Football 2011-2012

[kaosmark2]

right at the moment, nope - but they're only just out of that as things stand.

By the end of the season it might be that they're better than one of the top 6 (so top 5, or even 4) - given the slide by Spurs if it continues, if Chelsea revert to what they were, if Newc were to falter with their remaining games.

Actually, I'd say those apply by results, but not necessarily performances - but it's results that count. It's not like the league is always won on 'performances' rather than 'results', after all.

[The Nal]

Like, as you've been pointing out, Man U's fragility without Scholes. They've only performed this season against awful opposition and/or with him in the team.

Edited April 17, 2012 by The Nal

[eFestivals]

I think performances are a better assessment of where a team can look to be next season. Results are what matter, but performances show a lot.

Hmmmm ..... when Utd play crap but win, that's considered to be the sign of a great team, by winning on their off days.

[eFestivals]

I think the league is always an accurate reflection of who the best team is. Cant remember the last time the best team didn't win the league?

Best team in the league (just the league) - yep, cos it can't be measured any other way. Best performing team? Nope, not necessarily.

Likewise, the best team in a cup is the team that wins it. But when it's not Utd, it counts for nothing in Utd fans eyes.

They're two distinct competitions. What apart from selective use - blinkers - gets to mean that the performances in a cup count for zilch in some people's eyes, especially when the team that wins it might have knocked out the supposed "best team in the country" along the way?

If they were really an indisputable "the best team in the country" then they wouldn't get beaten, so again it's selective use.

[kaosmark2]

I think the league is always an accurate reflection of who the best team is. Cant remember the last time the best team didn't win the league?

[kaosmark2]

Hmmmm ..... when Utd play crap but win, that's considered to be the sign of a great team, by winning on their off days.

[eFestivals]

Off days aren't what I was talking about. I'm talking about typical performances that season.

but Utd typically don't play "great" (I'm talking overall, not specifically this season), they get their results over a season by grinding them out rather than via great performances. That's their style under fergie.

So from one angle it could be said that Utd have off-seasons every season but still get the results, in the exact same way as it's often commented about them winning on their off days.

[The Nal]

Likewise, the best team in a cup is the team that wins it. But when it's not Utd, it counts for nothing in Utd fans eyes.

[kaosmark2]

but Utd typically don't play "great" (I'm talking overall, not specifically this season), they get their results over a season by grinding them out rather than via great performances. That's their style under fergie.

So from one angle it could be said that Utd have off-seasons every season but still get the results, in the exact same way as it's often commented about them winning on their off days.

[kaosmark2]

they weren't because they blew it!

[eFestivals]

Liverpool were the best team in the Carling Cup and are one of the two best teams in the FA Cup this season. What are you on about?

that a team who are "the best team" can't be as awful as you keep saying they are, just perhaps?

[strummer77]

Liverpool haven't been good in enough full stop. The cups aren't an accurate reflection of how good or bad a club are. Hence Liverpool playing Cardiff City in the pisspot. Are Cardiff better than all the other 19 Premiership teams?

[fred quimby]

The best team in the country doesn't have to win every game. Even Ali lost on occasion.

they weren't because they blew it!

Edited April 17, 2012 by fred quimby

[The Nal]

doesn't that contradict each other, and by blew it you mean lost a couple of games

Edited April 17, 2012 by The Nal

[JC-Mo'Fucka]

in all honesty we have lost far too many points against teams nearer the bottom of the league than the top and it has cost us. will be an interesting 3 last games though

[eFestivals]

.... lost 6-7 games one season but still won the league. And were the best team.

(the Utd bit removed to avoid those who only see ABU when there is none. This is not about Utd, it's simply the case that it can be applied most to Utd because they've tended to win the league).

The team who win the league are not necessarily the best team, even tho winning the league is the best simple measure there is for who is the best team.

Because, for example, a not-best-team can come up against the poor teams on their own poor days and the better teams on their best days, and via that can end up with the best set of results.

Similarly, the best-team can come up against the poor teams on their best days, and the better teams on their poor days, and via that can end up with average results.

There's bound to be a complicated way that a measure can be made around those ideas to come up with an alternative league table that would be more meaningful for who the best team is than the league table that we use, but fuck knows how it might be done .... tho I'd guess that it would work something similar to how the FIFA world rankings do.

[Jaybles]

This is a bit of a silly debate.

The team who win the league, are on average the best team across a season of 38 games. This does not mean that at their peak they played the best football in the league. The only way to measure the best team across a season is league position.

[eFestivals]

This is a bit of a silly debate.

The team who win the league, are on average the best team across a season of 38 games. This does not mean that at their peak they played the best football in the league.

It's a silly debate.

But as I clearly laid out in words, it's not necessarily the case the best team wins the league. It's the team who has the fixtures fall in the right place by chance to match their form on the day that ends up with the points.

The only way to measure the best team across a season is league position.

Nope, that's merely the way that it's done, and we've become used to it being done. Once upon a time a cup winner was considered a better team than a league winner - which gets to show how these things are viewed has changed once and could change again.

There's other ways of doing it. For instance, there could be a weighted system in a similar style to how the world rankings are done, which would give a more accurate result for who is the best team.

I'd guess that some seasons the 'league table' done in that sort of way would be much the same, but other seasons it'd end up being wildly different.

[The Nal]

There's other ways of doing it. For instance, there could be a weighted system in a similar style to how the world rankings are done, which would give a more accurate result for who is the best team.

[kaosmark2]

Thats not 100% accurate either though. Hence USA getting high up the FIFA ranking because they play war torn Latino shitholes every year who are "weighted" the same as some genuinely quality European sides.

[eFestivals]

Thats not 100% accurate either though. Hence USA getting high up the FIFA ranking because they play war torn Latino shitholes every year who are "weighted" the same as some genuinely quality European sides.

If you note, I didn't say "exactly like" the FIFA system, just something similar.

We all know that as an average, when (say) Newc beat (say) Man Utd, it says more about the strength of Newc than is said when Newc beat (say) Wolves.

So a system could be devised for any group of teams playing in a 'league' (in quotes to denote that it's a different sort of league to how we normally think of it) where the teams are positioned in that league by some sort of weighted system - as long as the weighting is done correctly (whatever that 'correctly might be), it would give a better "best team won the league" result than what we get currently (where the result is more about a team's form on any day they play).

[Ed209]

USA made England look shit in South Africa...

[kaosmark2]

Nope, England did that all on their own.

[pink_triangle]

Yes indeed. Worrying.

I think the league is always an accurate reflection of who the best team is. Cant remember the last time the best team didn't win the league?

[kaosmark2]

Championship looks pretty settled after tonight, still technical chances, but 5 point gaps with 2 games to go are huge.

Good win for Bayern as well. Very finely poised, absolutely gutted I couldn't see it, internet too slow to stream and my local pub's sky was down tonight.