' than just 'emerging', if not at least on the cusp of being now well-established - players you should have noticed for yourself already. 'The Scout' is almost always just a little bit late to the party in spotting good acquisitions.]

But above all, you need to watch full games, with close attention - to get an overall sense of how a player, and the team around him, is performing in every aspect. People who say a player is 'in form' just because he scored a goal or two recently (or has kept a clean sheet or two, if it's a keeper or defender), or has a good-looking number in that FPL chart at the top of the post here,.... they don't know what they're talking about; THAT isn't form.

Luck-o-Meter (35)

The rate of injuries has slowed somewhat in recent weeks (everyone's injured already??), but a greater incidence of fatigue, nerves, perhaps occasional complacency or dipping in motivation, and a preoccupation, for some, with the final rounds of the European competitions, mean that already over the past few gameweeks we've seen more and more bizarre swings in form and unexpected results. The tail-end of the season becomes even more of a lottery than usual. Eccentric coaching decisions and incompetent refereeing may add even more to these uncertainties.... Will they this week? Let's see.

The tight turnaround this week (a Friday evening kick-off for City v Wolves no doubt catching many FPL managers by surprise - especially as having the last match of Gameweek 34, Forest v Brentford, put back to Thursday evening meant that there was a gap of less than 24 hours between the two gameweeks) may have provided the first cruel blows of Fortune for some.....

And indeed, the new gameweek got off to a strange and exasperating start, with in-form visitors Wolves being largely dominant at the Etihad, yet somehow not managing to make any of their chances pay (the highly fancied FPL picks Cunha and Ait-Nouri both hit the post!). This led to the rare (almost unique - I can't recall seeing it before!) phenomenon of the Wolves players getting far higher average ratings on the BBC match report than the City ones, despite having lost the match; in fact, 6 Wolves players were rated higher than any City players (except match-winner, Kevin DeBruyne)! And not only did City nick a winner somewhat against the run of play, and improbably cling on to a clean sheet - but Josko Gvardiol, who really did nothing all game, apart from one important block from an Ait-Nouri effort in the second half, somehow hoovered up the maximum bonus points. Ain't no justice!  More FPL woe in that Cunha and Marmoush, two of the highest-owned forwards after Isak, both unexpectedly drew a blank here; and that the recently excellent Strand Larsen was a very late withdrawal, with a groin muscle problem that might keep him out for a few weeks. Also, Rayan Ait-Nouri was very lucky to escape a red card for raking his studs down Bernardo Silva's shin late in the game; he probably benefitted from the overturning of Evanilson's red card a couple of days ago on the basis that his foul, though horrendous, had been 'accidental' - this looked the same kind of thing: a very nasty impact, but clumsy rather than malevolent. Though I'm not sure that presumed intention should be any part of assessing the severity of incidents like this...

Marshall Munetsi's penalty shout was a feeble claim: it looked as though he'd merely slipped over in the six-yard box as Gvardiol very lightly laid a hand on his upper arm for a moment. Nevertheless, Gvardiol was taking a big chance in trying to touch an attacking player who was slipping in behind him, and we do still sometimes see such tenuous 'infractions' penalised - it was one of those where, if the referee had initially seen it as a foul, VAR might have been hesitant to query that. And if a penalty had been given there, Gvardiol would have, in an instant, lost his clean-sheet bonus.... and all or most of his extra bonus points. On such slender margins in officiating do tens of FPL points - and the outcomes of games - often swing....

Villa prevailed narrowly over Fulham at home, although both teams looked pretty mediocre and lacked any cutting edge. Robinson was a little lucky to avoid conceding a penalty early on for needlessly barging Watkins in the back; it wasn't a very heavy contact, but it was illegal. Ruling out Sessegnon's goal for a faint touch on the hand as the ball came down for his half-volley looked fair enough. Unai Emery alienated a lot of FPL fans by making a pair of substitutions just about on the stroke of the hour - leading to the bizarre and vexing inconsistency that John McGinn received full appearance points while poor Marco Asensio got only a solitary point, despite their departure from the pitch being mere seconds apart!

Arsenal faltered again, failing to capitalise on a comfortable dominance in the first half, and then being caught out by - oh, the irony! - a couple of Bournemouth set-pieces in the second half. Semenyo took his long throw-in for Huijsen's equaliser from the wrong place - a curious new example of poor refereeing potentially having swung the course of the game. There was just a slight whiff of controversy about Bournemouth's winner, since it was impossible to see on the VAR pictures (whose resolution seems to be getting worse by the week?!) what part of Evanilson's body the ball had been deflected over the line by.

Everton are still misfiring too; likewise should have made more of their first-half chances. Long-range pingers from McNeil and Enciso were really the only bright spots in a fairly dull game. Everton fans are a bit disgruntled by the fact that Hirst's equaliser came after Patterson had been laid out at the other end of the field with an apparent facial injury.

Leicester won comfortably against Southampton, and really should have won by more: El Khannouss blazed a couple of excellent chances wide, and Vardy had a good penalty shout waved away.

Brentford were up to their old tricks again, dominating the game and scoring for fun,... but failing to shut out even a very poor opponent. They really need a better keeper: there was nothing to be done about Garnacho's 20-yard screamer, but the other two they conceded here were very much Flekken's fault (and I don't like the way he started whingeing at his defenders after letting Diallo's third through his legs....). One wonders if something's broken with the new Semi-Automated Offside decision technology, as we haven't often been seeing the justificatory computer graphic renderings which are supposed to determine the calls now; in this game we had a very long delay to verify Wissa's goal... in which no-one had been anywhere near to offside - bizarre! With United so utterly woeiful, it's becoming harder and harder to see how Amorim can keep his job this summer. But at least it was nice to see returns to the field after long injury abences from Mount, Diallo, Shaw, Henry, and Thiago in this game.

It was nice to see VAR actually doing its job well at Brighton, twice correctly overruling the award of a penalty to Newcastle, and then eventually stepping in to direct the referee to take a second look at an obvious handball in the wall defending a free-kick from 20 yards - but Craig Pawson really wasn't having a good day, to have got all three of these wrong the first time. Moreover, as with the Ben Johnson incident last week, his eventual decision to show a yellow card to Willock in the second incident was extremely harsh: Van Hecke managed to pull out of his rash challenge at the last minute, but it was reasonable for the attacker to go to ground in an attempt to avoid an anticipated - and potentially devastating - contact; going down like that is not necessarily 'diving'. Mats Wieffer should definitely have been sent off for a dangerous challenge on Tonali, and on that one VAR failed to intervene; I suppose they're not supposed to adjudicate on yellow card decisions, even for a second yellow (although, obviously, they should have jurisdiction over all potential sendings-off; that's just an absurd oversight in the protocols); but this challenge clearly met the threshold for at least consideration as a straight red card, so they surely could have suggested a second look to Pawson - which would then have given him the option to award a second yellow rather than a straight red, once he'd seen the foul more clearly. But for me, it was every way a straight red. I'm not sure if Newcastle fans can take encouragement from this game or not: they did dominate, and created large numbers of chances - but weren't at all clinical with them, which is why they needed the fortuitous late penalty to salvage a point. I don't think I'd be backing any of their players except Isak for the run-in; and even he might be becoming questionable.

