Premier League Gameweek 30-32

Paul the Wolf said:
When Chelsea won their first title in 1955 they got 72 points (if you take 3 points for a win) Cardiff who finished 20th got the equivalent of 50 points.
Must have been super super strong.
Click to expand...
More a consequence of a relatively equitable financial picture. Investment in clubs was minimal. Coaching, intelligent recruitment and facilities probably separated the good from the bad.
 
adexkola said:
Remember 2007? We (United) went from being dumped out the CL by Benfica in the group stage the previous year, to going to the semi-finals, where we only got put out by a Milan team who had the fortune to rest their entire squad and ignore the league, while we were decimated by a brutal title race and injuries (no I'm not bitter)

You can argue we had Giggs and Scholes and Neville to provide experience, which is true, but we also were carried by Ronaldo and Rooney and Rio and Vidic and Carrick who between them didn't have much experience up to that front

I say all that to say that progress paths can be non-linear and I think Arsenal have the capability to show that maturity leap despite the lack of experience
Click to expand...

Agreed with all of this.
 
PickledRed said:
More a consequence of a relatively equitable financial picture. Investment in clubs was minimal. Coaching, intelligent recruitment and facilities probably separated the good from the bad.
Click to expand...

Yes but thus the points difference is meaningless. In any year some teams could be far better than the others, whether they're better than current teams or vice versa is highly debatable.

The entertainment value now is so low for the league as a whole.
 
giorno said:
Rangnick's Manchester United finished 6th in 21/22. West Ham 7th
Click to expand...
Both those teams held a higher standard that season than they have this one in similiar positions on the table. But I do see your point though.
I am perhaps a bit blinded by the regression of Liverpool and City, underwhelmed by Arsenal and the abnormal performance of especially Sheffield Utd and Burnley
 
Paul the Wolf said:
Yes but thus the points difference is meaningless. In any year some teams could be far better than the others, whether they're better than current teams or vice versa is highly debatable.

The entertainment value now is so low for the league as a whole.
Click to expand...
I don’t agree that the entertainment value is low with a race this tight for the league and the European spots. It’s exciting for any neutrals and supporters of the top 6 teams. And this is not even counting the relegation battle which is coming down to the wire. Pure entertainment
 
njred said:
True but the strength of the league is much better now. The difference between 1st and 4th then was like 30 points which is crazy.
Now 30 pts is the difference between 1st and 12 or 13th. The league is stronger than ever.
Click to expand...
More competetive doesn't equal stronger.
If all the teams achieve a higher consistent quality over a season the league gets stronger even if that includes the best team running away points wise. If all the teams dip in quality on a consistent basis throughout a season the league gets weaker, and a normal effect of that is that points tallies evens out. Then you have to see if it evens out because there is more quality in the league so everyone can take points from anyone, or if performance levels are poorer/more inconsistent. In my opinion it is clear that this is a year of poor quality/consistensy across the board, from 1st to 20th. The point tally, and what differs 1st from 10th or 12th to 20th is irrelevant for the quality of the league.

3 teams fighting for the league is certainly competetive but if 2 of them are the same teams that have usually fought for the title over a number of years but they are both much worse, while the third team is in and around their current level, how can that equal stronger league?

More exciting maybe
 
njred said:
I don’t agree that the entertainment value is low with a race this tight for the league and the European spots. It’s exciting for any neutrals and supporters of the top 6 teams. And this is not even counting the relegation battle which is coming down to the wire. Pure entertainment
Click to expand...

Agree- as a supporter of a Championship club I occasionally just drift away from the Prem if one team is way ahead. A two way title race is interesting and a three way race is brilliant. I really couldn’t call it either. I get why City are perhaps favourites but I could absolutely see Liverpool or Arsenal winning it.
 
njred said:
I don’t agree that the entertainment value is low with a race this tight for the league and the European spots. It’s exciting for any neutrals and supporters of the top 6 teams. And this is not even counting the relegation battle which is coming down to the wire. Pure entertainment
Click to expand...

Watching the football I mean rather than the race itself. Where six seven or even eight clubs can qualify for Europe they don't need to be that good and the bottom teams are so poor where they're regularly getting beat by large scores. Not enjoying it any more. And I've loved football my whole life.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
Yes but thus the points difference is meaningless. In any year some teams could be far better than the others, whether they're better than current teams or vice versa is highly debatable.

The entertainment value now is so low for the league as a whole.
Click to expand...
I think this weekend’s games and results indicate high levels of entertainment. Granted, the showpiece game has been a disappointment. Yet, three weeks ago Liverpool v City was widely regarded as being very enthralling.
 
