-
I'm not rubbishing the achievement here, I'm interested in the bigger picture. If you can have a predictor of "winning the league after x games" that would be on a par with "if you're bottom at christmas you're going down" type thing. And also "wet tuesday in stoke".
A shorthand we could all throw about.As you say, the point that you've not been playing as well as you should and yet your point total is still your highest at this point than ever before indicates the dryness of numbers.
Perhaps you could start rating matches out of 10? Much like commutes on the thread that Andy loves so much.
How many points did Newcastle have after 12 games the year they royally fucked it up?
Chalfie-
I'm not rubbishing the achievement here, I'm interested in the bigger
picture. If you can have a predictor of "winning the league after x
games" that would be on a par with "if you're bottom at christmas
you're going down" type thing. And also "wet tuesday in stoke". A
shorthand we could all throw about.As you say, the point that you've not been playing as well as you
should and yet your point total is still your highest at this point
than ever before indicates the dryness of numbers.Perhaps you could start rating matches out of 10? Much like commutes
on the thread that Andy loves so much.How many points did Newcastle have after 12 games the year they
royally fucked it up?My point was not to use that table as a predictor of who was going to win the league save to point out the comparison between Chelsea' s current form, their form at a similar stage in previous seasons and the current form of the self-anointed Big Clubs.
While Chelsea have, until the last week, not been playing up to what I consider their capabilities, they have still been playing better and, importantly, more consistently, than in previous seasons. This is because, in my view the Chelsea squad is better than ever before.
At the same time, we have seen in recent years that other teams are not at their highest level. Even the league winning ManU side of two seasons ago under SAF was generally acknowledged to be one of the weakest ManU sides of recent times. They have slipped back since then.
Other teams are not doing so well. Tottenham's win over Hull was nothing to celebrate. Arsenal, ManU, Liverpool and even City have been throwing away points that one would usually have expected them to pocket easily.
There is no point in a subjective marking of performances. Last night's 5-0 away in Germany to a side undefeated at home, might have scored near to 10/10 but then how would one rate an away win at Arsenal later in the season by a greater margin or beating Real Madrid in the CL Final when reduced to 9 men by outrageous refereeing?
Scores out of ten are best left to Andy's commute.
The positions in 1995/6 were:
1 (1) Newcastle United 12 10 1 1 29 9 20 31
2 (2) Manchester United 12 8 2 2 23 12 11 26
cliveo
The reason for choosing 12 games is not because this is a season defining moment. In truth, 38 games is the only real measure of a season because at that stage everything evens out and everyone has played the same teams home and away. It was because 12 games is precisely the number of games that have been played so far this season. The same table could be run after 13, 14 and probably most reliably 19 games and give a better indication of how things are going.
As to the strengths of the teams played, it is true that we have not yet played Tottenham and Southampton. We haven't played Newcastle and Sunderland. Hull and Stoke are yet to come. Let's also not forget West Ham.
We have, however, played Man U, Man City and Liverpool all away and Arsenal at home. Our first half of the season is tougher than our second half.
The other point to be made is that, until last weekend, Chelsea have not been playing as well as they might. The first 25 minutes of the WBA game showed what they could do. Yesterday's match showed that it could be sustained for 90 minutes.
I am looking forward to the challenge that is Derby.
How curious that your first memory should be scatological.