3 from 5 already

[tiger76]

I wasn't suggesting either as an approach cos you should be just trying to win or draw each match as best you can

I was more commenting about how the majority view on here seems to be that the way to survive as one of the weaker teams is to have a good defence rather than a good attack but the stats don't really support that view

I'd say we do have a good attack relative to the teams around us, I'm pretty sure we scored our record PL goals tally only last season, however if they can't get into the game they won't be effective, this harks back to the lack of creativity in the midfield and wide areas, and those are the areas we should have recruited in during the most recent transfer window, we didn't or couldn't either way that's now coming back to bite us.

[Goddy]

I wasn't suggesting either as an approach cos you should be just trying to win or draw each match as best you can

I was more commenting about how the majority view on here seems to be that the way to survive as one of the weaker teams is to have a good defence rather than a good attack but the stats don't really support that view

I know you like to live by your username but, DA, I'm not sure you're correct. Here's the last 3 seasons (which as far back as I could be othered to go) comparing goals scored and goals conceded with us and the relegated teams for those seasons. The 18/19 season was a slight outlier with us scoring our highest amount but also conceding the most (but also coincides with our worst recent league performance. The striking (sorry, pun not intended) is that, in general the goals conceded by those being relegated is much higher than the goals scored when comparing our performance against the relegated teams. This suggests that it is actually a wiser strategy to, firstly, try and not concede (and then nick a goal) rather than go for goals. (Percentages in the following are comparing goals for and goals against relative to Burnley's performance).

19/20 Burnley 43 50
Bournemouth 40 (7.0)% 65 30.0%
Watford 36 (16.3)% 64 28.0%
Norwich 26 (39.5)% 75 50.0%

18/19 Burnley 45 68
Cardiff 34 (24.4)% 69 1.5%
Fulham 34 (24.4)% 81 19.1%
Huddersfield 22 (51.1)% 76 11.8%

17/18 Burnley 36 39
Swansea 28 (22.2)% 56 43.6%
Stoke 35 (2.8)% 68 74.4%
WBA 31 (13.9)% 56 43.6%

Edit - apols for the layout when I post the above

[Devils_Advocate]

I know you like to live by your username but, DA, I'm not sure you're correct. Here's the last 3 seasons (which as far back as I could be othered to go) comparing goals scored and goals conceded with us and the relegated teams for those seasons. The 18/19 season was a slight outlier with us scoring our highest amount but also conceding the most (but also coincides with our worst recent league performance. The striking (sorry, pun not intended) is that, in general the goals conceded by those being relegated is much higher than the goals scored when comparing our performance against the relegated teams. This suggests that it is actually a wiser strategy to, firstly, try and not concede (and then nick a goal) rather than go for goals. (Percentages in the following are comparing goals for and goals against relative to Burnley's performance).

19/20 Burnley 43 50
Bournemouth 40 (7.0)% 65 30.0%
Watford 36 (16.3)% 64 28.0%
Norwich 26 (39.5)% 75 50.0%

18/19 Burnley 45 68
Cardiff 34 (24.4)% 69 1.5%
Fulham 34 (24.4)% 81 19.1%
Huddersfield 22 (51.1)% 76 11.8%

17/18 Burnley 36 39
Swansea 28 (22.2)% 56 43.6%
Stoke 35 (2.8)% 68 74.4%
WBA 31 (13.9)% 56 43.6%

Edit - apols for the layout when I post the above

You've just compared Burnley to the bottom 3 which is a bit of a silly way of assessing if a team is more likely to go down with a good defence or a good attack

I looked at where did the three lowest scorers finish and where did the three highest conceded finished and it was the teams in the three lowest scorers that got relegated more often in the last 5 seasons

Therefore statistically you are more likely to go down scoring less as opposed to conceding more

[Spijed]

You've just compared Burnley to the bottom 3 which is a bit of a silly way of assessing if a team is more likely to go down with a good defence or a good attack

I looked at where did the three lowest scorers finish and where did the three highest conceded finished and it was the teams in the three lowest scorers that got relegated more often in the last 5 seasons

Therefore statistically you are more likely to go down scoring less as opposed to conceding more

Isn't the mantra of managers like Big Sam is that you need to shore up the defence first and foremost?

