2019/2020 Fixtures v 2018/2019 Results - Season Comparison

1dragon

TIA Regular
Joined
Jan 6, 2009
Messages
2,748
I want to understand but I am struggling to understand the table
The ranking (1,2,3...) shows a particular position in a particular year (between 1997 to 2019) would have performed relative to each other. For eg. The 1st place in 2019 would have ranked 1st out of 27, another year's 1st place would have ranked 2nd out of 27 etc. And 1998's 1st place would have ranked 26/27. I think the entire table is too big to display, so the author only placed selected years when Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal and Man City were champs.

I think it can mean a few things:
- how strong/weak were the title challengers relative to the rest of the teams in that particular year
- how strong/weak the title challengers were relative to each other
- how dominant the top teams in a particular year as compared to other years
- how weak/strong the other teams were in a particular year as compared to other years.
 

Incognito

The Normal One
Joined
Jan 6, 2011
Messages
3,141
I want to understand but I am struggling to understand the table
If I understand correctly, it is ranking for every league position in the past 28 odd years on basis on total number of points achieved by the team in that league position - kind of horizontal ranking for each league position. So for league position 1 row, if we continue with the current PPG we'll be rank 1 because of 111 points in the 2019 season, City's 2017 will be rank 2 with 100 points and so on.

'The league is easy' kind of arguments might not be easy to predict with because there are multiple ways this can be interpreted. League consist of 20 teams and if we consider say 2017 season, the top 6 positions looks good but the remaining league actually looks weak (as most of the rankings are in 20s). Inference being the top teams were way ahead than the rest of the league and City were really good against these top teams as well. Whichever team won the mini league between the top 6 teams could have been the champions in such a case, kind of how it was during the late 2000s when we had the traditional top 4 of us, Chelsea, Arsenal, United.

The other way to look at it is how much competition the top challenger has given to the eventual champion by taking as much points as possible, which seems to be not that significant for most of the years mentioned here. So if a league is considered difficult in case the second team tries it best to accumulate the most points possible, none from the above table makes a case for it. Which makes City's 2018 win more tough than the 2017 one. But then again, if the rest of the league rankings were pathetic during 2018 (not shown in that table) it will again mean the rest of the league was easy in itself.
 

Jimmyscase

DoctorJimmy: knee-high flying tackle specialist
Joined
May 18, 2016
Messages
5,108
The table confirms that normally the team coming top doesn't beat the all teams directly below it twice in a season. This year teams in places 4-7 are spectacularly poor in comparison with previous seasons, because none of them got three points against us and they've been beaten by us at times when it disrupted a potential sequence of positive results. In fact it seems to need an extra recovery period mentally and physically after their games against us, this year in comparison even to City in 2017

So the figures above for this season are skewed by us being so consistent.
It really can't be used to support or refute any claim there's been a concomitant dip in quality.
 
Last edited:

Gone Kloppo

Formerly known as Ʒan
Joined
Jul 15, 2016
Messages
2,428
Recently we've had the media asking 'is this the greatest team ever?' we've had fans weighing in with their opinion ' nothing can beat the united treble', ex arsenal players telling us that back when they were a boy in 2003, the league was far more competitive. The arguments for greatest season ever are usually I've those 5 seasons.

I agree that the table is inconclusive. And what is the definition of 'competitive season'?Competitive in a title run-in sense or competitive across the 20 teams? If it's the latter then you'd expect a competitive season would show all the teams in my table being mid-range creeping close to position 28 since the points will be more evenly distributed.
 

Jimmyscase

DoctorJimmy: knee-high flying tackle specialist
Joined
May 18, 2016
Messages
5,108
Recently we've had the media asking 'is this the greatest team ever?' we've had fans weighing in with their opinion ' nothing can beat the united treble', ex arsenal players telling us that back when they were a boy in 2003, the league was far more competitive. The arguments for greatest season ever are usually I've those 5 seasons.