For me, West Ham v Spurs - rather than the much-derided Leicester v Southampton match-up - was the weekend's 'El Crapico': two absolutely awful teams who would have been relegated this year... if promoted Championship sides were able to compete at the higher level any more. Spurs will hide behind the excuse of putting out a 'B team' ahead of their Europa League semi-final second-leg game on Thursday; but to be honest, at the moment their 'first team' isn't any better (one of the few consolations of their dismal season is that they've been able to give so much experience to promising youngsters like Spence, Bergvall, Gray, Moore, Tel, and Odobert). Without an uncharacteristic error (actually, a treble or quadruple error!) from Max Kilman gifting them an early lead, Spurs didn't look likely to get on the scoresheet; without the always lively Jarrod Bowen, neither would West Ham.

We might have expected Liverpool to have a bit of a drop-off in performance after securing the title a month before the end of the season, and perhaps to give a few squad players a run-out; and there have been signs of improvement at Chelsea over the past couple of weeks; but such a comprehensive win by the Blues surely took everyone by surprise. Van Dijk had a rare stinker, slipping more than once and racking up several mistakes and then scoring at his own end (by lashing a panicky clearance into his defensive colleague Quansah),.... before redeeming himself ever so slightly with a late headed goal to put the home side back under a bit of pressure in the closing minutes. Alisson also looked uncharacteristically jittery at times, and was very lucky to avoid a sending-off for cleaning out Madueke outside his area (saved by a late offside flag - although it might still have been judged 'serious foul play'). Jackson's injury-time penalty was a bit soft, but overall Chelsea were well worth their margin of victory - with Lavia and Cucurella particularly impressive, and Palmer absolutely back to his imperious best (as usual, he smashed one effort against the inside of a post, and had a few excellent potential assists spurned by his teammates; with slightly better luck, he could have had a 15 or 20-point haul here).

The final game on Monday night between Palace and Forest looked quite entertaining, with a lot of open, end-to-end football - but both sides misfiring rather in front of goal. No obvious controversies in the match; although Palace's penalty award against Sels looked a bit soft (and it was at first ignored by the ref; and I'm not sure there was a clear enough 'error' for VAR to insist on a second look). And Murillo became yet another defender to unexpectedly wind up on the scoresheet.

A lot of unexpected results this week, with Ipswich battling to a draw at Everton, Wolves being very unlucky not to beat City, Bournemouth stealing a win from a very lacklustre Arsenal, Newcastle labouring to a draw at Brighton, and Chelsea spanking the newly-crowned champions..., while City, Villa, and Leicester were, rather improbably, the only teams to manage to keep a clean sheet. With most of the big names blanking this time (only Palmer, Isak, Mbeumo, Wissa and Bowen produced returns among the highest-owned players), the 'Team of the Week' on Monday was full of left-field improbables; only Gvardiol, DeBruyne and Isak have any significant ownership. Of course, there were a fair few selection surprises and late injury withdrawals too; and some more exasperating eccentricities in the bonus points allocations. And it's ended up another very low-scoring gameweek: most 'good scores' are only in the 40s and 50s this time, and only a handful of outliers have managed much better than 60 points. There have been, I think, 4 or 5 really bad bits of officiating, with Craig Pawson failing to send off Mats Wieffer being the most egregious; but that's actually much better than we've seen in most weeks so far this season. Overall, I'd say this is barely a 5 out of 10 on the 'Luck-o-Meter', and really for wayward form and surprising results, rather than the refereeing.

DON'T FORGET The Boycott.  Most people will have played the dratted 'Assistant Manager' chip by now; but if you haven't.... it's not too late to refuse to do so! I took the high road by quitting playing the game for the rest of the season when it was introduced in GW23. [I worry that, if people don't protest vociferously about it, the new chip may become a permanent feature of the game - and it will completely ruin it.]  If you didn't feel able to join me in such an emphatic gesture, I hope you at least thought about refusing to use the Assistant Manager chip (and still might refuse, if you've kept it till the last few gameweeks of the season).

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

Dilemmas of the Week - GW35

There again don't seem to have been that many new injuries this week. 

But 'form' becomes more and more unpredictable in the closing weeks of the season... And once more, we have teams in the semi-finals of the European competitions facing likely 'rest rotations' - or perhaps a general loss of focus - ahead of the crucial second-leg games next week: Arsenal, Manchester United, Spurs, and Chelsea are unlikely to be at their best in the League this weekend!

But at least we've been spared having any more blank and double gameweeks to have to worry about!!

I am trying to streamline these weekly round-ups, aiming to confine myself to just the injuries to players that are likely to have a major significance in FPL; and also, of course, only to new injuries - I figure everyone should be aware of players who were already ruled out for the last gameweek! [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 35?

Does anybody need to be moved out because of injury?

Marcus Rashford, whose form had been starting to look promising since his loan move to Villa at the start of the year, apparently picked up a hamstring problem in training ahead of last weekend's FA Cup semi-final, and will struggle to be in contention again before the end of the season.

Wesley Fofana missed last week's game against Spurs after suffering another muscle injury, and has needed surgery this week - so will be out until next season. Christopher Nkunku and Robert Sanchez also had to miss the midweek Europa Conference game with unspecified training 'knocks'.

Leicester keeper Mads Hermansen has suffered a relapse of the groin muscle problem that kept him out for a while recently, and now seems likely to miss the rest of the season - unfortunate, as he has been their best player of late.

Conor Bradley missed last weekend with a minor knock - but it seems likely that Trent Alexander-Arnold is fit enough to reclaim the regular start at right-back anyway.

Diogo Dalot has a calf muscle strain that might keep him out for the remainder of the season.

Joelinton has suffered a recurrence of an old knee problem, and is likely to be out for a while.

Callum Hudson-Odoi had to come off against Brentford last night with a hamstring problem; doesn't seem to be too bad, but he's likely to miss this weekend, at least.

Lucas Bergvall missed Spurs's Europa League game last night with an ankle injury picked up in training this week. James Maddison and Dominic Solanke are also now slight doubts after 'precautionary' substitutions last night because of minor injuries.

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

Ben Johnson is serving a one-match ban after being harshly sent off against Newcastle last week (Ipswich couldn't appeal against the decision because it was for two yellow cards, rather than a straight red).