Paul the Wolf said:
Watching the football I mean rather than the race itself. Where six seven or even eight clubs can qualify for Europe they don't need to be that good and the bottom teams are so poor where they're regularly getting beat by large scores. Not enjoying it any more. And I've loved football my whole life.
Click to expand...
That’s most seasons. You can drop around 42 points to get into the CL. In the 2004 Liverpool dropped 54 points and still got top 4.
 
PickledRed said:
I think this weekend’s games and results indicate high levels of entertainment. Granted, the showpiece game has been a disappointment. Yet, three weeks ago Liverpool v City was widely regarded as being very enthralling.
Click to expand...

I watched four games this weekend, Spurs, United, Liverpool and City and was bored rigid most of the time, just mistake after mistake. Want to see some flair, invention and excitement. Not defenders passing the ball about without purpose, move a few yards upfield, then pass it backwards again. That carries on until someone loses the ball. Maybe some people like that type of football but I don't.
 
FeedTheGoat said:
More competetive doesn't equal stronger.
If all the teams achieve a higher consistent quality over a season the league gets stronger even if that includes the best team running away points wise. If all the teams dip in quality on a consistent basis throughout a season the league gets weaker, and a normal effect of that is that points tallies evens out. Then you have to see if it evens out because there is more quality in the league so everyone can take points from anyone, or if performance levels are poorer/more inconsistent. In my opinion it is clear that this is a year of poor quality/consistensy across the board, from 1st to 20th. The point tally, and what differs 1st from 10th or 12th to 20th is irrelevant for the quality of the league.

3 teams fighting for the league is certainly competetive but if 2 of them are the same teams that have usually fought for the title over a number of years but they are both much worse, while the third team is in and around their current level, how can that equal stronger league?

More exciting maybe
Click to expand...
So, by your definition in order for a league to be strong the top team, or top two teams, needs to be significantly better than everyone else? According to you the season City won the league with 100 points the league was at its strongest ever?
 
Did anyone notice that Anthony Taylor seemed to have forgotten to bring his whistle and cards to the game today?
 
njred said:
True but the strength of the league is much better now. The difference between 1st and 4th then was like 30 points which is crazy.
Now 30 pts is the difference between 1st and 12 or 13th. The league is stronger than ever.
Click to expand...
City got 93 points that year and the difference between first and fourth that year was 22 points.
 
berbatrick said:
unfortunately this meek surrender
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/17810224
Click to expand...

Poor game and a depressing one for us of course, but I still don't think it's the same league. At least there would have been some needle between the fans and a bit of contrast in playstyles, not to mention an actual goal.

Yesterday's had no atmosphere, two teams managed by coaches who love each other playing the exact same brand of football, with a referee who was actively rewarding every tactical foul made by two sides whose entire defensive philosophy revolves around tactical fouling. It was just completely insipid from every angle.
 
VARsenal said:
So, by your definition in order for a league to be strong the top team, or top two teams, needs to be significantly better than everyone else? According to you the season City won the league with 100 points the league was at its strongest ever?
Click to expand...
No? But if the top top teams are worse than they have been, and everyone else is as well down the table the league isn't stronger
 
In regards to the discussion about the league being strong... Perhaps I'm biased but for me the PL was at its best when United, Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea were the top 4 and consistently reaching the latter stages of the CL.

I don't really care how good City are or have been. They deserve no respect or appreciation and frankly leave a sour taste in the mouth with their blatant cheating.
 
FeedTheGoat said:
No? But if the top top teams are worse than they have been, and everyone else is as well down the table the league isn't stronger
Click to expand...
So clarify for us what constitutes a strong league? Besides the bottom 3 and top 2, how can you definitively say every other team is worse?
 
V.O. said:
Poor game and a depressing one for us of course, but I still don't think it's the same league. At least there would have been some needle between the fans and a bit of contrast in playstyles, not to mention an actual goal.

Yesterday's had no atmosphere, two teams managed by coaches who love each other playing the exact same brand of football, with a referee who was actively rewarding every tactical foul made by two sides whose entire defensive philosophy revolves around tactical fouling. It was just completely insipid from every angle.
Click to expand...
Very true. I recall Fergie and Mancini clashing on the touchline during that game. There was at least fiesty atmosphere between the two clubs.
 
VARsenal said:
So clarify for us what constitutes a strong league? Besides the bottom 3 and top 2, how can you definitively say every other team is worse?
Click to expand...
Because I watch them, performance levels have been noticeably bad this year
 
Apparently Akanji has complained that Arsenal were guilty of tactical fouling in yesterday's match. Something City would never contemplate, of course.
 
Now we've lost any hope of top 4, we've gone from wanting a Tottenham defeat tonight to a Tottenham win to keep West Ham further away from us. The state of our shit cnuts.
 
Branthwaithe awful for that goal though. Really made it easy for Isak.

Onana looking good though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.