I agree that the table is inconclusive. And what is the definition of 'competitive season'?Competitive in a title run-in sense or competitive across the 20 teams? If it's the latter then you'd expect a competitive season would show all the teams in my table being mid-range creeping close to position 28 since the points will be more evenly distributed.
Seasons 1960-1975 were madly varied in terms of champions, and there were really freaky falling off seasons for LFC after a championship season in those times; common sense tells us that those were league seasons without domination and therefore broader competitiveness. Those sort of seasons aren't ever coming back though. The thing is, my guess is the table you produced for the PL-era highwater seasons wouldn't look that different for any 5 seasons from the sixties to the mid 70s. It's not telling us much, I'm sorry to say.
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
12,164
I dont think you can tell how tough a league is just from internal results. Looking at how many teams do well in European competition is my personal measuring stick. Even saying a league can't be tough and competitive if there is a dominant team doesn't fit with me. There have been times Bundesliga teams have been doing incredible in Europe but Bayern was still dominating domestically. At the moment English sides are having a good time of it in European competition which means, to diminish our league achievement by saying it's a weak league, you need to say the whole of Europe is currently being very weak. I just don't agree. If we had 15 points less everyone would be raving about how great a season it was. Wolves, Leicester and Sheffield United turning the big 6 into a big 9? A 3 horse title race with Leicester and City still in it? So many teams challenging for top 4? Even bottom team Norwich giving title challengers a tough time of it? And English sides dominating the later stages of the European competitions. It would be getting talked about as the best, most competitive, exciting Premier League season for years or ever. But we have 15 points more than that so its weak. It's not weak we are just phenomenal!
 

nobluff

Official TIA Match Thread Starter
Joined
Oct 26, 2007
Messages
1,942
....ok scrap that maybe 20 less points!!! Keep forgetting how far ahead we are and how many points we would need to drop to see an exciting title race!!!
For me it’s already way too exciting. I would prefer that we make it less exciting week over week, until it’s done and dusted, then the real excitement can start.
 

Anfield rd Dreamer

Well-Known Member
Ad-free Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2012
Messages
12,164
After seeing the TIA article using some C5 index that concludes that Leicester's League title was the most competitive season, I don't feel so bad about my own flawed logic!
Haven't read the article but any process used to achieve that result is flawed. For a start Leicester are a much tougher, stronger side that play better football this season than that. So if the only decent side that had a good season and ran away with the league is actually better this year the conclusion is rubbish. Spurs didn't even hold onto second in the end did they?
 

Jimmyscase

DoctorJimmy: knee-high flying tackle specialist
Joined
May 18, 2016
Messages
5,108
Only downside to this league season is it can't be replicated, absolutely absurd.
I wouldn't even want the gap to be replicated, heretical as that may seem. But if City start next season on -10 (which isn't beyond the realms of possibility) the gap to them might be at one point 25 again...it'd be nice if beating literally everybody twice was the only way we can up ourselves. Imagine that!
 

Jimmyscase

DoctorJimmy: knee-high flying tackle specialist
Joined
May 18, 2016
Messages
5,108
The stat-man extraordinaire based in the States whose probability tables I've been quoting from regularly for weeks, seems to have taken a weekend off from the Premier League. No updates after Norwich yet. Shame, I'm now on tender hooks waiting to see if last game's 99.98% figure just went up to 99.99%
 

BigJon

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2018
Messages
280
I have often wondered what the results of the league would have been had the 2 pts for a win and 1 for a draw system been retained. Would this significantly alter the winners in many seasons? Alas I have neither the technical, mathematical or analytical skills to work this out - I do have a large piece of slate and some chalk which is a start.
 

Sweeting

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2008
Messages
9,501
I remember that Chelsea team of 16/17 being an absolute machine that felt like it just kept winning and winning.

Now we are going to better their points total quite substantially (barring a disaster). That's pretty incredible.