And Joao Pedro is serving the second game of his three-match suspension after that latest piece of petulance against Brentford.

Bournemouth's Evanilson, however, has had his red card overturned on appeal, so will be available this weekend. (I am somewhat surprised by that verdict. Yes, the collision was clearly 'accidental', in that his standing leg slipped out from underneath him; but it was a horrific challenge - and he slipped because he was lunging in so recklessly. I think these sorts of incidents are usually assessed by consequences and 'lack of care', rather than presumed malicious intention; and on those criteria, the red card was deserved.)

Did anyone give other cause to consider dropping them?

Newcastle, Fulham, Palace, and Chelsea have been severely unconvincing in recent games. And Spurs, Manchester United, and West Ham have been just awful. It's difficult to see the value in taking many - any?? - players from these teams, even if they have a good fixture.

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

Umm,.... no. Cody Gakpo and Alejandro Garnacho were the only conspicuous standouts in last week's games - but not to the extent that you'd be wanting to bring them in.

Most people have probably used the 'Assistant Manager' chip by now - wanting to keep the tail-end of the season free to play other chips. With increasing unpredictability of results in the closing weeks of the season, it really shouldn't be a good time to play a chip based on team results anyway; and most of the top teams actually have quite tough run-ins - at least for the next three gameweeks - so there aren't any secure wins in prospect even for the biggest names, and certainly no huge margins of victory or easy clean sheets likely; moreover, most of the stronger teams at the lower end of the table have recovered so well in the past month or two that they no longer have many table-bonus prospects. However, Everton's David Moyes, Brentford's Thomas Frank, Forest's Nuno Espirito Santo and Wolves's Vitor Pereira have a fairly soft closing-run of fixtures, which might offer a tempting prospect of being able to stay with the same manager choice for all three weeks. I fear Everton and Forest are rather going off the boil, but Brentford have a happy knack of scoring plenty of goals even in games they lose, so are probably the most appealing points prospect for this chip now; though I do suspect that Wolves are in such ebullient mood at the moment that they could well pull off a table-bonus win against City tonight!

BEST OF LUCK, EVERYONE!

AND PLEASE DON'T FORGET The Boycott; though I'm willing to comment on its possible use, I actually loathe the pointless innovation of the 'Assistant Manager' chip - and I have been urging people to please consider quitting the game, or at least refusing to use the chip, in protest. 

But if you couldn'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 

Sheep Picks (12)

 

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 35, I'm going to nominate Ollie Watkins. It's not qctually quite as bad as I'd thought: I've been seeing him mentioned all over the Facebook forums in the last few days, and it had seemed like he was going to be one of the week's most transferred-in players. In fact, it looks like he might come up around 60,000 or 70,000 new buyers - which is significant, but not quite a stampede. However, he has edged up to become the 5th most popular forward (effectively 4th, since Haaland still isn't available to start), with nearly 19% ownership - ahead of the much more in-form Wissa and Cunha.... which is just NUTS.

Now, I like Watkins a lot; and he has started to look sharp again in the last few weeks - particularly in the surprise win against Newcastle the other week, when he notched a goal and an assist. Villa's form, too, so patchy in the first half of the season, has shown a strong improvement since February - and they've now racked up 6 wins in their last 8 games, to come storming up the table to get back into the Champions League conversation (I still don't think they're good enough to deserve to qualify for the premier competition; but at least they're giving it a damn good go at the moment). People are also taking encouragement from the recent news of a significant hamstring injury for Marcus Rashford, which seems to diminish the prospect of Watkins getting rationed minutes any longer.

However, the counter-arguments would be: a)  He's been getting short minutes recently (in fact, he's only played a full 90 two or three times since the turn of the year) because of an injury worry; he might not yet be fully over that, might perhaps still be carrying a problem of some sort.  b)  His omission from so many games, including the recent Champions League showdown with PSG, might suggest other problems - perhaps that he's out of favour with Emery because he's looking to leave the club at the end of the season. c) Villa's 'charge' has been aided by hefty helpings of luck: 2 of their run of wins have come against bottom-of-the-table clubs (which scarcely counts!), while they squeaked wins they didn't really deserve against Chelsea, Brentford, and Forest, and Newcastle mysteriously failed to show up for their surprise 4-1 hammering a couple of weeks ago; Villa were well beaten by City last week, and by Palace early in their present successful run. Their form hasn't really looked all that consistent or convincing. d) The run-in over the final 4 Gameweeks, though not too daunting, is far from straightforward either: Villa might struggle to get a result in some of these fixtures, and certainly can't be assured of any large and comfortable wins.

But - as is usually the case with these strangely over-popular selections - the decisive argument against bringing in Watkins is the quality of the alternative selections. Cunha, Strand Larsen, and Wissa are in outstanding form and have a great closing run of fixtures; Marmoush has also looked very dangerous in recent weeks; Isak and Wood are the season's outstanding performers up-front (though, admittedly, there are signs that both their and their teams' form may be faltering...); and Welbeck, Mateta, and perhaps even Ipswich's Liam Delap could be tempting left-field picks in the closing weeks of the season.

You only get 3 forward picks in FPL. And I don't see how Ollie Watkins, even on the most optimistic assessment of team form and minutes prospects, is any better than the 4th or 5th most promising pick in that position at the moment.

A little bit of Zen (40)

 

“In the practice of Zen, there is no goal. The goal is in the practice itself.”

Dogen Zenji

A final WRINKLE??

 

Just when you thought you might have been almost out of the woods for FPL confusion & calamity,..... it appears there may yet be a further Blank/Double speedbump lurking in our future.

Because the FA Cup has been scheduled before the end of the regular season this year (on Saturday of Gameweek 37 - WHY, WHY???), the Palace v Wolves and City v Bournemouth games in the League will have to be moved from that weekend.

Now, they won't be - can't be! - moved very far: they'll just have to be shunted a few days forwards or backwards into the middle of the adjacent week. And forwards - into the gap between Gameweeks 36 and 37 - seems way more likely, since the League surely wouldn't want to clutter up the final week of the season; and it would be a bit unfair on those four teams to have a substantially shorter recovery time before their final league games (there being no scope to play their weekend games on the Sunday or Monday, as the final matches of the season are now always played simultaneously).

So, yes, that's definitely going to happen. But it's not clear when the rescheduling will be confirmed (maybe not before the upcoming GW35 deadline!), or which of the adjacent Gameweeks the League will choose to include the new dates in.