[Goddy]

You've just compared Burnley to the bottom 3 which is a bit of a silly way of assessing if a team is more likely to go down with a good defence or a good attack

I looked at where did the three lowest scorers finish and where did the three highest conceded finished and it was the teams in the three lowest scorers that got relegated more often in the last 5 seasons

Therefore statistically you are more likely to go down scoring less as opposed to conceding more

I don't agree it's 'silly' at all. I am looking at factoring goals scored and goals conceded. Just looking at a simple scoring or conceding goals as a measure is less useful in terms of outcome (points gained or position in the league etc). You really have to consider the number of goals scored in relation to those conceded for anything useful.

The point of the figures in my list is that, in the main, the number of goals scored by teams relegated doesn't differ ton our goals scored anywhere near as much as goals conceded (although I agree 18/19 is not in line with that but then that was our worst performance in the league, too). So, the numbers suggest that the key difference is not that, in general, focusing on scoring goals is likely to lead to a higher number of points rather than focusing, in the first instance on not conceding. Essentially the numbers seem to stack up with the commonly held idea that we sneak a fair few 1-0 victories and that's the key difference between us and those more likely to be relegated.

[cricketfieldclarets]

This time last season Everton were in the bottom three and Bournemouth were in the top half

But so we’re Norwich and Watford. As above.

As above average of 2 from 3 in the bottom 3 after eight games go down.

[cricketfieldclarets]

At risk of casting doubt on your statisitcs:

1. If in the last three years, 5 out of 9 clubs in the bottom three have survived, then doesn't that on the face of it suggest that the odds are in our favour?

2. We haven't played 8 games.

Point one I made reference to above. There was one season where none went down. But the season prior all three went down. More often than not as I’ve said at least two go down. Two out of the three going down every single time.

Just picked three more random seasons. The two we went down. 2009/10 and 2014/15 And one other (the year after).

Again this rings true.

Point two. Fair enough. But given our game in hand was at home to United who we have beat at home once in 52 years (the year we went down) the odds are we would still be there.

[Devils_Advocate]

Isn't the mantra of managers like Big Sam is that you need to shore up the defence first and foremost?

The approach you are talking about is more in relation to when managers come in to clubs and it is a mess or the squad needs overhauling. In this situation then it is a lot easy to start from the back and get that right before trying to outscore teams

If you are trying to link this approach to the situation Burnley are in when we are a club who have had more consistency and is more settled than pretty much every other club in the professional leagues then you have really missed the point. Then again if you hold Sam Allardyce as an authority on how to manage a Premier league team in 2020 you missing the point isnt really that much of a surprise

[Devils_Advocate]

I don't agree it's 'silly' at all. I am looking at factoring goals scored and goals conceded. Just looking at a simple scoring or conceding goals as a measure is less useful in terms of outcome (points gained or position in the league etc). You really have to consider the number of goals scored in relation to those conceded for anything useful.

The point of the figures in my list is that, in the main, the number of goals scored by teams relegated doesn't differ ton our goals scored anywhere near as much as goals conceded (although I agree 18/19 is not in line with that but then that was our worst performance in the league, too). So, the numbers suggest that the key difference is not that, in general, focusing on scoring goals is likely to lead to a higher number of points rather than focusing, in the first instance on not conceding. Essentially the numbers seem to stack up with the commonly held idea that we sneak a fair few 1-0 victories and that's the key difference between us and those more likely to be relegated.