And just for a further sprinkling of mayhem, Spurs have now cheekily asked if they might be allowed to move their Gameweek 37 fixture (away to Villa) forward slightly, to allow them more time to prepare for a possible Europa League Final (also, weirdly, to be played in the middle of the last week of our domestic season). If they were to be granted that wish, I suppose Manchester United would demand the same privilege. But I don't think the League would like the idea of four matches being moved out of their scheduled weekend starting slots (it would cause all sorts of havoc with the TV arrangements!). And since we won't even know if they 'need' that indulgence until just before the Gameweek 36 deadline, it could be a massive pain-in-the-backside for FPL managers too!

However, I don't think Spurs have much of a leg to stand on with this application; they're just trying it on - with almost zero chance of success. Fixture logjams like this, and additional squad pressure from big midweek games, are part-and-parcel of playing in the European competitions; they've been having to cope with it all season - they should be able to manage the burden just one more time. (And, thankfully, their opponents, Villa, seem to be unwilling to countenance the change, so that probably puts the kibosh on the proposal.)

The FA Cup Final reschedulings, alas, still hang over us, like the proverbial 'Sword of Damocles'. If the League did mischievously decide to declare GW37 a 'blank' week for those teams and GW36 (most probably) a 'double', it would be a HUGE hassle to have to deal with. Even though it's only 4 teams involved, they are 4 teams that most FPL managers have significant representation from; and probably no-one has the Free Hit or Wildcard left any more to skirt around the disruption,... or many (any?) saved Free Transfers either. So, for most of us, it would probably be that painful conundrum of whether to take 'hits' for multiple transfers or put out a short team.

Now, I can't see any earthly reason - other than sheer malice - why the League would choose to declare that moving these matches just a few days moved them into another Gameweek. But they might, they can....  And the not-knowing is agony.

[Fortunately, the League announced the following afternoon that these two games would be moved (surprisingly, back rather than forwards; presumably that was a request from the clubs in the Cup, feeling that they'd rather have a bit of extra prep time for the Wembley Final than for the last day of the League; actually, the last two days of the League!!) to the evening of Tuesday 20th May - but would stay part of Gameweek 37, as I'd anticipated/hoped. Phew!]

Is Cole Palmer playing BADLY?

 

SHORT ANSWER:  NO

LONG ANSWER:  NO - but he has ceased to be appealing as an FPL asset; however, this is mainly down to the crash in Chelsea's form since early December, rather than because he hasn't been playing well.

Yes, the Golden Boy has hit a bit of a scoring drought over the last few months; but that happens to all players from time to time. And it's worth reminding ourselves that he's not a striker; we just grew used to him scoring goals at a striker's rate over last season and the early part of this one! He's not producing regular assists at the moment, either, because the entire Chelsea team has collapsed into dysfunctionality: Maresca-ball just isn't working - and that's not Palmer's fault.

I've been able to watch the entirety of Chelsea's last few games; and I've been looking at Palmer closely.

And he still takes my breath away. 

His alertness and awareness are just on another level. It's become a bit of a cliché in recent years to speak of particularly intelligent players having 'a head-on-a-swivel' - but Palmer really does: if you watch him closely in a game, you notice that he is glancing around him constantly - not just every few seconds, but just about every single second, checking the changing situation around him from moment to moment. This is a very hard thing to count (sometimes this glancing around is just a quick motion of the eyes rather than a plainly visible turn of the neck or the upper body), but I'd guess that Palmer is maybe scanning at least twice as often as just about any other player.

This leads to an uncanny degree of spatial awareness. Most players, if they're really switched on, will try to make sure that they always have an open passing lane from or to at least one of their teammates, even if they're not likely to receive the ball; Palmer almost invariably has at least two or three passing channels available! Not only that, but his 'rest defence' posture is impeccable too: he's almost always not only putting himself in space where he can be easily found by a Chelsea teammate, but at the same time putting himself more or less on a line between two opponents (so that his 'cover shadow' would make it difficult for them to pass to each other, if their team should suddenly regain possession of the ball). Often, indeed, he somehow manages to be blocking two potential opposition passing lanes at the same time, as well as being in good space to receive. And he is almost constantly in motion, seemingly unthinkingly taking a subtle step or two one way or another to always optimise his positioning. Really, I think in the Premier League at the moment only Martin Odegaard comes close to this level of acuity in his positioning; and he's not that close.

He's incredibly alert and quick-to-respond as well. When a defender miscontrols a ball, he's often off like a bullet-from-a-gun to pile pressure on the guy; when the ball is played into the box, Palmer is almost always one of the first men following up to try to get on the end of it; when a shot rebounds or is fumbled in the six-yard box, Palmer seems to be invariably the quickest to react on either team.

Now, I think it is possible that Palmer's performance might have dipped ever so slightly - perhaps even in some of these areas I just mentioned: maybe his rate-of-scanning or speed-of-response has fallen off, almost imperceptibly, by just a few percent.... but enough to occasionally have a small impact on his returns. I think it's also very likely that he is suffering some physical and mental fatigue, from having had to play almost every game in the League (and having to bear the responsibility of being both principal playmaker and principal goalscorer in a severely under-performing team); and, given that he gets lumps kicked out of him in every game, he's probably been carrying one or two little niggling injuries from time to time as well.

And it would be surprising if even his apparently ironclad self-confidence hadn't taken a bit of a dent from Chelsea's woeful run of form over the last few months, if he weren't starting to feel a bit demoralised by how badly things have been going; and that might - sometimes - take a little bit of an edge off his previously uncanny finishing.

But Cole Palmer has not been playing poorly over the past four months or so; he's still been Chelsea's best player, the only member of the side who regularly looks like he can create a threat. He hasn't suddenly become a bad player: he's the best creative midfield player in the Premier League, and one of the best in the world.

The amount of disparagement of Palmer we've been seeing online recently is quite unwarranted. And it is, sadly, an example of one of the great vices among the FPL community: people don't like to take responsibility for their Fantasy performance - they always want to blame their players.

This combines with other unlovely traits of humankind: a suspicion or resentment of exceptional talent (a refusal to believe that someone can be as good as Palmer is...), particularly in comparison to other 'favourite' players (partisans of Arsenal or City or United are always trying to contrive arguments that Palmer is 'not as good' as Saka or Foden or Fernandes... a fatuous debate, since they all have different strengths and weaknesses, different styles of play; but the fact that these players are commonly discussed together surely demonstrates that they are all similarly exceptional...).

Palmer's had a very disappointing run of FPL returns since the end of last year. But he's never been outside the top 3 or 4 FPL players for the year (and is still miles ahead of Saka, Foden, Fernandes, etc....), and will surely finish the season with well over 200 points. Moreover, I think he's been exceptionally unlucky (Chelsea have had so many good penalty shouts turned down this season; and Palmer has hit the post, or demanded a great stop from the opposing keeper, in just about every single game); and I would still bet on him picking up at least one or two more decent hauls this season.

He is not a bad player; he has not been playing badly.  People who make such accusations are deeply bitter and biased, and ignorant of football.

Luck-o-Meter (34)

The rate of injuries has slowed in recent weeks (everyone's injured already??), but a greater incidence of fatigue, nerves, perhaps occasional complacency or dipping in motivation, and the mounting distraction of other competitions (the FA Cup and EUROPE!!), mean that already over the past few gameweeks we've seen more and more bizarre swings in form and unexpected results. The tail-end of the season becomes even more of a lottery than usual. Eccentric coaching decisions and incompetent refereeing may add even more to these uncertainties.... Will they this week? Let's see.

Nico Jackson broke his long goal drought with an absolute cracker from just outside the box - which, hopefully, should boost his confidence, and help him to improve over the remaining games. Alas, his anticipation, timing, positional play - which had been so vastly improved in the early part of this season - seem to have reverted to the cluelessness which brought so much derision on him last year. There were a few collisions and bits of wrestling in the box here which looked as if they should have merited a bit more attention than VAR apparently gave them - especially Caicedo's clattering into the back of Beto. But otherwise, there was fairly litttle of note in this game, either in the football or the officiating - apart from a couple of outstanding saves each from Sanchez and Pickford. (Two further observations, though.... First, there was an awful lot of 'faking injuries' etc. to waste time by Chelsea in this game. Yes, everyone does that these days. But Chelsea were really doing it conspicuously more than most here - to the point where you have to wonder if it is actually an official club policy, a tactic sanctioned by the manager. I do hope not. Second, Maresca served his touchline ban directly behind the dugout - where he obviously could have some 'emotional contact' with his players and staff, could easily overhear most of what they were saying, and could have spoken directly to them himself [though, admittedly, the cameras didn't catch him doing so] through the metal railing separating them. The terms of the ban may only state that he's not allowed in the dugout [or the changing-room, or on pitch during warm-ups]; but clearly the intent is that there should be a substantial physical separation between him and the dugout - and here, there wasn't! I hope he got permission from the League to watch the game from that position - in which case, it's their fault; they should have said NO. But if he didn't, he was plainly violating the spirit of his ban, and he ought to be made to serve the original ban again - as well as a substantial additional one.)

Brighton and West Ham are two strangers to consistency: they both have significant attacking threat, but most of the time can't defend to save their lives. Brighton have a much stronger overall squad and a better manager, which is why they're still in the hunt for a European place while West Ham are only spared the threat of relegation by the three promoted sides all being so exceptionally poor this season. The home side were much the better team in the first half, but failed to make it count; West Ham produced more danger after they brought on Fullkrug as a target-man for the second-half, but they likewise failed to produce many big chances... Brighton needed a couple of pingers from outside the box to clinch the result in a dull game.

Newcastle still aren't quite firing at their best - although Trippier is starting to show signs of his old greatness again at last. Here the Geordies were dominating possession and creating huge numbers of openings - but the quality of their crossing mostly wasn't too good, and their finishing was poor. Ipswich were playing with a lot of guts and resilience (Woolfenden's headed clearance over the bar, from his own goal-line, was little short of miraculous), and one suspects that - but for the contentious sending off of Ben Johnson in the first half - they might have been able to hang on for an unexpected goalless draw here. For me, although Johnson was stupid to hold back Isak when already on a yellow, that first card should not have been given; it wasn't absolutely clear - from any of the camera angles shown on TV - that Burn hadn't made some contact with his knee or shin; and even if he hadn't, Johnson's going down wasn't 'simulation', but a legitimate attempt to evade what looked like it was going to be a crunching trip. (And, by rights, Bruno Guimaraes should also have been booked for flourishing an imaginary card at the unfortunate Johnson behind the ref's back.)  The penalty was also a worrying piece of VAR intervention for me; there have been so many far more obvious fouls in the box this season that apparently did not meet the 'clear and obvious error' threshold required for VAR to whisper in the referee's ear about a possible mistake; but once that whispering begins, the referee obviously feels bound to reverse his original decision, regardless of what he sees on the TV monitor. And the problem here, even more than with the Dan Burn 'trip' on Johnson on the edge of the area, was that the TV pictures just weren't good enough to enable a definitive view to be reached: rather bizarrely, the VAR playbacks of Enciso's apparent arm-tug on Murphy only showed two angles - both from extreme distance, and both from the 'wrong side', with the attacking player's body obscuring the supposed point of contact (the defender's hand on the inside of the attacker's elbow); even more bizarrely, there was a third - much better angle - shown later on TV, much closer, and from the right-hand touchline where you had a clear line of sight to Enciso's hand reaching for the arm.... but even on that, the resolution wasn't anywhere near good enough to show if there had in fact been contact, or if it had been any more than fleeting and unsubstantial. (I'm not saying it wasn't a foul; just that the TV pictures weren't good enough to allow a definitive decision on the incident - and therefore VAR should not have been getting involved.)

As for the disallowed Newcastle goal, I think that was a fair call - although it was disappointing to see Ipswich keeper Alex Palmer going down like a bowling-pin. Yes, Guimaraes backed into him, and that's not allowed - but the contact was pretty light; he should have stayed on his feet and done his job of collecting the ball, rather than toppling backwards and looking for the foul to be given (he was taking a completely unnecessary - small, but non-zero - chance that the referee wouldn't find in his favour!). Goalkeepers should be made of granite: if an attacking player backs into you, they should be the ones hitting the ground - with bruises and regrets. As soon as an opposing team gets wind of the possibility your keeper may be physically and/or mentally intimidatable, they will target him for crowding and blocking at set-pieces (looking at you, Vicario...) - and you don't want to be inviting that kind of attention, Mr Palmer; it won't be to your or your team's advantage. Moreover, everyone surely now feels that goalkeepers are ridiculously over-protected by current refereeing practices; and having keepers 'play the system' like this, appealing for fouls to be given in their favour for the slightest contact, is only going to increase that general dissatisfaction. And maybe that will eventually lead to another tweak in the rules, or their 'interpretation guidelines' - wouldn't be a bad thing. So, I'd suggest Alex Palmer probably hasn't done his fellow goalkeepers any favours with this display of chronic lightweight-ism and play-acting; next season, we might perhaps see attacking sides starting to get away with a lot more in terms of crowding and jostling the keeper in the six-yard box - as a reaction to his piece of silliness here.

Southampton actually looked much the better side against a lacklustre Fulham in the first half, with only a couple of smart efforts from Willian (a curler drifting inches side, and a firm drive smacking against a post), getting a rare start, causing any excitement for the travelling fans. But Marco Silva made multiple tweaks at half-time, and the visitors immediately started to get on top, though they didn't finally apply any sustained pressure in front of goal until the last ten minutes or so. The Cottagers still look, for me, much the weakest of the six or seven teams chasing the other European places this year - though they have been punching a bit above their weight even to be in the middle of the pack, and their rivals all have their own flaws.