Why pick Burnley as the comparison point for analysing if you are more likely to go down based on goals scored or goals against. We are just one of many teams so we arent that relevant unless you want to make a specific point around are Burnley better focusing on being hard to beat than being free scoring (which I wasnt)

Just to repeat my initial point as you may not have read it properly or you may of misunderstood but I was not looking to suggest there is any right or wrong approach for any team (you play with what youve got) but that this common idea that clubs who score less goals but have a good defence are more likely to survive than clubs who score a lot but ship goal for fun is just not born out by the stats

2020

3 teams with lowest goals total came 19th, 14th & 20th - 2 relegated
3 teams with most conceded came 18th, 17th & 20th - 2 relegated

2019

3 teams with lowest goals total came 18th, 19th & 20th - 3 relegated
3 teams with most conceded came 14th, 20th & 19th - 2 relegated

2018

3 teams with lowest goals total came 20th, 16th & 18th - 2 relegated
3 teams with most conceded came 13th, 14th & 19th - 1 relegated

2017

3 teams with lowest goals total came 18th, 2oth & 19th - 3 relegated
3 teams with most conceded came 20th, 15th & 18th - 2 relegated

2016

3 teams with lowest goals total came 19th, 14th & 20th - 2 relegated
3 teams with most conceded came 16th, 19th & 20th - 2 relegated

Lowest scoring teams = 12 relegations
Highest conceding teams = 9 relegations

[bfcjg]

You’re expecting a slight change after a 100 games of 442 and lumping it forward to Barnes and Wood?

We can lump it forward to Jay Rod and Wood.

[dsr]

I know. That’s exactly what I said.

At least two out of three most seasons.

None that one season three years ago.

Then all three the year before.

Basically most seasons at least two of the bottom three after eight games go down.

And the good news is - after 8 games, we aren't in the bottom three!

[Clarets4me]

Am I the only one to notice that Brighton are actually on 9 points, not 6, as the posted League Table showed ??

[tim_noone]

Am I the only one to notice that Brighton are actually on 9 points, not 6, as the posted League Table showed ??

Collect your twix on the way out sir....

[AfloatinClaret]

I try to be optimistic, but even allowing for that game in hand which we have, I just can't see it myself and I'm rather disappointed that 'reality' has intruded with only eight games played.

To even suggest that come next May we are going to be one of five teams vying for the three Champion's League spots is frankly ludicrous, I suspect that we'll struggle to even be contending for the Europa League places and believe that we shall once again have to settle for 9th or 10th and achieving even that'll require us to create and score more goals. This is serious and we are at risk of ignominiously finishing 11th or 12th, that's the bottom half of the table FFS!

[cricketfieldclarets]

And the good news is - after 8 games, we aren't in the bottom three!

Great point

[Spijed]

Out of Fulham, West Brom & Sheff U. which of those teams, if any are likely to pose the biggest challenge to us?

[jojomk1]

And the good news is - after 8 games, we aren't in the bottom three!

And after 9 games we are

[RalphCoatesComb]

And then it was 3 from 4.

I think we'll be fine come May, but we need points and we need 'em before New Year.

[Spijed]

And then it was 3 from 4.

I think we'll be fine come May, but we need points and we need 'em before New Year.

Last season, Bournemouth had a great start to the season.

If football teaches you anything there is always one club that goes into freefall at some point during the season, and I wouldn't assume Brighton are safe at all either.

[jojomk1]

29 games to play - 87 points

During those 29 games can we win 3 more of them than the likes of WBA, Palace, Newcastle or Brighton

As Corporal Jones would say - "Don't panic"

Not just yet anyway

[FactualFrank]

One game at a time.

[dsr]

And then it was 3 from 4.

I think we'll be fine come May, but we need points and we need 'em before New Year.

I don't think that a side with 10 points in 10 games can be said to be safe from relegation beyond reasonable doubt. It's probable that 38 points would be enough to stop up, but have you considered the possibility they might lose form?

As for needing the points before New Year, the evidence of two seasons ago, and for that matter five seasons ago, suggests that isn't true. It would be a good idea, but not an essential.