Wolves produced a predictably straightfoward demolition of Leicester - the only relegation team not to have produced even a glimmer of improvement so far in their fight to salvage some pride from a dismal season. Cunha/Strand Larsen/Ait-Nouri was a points-for-everyone FPL selection this week! Jamie Vardy's penalty probably shouldn't have been awarded in the first place (it was more a case of him running into Sa than Sa 'bringing him down'); and justice was done when he telegraphed which side he was going to put his spot-kick, didn't hit it that hard... and Sa gratefully saved it. But those were probably the two largest slices of FPL 'luck' in Saturday's games.

A fairly dull game at Bournemouth was salvaged for United by a late goal, deep in injury time. We'd seen a great early goal from Semenyo (his second in three games; or his second in eleven, if you're more of the 'glass half-empty' mindset!), and Ouattara curling a free-kick against an upright (Zabarnyi then putting a follow-up effort only just wide), and late in the game Bruno Fernandes put a 25-yard screamer just inches wide; but apart from these isolated moments of excitement, only the ever-lively Garnacho looked likely to create any danger, and he didn't do so very often. The game would probably have limped on to a 1-0 win for the home side, but for Evanilson's sending-off with 20-odd minutes left. That was fair enough, a good use of VAR to direct the referee to take a second look. The Brazilian was perhaps slightly unlucky: he took a wild high swish at the ball, reckless, but not deliberately targetting his opponent; but he lost his footing, and what had been his standing foot crunched into Mazraoui's leg just above the ankle; I'd say there was no intent there, but the impact was serious, and thus the sending-off could perhaps be justified; although it would be harsh to characterise such an obviously accidental collision as 'violent conduct'. It probably didn't help Evanilson's case that Tyler Adams had got away with a similar rash challenge early in the game on Garnacho, also reviewed by VAR but apparently deemed to be only 'borderline' for a red card; that one again was accidental, Adams losing his footing on the slippery surface as he flew into a full-blooded tackle - but his second foot never got anywhere near the United player, and although the tackling foot caught Garnacho hard, he had got a touch on the ball first, and looked to be trying to pull out slightly, keeping his foot low and turning it sideways so that the impact was with the inside of the instep more than the studs. The referee and VAR getting two tough calls right in the same game?? Maybe things are slowly improving with our officiating! The BPS, alas, is still a complete shambles: Hojlund, thanks to claiming the 'decisive' goal in an uneventful game, gets the maximum bonus, despite doing absolutely bugger-all in the game - even the goal was a somewhat fortuitous touch on Ugarte's already goal-bound effort. (I really don't see why it's any more 'decisive' than Semenyo's.... which was also a much better goal. But he only got 1 extra point! BPS is broken.)

Liverpool, as expected, cruised to the title, as Spurs just couldn't live with them. FPL managers who'd pinned their hopes on huge points from Salah and other Liverpool players will no doubt feel frustrated that the clean-sheet slipped away from them so easily, and that the final scoreline wasn't even greater.... and that Mo didn't get a hattrick (he somehow just failed to get on the end of Gakpo's hugely unselfish layoff to him, and then had Udogie take a second off him - putting the ball into his own net). The only minor refereeing controversy concerned Konate's heavy challenge on Tel in the box - but it was fairly clear that he'd played the ball cleanly and only clattered the Tottenham man with his follow-through, so that was never going to be a penalty.

Forest are faltering slightly on the run-in. They appeared to dominate possession - which is not usually how they like to play! - in the Thursday night game at the City Ground, but were unable to create many decent chances from it. Chris Wood, so often deadly this season, had only one effort on goal, and headed it extravagantly wide. And then two uncharacteristic defensive errors, from Aina and Milenkovic (and arguably Sels, too, who in both cases could have come out more quickly to mop up the danger created by his defenders allowing an attacker to get goal-side of them), gifted the visitors a pair of goals either side of half-time. Referee Darren England was a bit card-happy, booking a total of 8 players, and manager Nuno Espirito Santo; yet Keane Lewis-Potter and Christian Nørgaard were both extremely lucky to escape sendings-off for particularly blatant second yellow offences. And Brentford keeper Mark Flekken somehow claimed maximum bonus points under the bizarre BPS ratings, despite making only ONE - not particularly demanding - save on the highlights I saw.

There continue to be doubts about the application of VAR, but there weren't too many controversial moments in the weekend's games, and only Ben Johnson's first yellow card (leading to a later sending-off) seemed obviously unjust; although Evanilson's might have been slightly harsh too. And the refereeing in the Thursday night game was probably the worst of the entire week. The only big surprise with the 'Team of the Week' is that there are so many defenders - and so few strikers! - in it; well, and that Sa was the top keeper thanks to a penalty save, though later replaced by Flekken, who was even less worthy of dominating the bonus points in his game; while Brighton's Baleba and Ayari (and the not entirely unexpected, but still not super high-owned Macallister and Semenyo) were edging out the likes of Salah and Diaz and Barnes and Murphy and Bowen and Mitoma and Iwobi in midfield; but most of the 'big names' came up with something - unlike in many recent weeks! The big points-spread this week - unlike in the last two weeks, where it was down to a lot of randomness in the returns! - can mainly be attributed to a lot of people having left themselves without either the Free Hit or Wildcard chips to get around the problem of the Blank Gameweek and thus putting out very short teams; most decent players, using a chip wisely to optimise for the week, seemed to be scoring in the 70s and 80s (with the Forest v Brentford game still to play), while the global average was a paltry 38 points (on Monday; it did somehow rise to 47 by the end of the week - again, WTF???)!

This has been one of the least unpredictable gameweeks of the season so far; and also one of the best for the standard of the refereeing (compromised a bit by the Thursday game). Hence, it's barely looking a 3 out of 10 on the 'Luck-o-Meter'. If only this weren't such a rarity!!!

DON'T FORGET The Boycott.  Most people will have played the dratted 'Assistant Manager' chip by now; but if you haven't.... it's not too late to refuse to do so! I took the high road by quitting playing the game for the rest of the season when it was introduced in GW23. [I worry that, if people don't protest vociferously about it, the new chip may become a permanent feature of the game - and it will completely ruin it.]  If you didn't feel able to join me in such an emphatic gesture, I hope you at least thought about refusing to use the Assistant Manager chip (and still might refuse, if you've kept it till the last few gameweeks of the season).

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

Dilemmas of the Week - GW34

 

There again don't seem to have been that many new injuries this week. 