[Claretitus]

Fulham just gone 2 up at Leicester. Could be 3 from 3!!

[Rileybobs]

Fulham just gone 2 up at Leicester. Could be 3 from 3!!

You didn’t think that Fulham were going to end the season on 4 points did you?

[tiger76]

A good weekend for Fulham and West Brom as it stands, but for all you shrinking violets, even if Fulham see this game out, they'll still only be 2 points clear of us, and West Brom a point clear, Sheff Utd should be worried though, already they're 2 wins short of safety, and they can't buy a win or a goal.

There will be plenty of twists and turns throughout the campaign, even Brighton will only be 4 points clear of the drop zone if Fulham bag all 3 here.

And I wouldn't completely rule out others getting sucked into the relegation dogfight, Palace have been without Zaha in their last 2 games, and they've drawn blanks in both of those fixtures, so if he was ruled out in the long term for any reason, they could easily plummet as happened last season.

[Claretitus]

[quote=Claretitus post_id=<a href="tel:1428081">1428081</a> time=<a href="tel:1606760075">1606760075</a> user_id=1205]
Fulham just gone 2 up at Leicester. Could be 3 from 3!!

You didn’t think that Fulham were going to end the season on 4 points did you?
[/quote]

Of course not, but they’ve obviously got a bit more about them than we thought, and a lot more than we have. Does anyone REALLY think we have what it takes to stay up? Coz I certainly don’t. Have a pop at me if you wish, but so far we have seen nothing, and I’m certain that if Zaha had played last Monday, we’d still be winless. All this 29 games left, 87 points to play for, means nothing when we are as awful as we are. Can’t even see a goal coming any time soon, let alone a win.

[Elizabeth]

Yes it’s testing our resolve but come on surely we have more backbone than some are showing .
I’m talking about some fans and nothing else !

[boatshed bill]

Yes it’s testing our resolve but come on surely we have more backbone than some are showing .
I’m talking about some fans and nothing else !

For all any posters know:
We have an unhappy manager,
We have a key player who wants away,
Not the best for team/club spirit in a relegation fight.

[Elizabeth]

Ok boatshed , not sure what your post means, it might mean you’ve given up, if it does excuse me if I wait a bit longer
Are you suggesting Dyche and Tarkowski are not going to give 100% ?
If you are I think different, I think both are better than that . I also think those around them are better than that

[jurek]

,

Add to that our protracted takeover
and possible new owners on the horizon.

Not too mention injuries.
Our lack of and poor recruitment as of late.
Playing to empty stadiums.
Lacking pace and creativity.

It doesn't sound good to me and I'm finding it
pretty difficult to see any positives.

[Elizabeth]

Don’t be too concerned jurek, there are enough of you on here to have a collective hug of despair.
It was Man City the weekend gone that has set you off , I understand

[Safron]

Don’t be too concerned jurek, there are enough of you on here to have a collective hug of despair.
It was Man City the weekend gone that has set you off , I understand

Yes man city who have had a poor start to the season and were struggling for form,but yet we still rolled over and showed no fight or desire to give them a fight!

[Elizabeth]

Yes Man City who beat us 5-0 every season even when we prove good enough to get top 10 positions

[boatshed bill]

Ok boatshed , not sure what your post means, it might mean you’ve given up, if it does excuse me if I wait a bit longer
Are you suggesting Dyche and Tarkowski are not going to give 100% ?
If you are I think different, I think both are better than that . I also think those around them are better than that

My post means that it's pure conjecture on my part.
But Dyche has been very naughty, he's shown division between himself and the chairman.
For what tit's worth, I think he'd welcome a move right now if offered one at the right money.
We know Tarkowski wants out, he's said so.
How can this not adversely affect our performance?

[Elizabeth]

I don’t know , shall we agree on weekends we get badly beaten it affects our performance and on weekends we get a good result it doesn’t affect our performance ?