But of course, this is a Blank Gameweek, with the four teams who had double-fixtures last week - City, Palace, Villa, and Arsenal - missing a game this week, because of the FA Cup Semi-Finals. (Nottingham Forest, also playing in the Cup this weekend, don't play their League game against Brentford until Thursday; but the League has decided that that's still part of Gameweek 34, rather than the more adjacent Gameweek 35, so..... no double for you!) Those who invested particularly heavily in doubling players last week are probably obliged to play their Free Hit (or Wildcard) this week to fill all the gaps those players will leave in their squad; and, if they haven't still got a rebuild chip to use for that.... a world of pain, taking multiple hits and/or putting out a short team.

In addition to those teams missing because of the FA Cup round, Chelsea, Manchester United, and Spurs might be decimated by precautionary rotations ahead of their massive European semi-finals this coming week.

I am trying to streamline these weekly round-ups, 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 34?

Does anybody need to be moved out because of injury?

Mikel Merino and Ben White missed Arsenal's midweek game against Palace with renewed injury concerns - but at least Arsenal don't have a league game this weekend.

Bournemouth's Lewis Cook has been struggling with tendinitis in an ankle, and seems likely to miss this week.

Brighton's Jan-Paul van Hecke will be out for at least a week under 'concussion protocols', after suffering a severe blow to the head in the final moments of last week's game against Brentford.

Malo Gusto had to come off against Fulham last week with a leg muscle problem; apparently not too serious, but is out of contention for the Everton game.

James Tarkowski looks set to miss the remainder of the season after straining a hamstring in last weekend's game against City. This is bad news for Everton, for whom he really has been a lynchpin for several seasons now. Michael Keane is a decent enough defender, but I don't think he comes anywhere near Tarkowski's levels in providing constant organisation and inspiration; and when he came on to replace him last week, the side immediately started looking much more vulnerable at the back.

Rodrigo Muniz missed last week's game with a training injury, and could be out for a little while. (Good news for fans of Raul, who may fancy Fulham's prospects against Southampton this weekend, but were wary of unpredictable rotations between the two strikers....)

Stephy Mavididi - Leicester's only dangerous player these days - had to come off last week with a muscle strain, and could miss the rest of the season.

Diogo Dalot has joined Manchester United's long injury list this week - with a calf strain that might sideline him for a few weeks.

And Fabian Schar was withdrawn against Villa last week, feeling hamstring tightness - so is a minor doubt for this week.

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

Joao Pedro, of course, is starting a three-match 'violent conduct' ban for his silly bit of argy-bargy with Nathan Collins last weekend. But at least there were no new totting-up bans last week. Likewise Ipswich's Leif Davis, suspended for three games for his horrific challenge on Bukayo Saka. (And Chris Richards - unable to get his absurdly unjust double-yellow dismissal last Saturday reviewed - has already served his one-match ban in the midweek game at Arsenal; but he isn't  in action in the League this weekend, anyway.)

Armando Broja - recently (and unfathomably) favoured to start over Beto for Everton - is a Chelsea loanee, and hence ineligable to play this week.

Evan Ferguson, who hasn't yet been getting much of a look-in at West Ham anyway, is similarly unable to to appear against Brighton.

Did anyone give other cause to consider dropping them?

The entire Spurs team.... just stumbling from bad to worse, utterly shambolic in the last couple of outings. (And now probably saving themselves for Bodo/Glimt....)

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

Omar Marmoush and Nico O'Reilly (and Matheus Nunes) continue to look outstanding for City. But unfortunately, no-one else at the club does, which rather limits their appeal too - especially with a blank this week, and only one straightforward fixture in their last four....

Matheus Cunha and Jorgen Strand Larsen continue to look very promising forward picks with massively improved Wolves; and this week, you might even go for both of them!

Ollie Watkins and Marcus Rashford were both outstanding in one half of last week's double-header - but unfortunately, there's now a likelihood of inscrutable rotation between the two of them. And they too are blanking this weekend, because of the Cup.

So, acquisitions for this weekend are mainly focused on players from teams facing the bottom-end clubs, Leicester, Ipswich, and Southampton.... and West Ham and Spurs.

ADDENDUM: I omitted to say this originally, but I would be very tempted to have a punt on Trent Alexander-Arnold this week, after the rousing moment of his crucial late goal against Leicester. I remain not fully convinced about Trent's overall usefulness - how fully he fits a specific role for any given team, beyond his undoubted ability to occasionally swing a game with a moment of brilliance... which, marvellous though it is to have, is, unfortunately, not enough - and he's probably not yet 100% fit again, and I probably wouldn't be starting him any more, if he really is bound for Madrid in a couple of months, but... his spirits are obviously sky-high at the moment, and with the emotion surrounding the prospect of Liverpool clinching the title at Anfield (with four weeks left!!), I would be very surprised if Slot didn't start him against Spurs... and if he doesn't have a big game. And, since most people are surely playing a Free Hit or a Wildcard this week, it's a reshuffle, a gamble that's easy to take. Go on - you know you want to.

Most people have probably used the 'Assistant Manager' chip by now - wanting to keep the tail-end of the season free to play other chips, like Bench Boost, Free Hit, and Wildcard. If it is still in play, Vitor Pereira and Wolves look like the best bet for posting a big goal-tally against woeful Leicester. If you're chasing the siren table-bonus opportunity, David Moyes and Everton - as usual! - look the strongest prospect for that, against floundering Chelsea (although I wonder how much momentum Everton will lose with the absence of Tarkowski to hold them together). However, there are plenty of other possibilities, and Southampton caretaker manager Simon Rusk (who only costs 0.5 million!) against flakey Fulham, or (no, don't laugh!) United's Ruben Amorim against faltering Bournemouth could be tempting left-field options.

BEST OF LUCK, EVERYONE!

AND PLEASE DON'T FORGET The Boycott; I loathe the pointless innovation of the 'Assistant Manager' chip - and I have been urging everyone to please consider quitting the game, or at least refusing to use the chip, in protest. 

But if you couldn'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 (39)

"I want to taste and glory in each day, and never be afraid to experience pain."

Sylvia Plath

It's almost as if she wanted to play FPL....!

It HAD to be said....

Football Meta's amiable and insightful Cormac has become one of my favourite Youtube tactical analysts over the past year or so. And I was particularly glad to see him just drop this video, detailing the shortcomings of the dread 'building out from the back' philosophy. (For me, he doesn't really go far enough in his critque...)

I find this tiresome dogma, which has become almost universal in the Premier League during the past decade, is stifling the life out of the game - it is the new anti-football.

It is painfully dull to watch.

It imposes far too much pressure on keepers and defenders - which, I think, wears them down mentally, undermines their confidence, and utlimately tends to make them more error-prone not just in build-up, but in all aspects of their play. (Because mistakes by a keeper or his defenders often tend to be castastrophic, yielding a goal and perhaps costing the game, their errors are placed under far closer scrutiny than those of attacking players, and tend to be given more weight than their successful defensive actions. And when they are on the ball so much, in dangerous situations, and committing costly errors - or at least coming close to doing so - so often, in almost every game, these poor buggers are often now getting pilloried by the fans.... when it's really not their fault; it's down to their manager's style of play.)

And it is founded on what I believe is a fundamental misconception: the fearful, over-conservative conviction that restricting the opponent's chances is more important to ensuring victory than creating your own. (The problem here is that you cannot play football purely as a matter of statistics, because the element of chance can never be eliminated. Even if you can prevent your opponent from getting any clearcut chances [which is just about impossible], while you manage, say, 10 chances,.... your finishing might not be good enough to convert any of the 10 chances, while your frustrated opponent might yet produce a worldie of a goal out of nothing, or perhaps pick up a soft penalty. This approach does not guarantee wins; in fact, it makes them painfully hard to achieve. If you're content to accept a more free-flowing, 'chaotic' sort of game, in which both sides might enjoy something like 20 chances, you should be able to win - and win more easily, and by bigger margins - so long as you can defend the chances made against you better than the other side defends against yours.)

Even if the core philosophy behind it weren't so misguided, it is still wrong-headed in practical terms. Its supposed justification is encapsulated in the tiresome mantra: "The quicker it goes up, the quicker it comes back." Build-up from the back started because managers like Pep became afraid that long balls out from the goalkeeper were too often resulting in an immediate loss of possession, and the more patient approach was seen as being a way to hold on to the ball more effectively,.... and eat minutes off the clock.

However, that's a very questionable proposition. If your goalkeeper can kick accurately, and if you have some well-drilled routines to create different medium- and long-range passing options for him, and if you have very quick players who can run into space behind the opposing back line to chase down a long ball over the top, or big strong players who can win most of their aerial duels and hold the ball up until other teammates can link up with them,.... there's really not that much of a problem in retaining possession from a keeper's kick. Well, yes, it is always going to be a little risky; and you might end up losing possession perhaps as much of half of the time (at worst...). But so what? Losing possession in the opposition defensive third of the pitch shouldn't be a big deal. You ought to be set up for a quick counter-press to win the ball back again, or at least hamper the speed and ease with which the other side can start to move the ball back up the pitch. And even if they do start quickly on the counter, you should have good defensive midfielders who can snuff out most such moves in the middle of the park.

A loss of possession deep in the opponent's half isn't often going to result in a goalscoring chance against you. A loss of possession in your own final third, however, almost always does.

And we are seeing such turnovers during failed build-up play more and more often in recent years.

Perhaps when building-out-from-the-back first started to appear, there was some clearer benefit to it. It had the advantage of novelty in its favour; and most sides weren't equipped to counter it very well.

Teams were still often only playing with one outright forward, or at most two; and 'high pressing' wasn't yet much of a thing. So, a back-four, or even a back-three, usually had a comfortable numerical advantage in the first line, even without having the keeper step up into the back-line to create an additional passer - and sides playing out from the back could thus usually bypass initial pressure quite easily.

But now,.... many more teams are playing with a front-three,... and are regularly pushing one or more of their midfielders or advanced full-backs up on to the opposing back-line as well; sometimes, the numerical advantage is with the attacking team. And even though it mostly still isn't, pressing has become much more sophisticated and well-drilled: teams will choose their moments to press most vigorously, saving their energy for when it can be most effective, most devastating; and they'll target particular players or areas of the pitch, so that, even though they are outnumbered across the whole back-line, they can quickly achieve a crucial overload in the area around the ball.

The slow build-up idea might have 'worked' up to a point, when it was a surprising innovation. But things have moved on, the game has caught up with it - and overtaken it. 

Any tactical idea becomes limiting, self-damaging if it is too obvious, too predictable. And we now see so many managers who are so insistent on the slow build-up that they almost never stray from it, never allow their players to vary the way they play out. And that makes them very easy to 'read', easy to press,... easy to nick the ball off in dangerous positions.

I'm not sure that building-out-from-the-back ever really worked all that well. But it has now clearly become an absolute liability for many teams.

And did I mention, it's SO FUCKING BORING to watch? Aesthetics matter; this is 'the beautiful game', after all. Most fans, I'm sure, would far rather see their team come out on the losing end of a 4-3 humdinger of a game occasionally than watch them grinding out arid 1-0 and 2-0 wins most weeks. I know I would, anyway.

I think, I hope we are now seeing the last days of ponderous slow build-up from the back, in favour of more diverse, dynamic approaches to moving the ball forward from your own penalty area. It's been a long time coming. Too, too long....

Not such a BAD Double Gameweek....

A lot of folks online are griping and whingeing about what a rotten Double Gameweek it turned out to be...

I say they need to try to cultivate a more balanced perspective.

Gameweek 33 was a bit of a mixed bag: not great, but far from terrible either.

It was in fact much better for FPL managers who'd gone big on the doubling teams than I had anticipated (perhaps straying too far towards the pessimistic pole on this one....). Manchester City and Crystal Palace, somewhat improbably, hung on to clean sheets in their Saturday games; and City managed two wins, in games they might have been expected to struggle in, while Palace picked up two plucky draws in games they were generally expected to lose. And Villa pulled off quite the surprise with their emphatic win over Newcastle. Few of the main doubling players missed out through injury or rotation, so most ended up with decent points. Meanwhile, those FPL managers who'd opted not to pick up too many extra doubling players were hard hit by low or blank returns from the majority of the most fancied Single Gameweek players: Salah and Diaz and Jota, Isak and Murphy and Barnes, Elanga and Gibbs-White, Palmer and Jackson, Doucoure and Beto, Cunha and Strand Larsen. Hence, only 3 single-game players - Sessegnon, Mbeumo, and Wissa - wound up in the 'Team of the Week',.... where I'd expected there might be at least 4 or 5, maybe even 6 or 7 or 8.

However, only Trossard, among the doublers, came in with a really big haul. And many of the best returns of the week came from less expected (lower-owned!) doubling players like Henderson, Zinchenko, Kiwior, and Matheus Nunes.

Single-game Bryan Mbeumo produced the second biggest total of the week. And alhough only a few of them made it into the 'Team of the Week', several of the best single-game players were close to the best performances of the week,.... and somewhat better than the majority of the doublers.

This Double Gameweek 33 didn't look all that promising; and it had the potential to be a bit of a disaster for people who'd bet big on the doubling teams. In fact it worked out pretty well for them - rather better than could have been reasonably expected! - and most of them probably did slightly better for the week than the majority of those who had moderated their selections of doubling players. The advantage was perhaps only very slight; but it could easily have been zero.... or less-than-zero!  You folks dodged a bullet; and you should be bloody grateful!