[boatshed bill]

I don’t know , shall we agree on weekends we get badly beaten it affects our performance and on weekends we get a good result it doesn’t affect our performance ?

No.
It's not about the result. The result is nothing more than an indicator that Sean Dyche has no idea how to set up against Pep's Manchester City.

[Wile E Coyote]

west ham fans must be jumping through hoops, some anyway. 5th now, and the levels of hate towards moyes has been shocking recently. now look at them go. always rated him, and firmly believe he was utd's true saviour. their owners were vilified too. but it must be quiet times on their board whilst the goings good. thousands of them skulking in the shadows now.
their position will probably change soon one way or the other, but it just shows how difficult this league is to predict .

[Goobs]

Of course not, but they’ve obviously got a bit more about them than we thought, and a lot more than we have. Does anyone REALLY think we have what it takes to stay up? Coz I certainly don’t. Have a pop at me if you wish, but so far we have seen nothing, and I’m certain that if Zaha had played last Monday, we’d still be winless. All this 29 games left, 87 points to play for, means nothing when we are as awful as we are. Can’t even see a goal coming any time soon, let alone a win.

So which part of the US do you live in?

[Spijed]

A quick comparison of our current rivals and the position of the teams they've played. Ourselves and Brighton have had the more difficult opponents to date:

[RalphCoatesComb]

With the Blades as good as down, and Brighton at Leicester tomorrow, it's looking more and more like 2 from 4 for the drop now

[FactualFrank]

With the Blades as good as down, and Brighton at Leicester tomorrow, it's looking more and more like 2 from 4 for the drop now

I think with this season only 10-11 games in, it's far too early to say anything like that. It could change a lot in 5 games.

[DomBFC1882]

With the Blades as good as down, and Brighton at Leicester tomorrow, it's looking more and more like 2 from 4 for the drop now

Completely agree. IF we can tighten up defensively we will stay up imo as the other teams leak far to many goals

[FactualFrank]

Completely agree. IF we can tighten up defensively we will stay up imo as the other teams leak far to many goals

Other than the City game, we have improved when compared to when the Tarky-Mee partnership wasn't here. That is no coincidence at all.

In line with what you say, we need to be picking off the 1-0 and 2-1 wins and drawing at worst, that did us so well in the past.

[Spijed]

I wouldn't write off Leeds either as their defence is very suspect. Their keeper has kept them in many games this season.

[FactualFrank]

I wouldn't write off Leeds either as their defence is very suspect. Their keeper has kept them in many games this season.

Like I've said they will throw another £150 million at the wall next month.

The twunts will be fine.

[DomBFC1882]

Other than the City game, we have improved when compared to when the Tarky-Mee partnership wasn't here. That is no coincidence at all.

In line with what you say, we need to be picking off the 1-0 and 2-1 wins and drawing at worst, that did us so well in the past.

I'm with you on that Frank

[RalphCoatesComb]

It could change a lot in 5 games.

It could and I hope that it does. Fine margins but, as Sean says, we have a strong jaw !

[Firthy]

The way things are looking at present, I'd happily take a point at Arsenal although I think we could sneak a 1-0 victory. Arsenal aren't playing that well at present and today is probably our best chance of getting a win at Highbury, I just hope SD goes for it and we don't play too defensivley.

[FactualFrank]

The way things are looking at present, I'd happily take a point at Arsenal although I think we could sneak a 1-0 victory. Arsenal aren't playing that well at present and today is probably our best chance of getting a win at Highbury, I just hope SD goes for it and we don't play too defensivley.

We have no chance of beating them at Highbury.

[DomBFC1882]

The way things are looking at present, I'd happily take a point at Arsenal although I think we could sneak a 1-0 victory. Arsenal aren't playing that well at present and today is probably our best chance of getting a win at Highbury, I just hope SD goes for it and we don't play too defensivley.

Highbury? What decade are you stuck in pal