Hostedenis

Who are you, Costa?

High quality and english stream, Jose interview right now! http://www.riderhd.org/

The 90 points for the season assumption can be achieved by winning all home matches and the seven "easiest" away matches (the three promoted teams and the 14th-17th ranked teams from the previous season) and draw the 12 remaining away matches. Thus, there are 19+7=26 easier games, or par 3 games, and 12 more difficult games, or par 1 games. So we need to have 12 difficult away games, and these are decided by the 12 teams (13 without Chelsea) that were on top the previous season. Meaning: City, Liverpool, (Chelsea,) Arsenal, Everton, Tottenham, Man United, Southampton, Stoke, Newcastle, Crystal, Swansea and West Ham. So that's why Crystal Palace away is considered a par 1 game. It just so happens that these 12 (or 13 with Chelsea) teams also form the top 12 (or 13) teams again this season so far. Like I said at the end of my post, it might be interesting to, instead of counting the 12 most difficult away games as par 1's, count the 8 most difficult away games as par 1 and the four most difficult home games as par 1, and thus have again 12 par 1 games leading up to a 90 total for the title assumption. The par 1 games would then be City (home and away), Liverpool (home and away), Arsenal (home and away), Everton (home and away), Tottenham (away), Man Utd (away), Soton (away), Stoke (away). For now I prefer the APLT that counts the 12 most difficult away games as par 1's, because it's the classic way most other people are doing it. I think it is a good way, because with the 12 top teams from last season the par 1 games include games like West Ham away and Newcastle away with teams who have been good this season, while the other system would count a team like Everton twice (both home and away game as par 1) while they have been underachieving a lot this season. I might change which games are par 1 and which aren't, going into next season, if that's what people on here prefer. Although I understand you don't quite get why Crystal Palace away gets to be a par 1 game while for example City at home isn't (which is why I said the system isn't perfect) but it doesn't really matter in the long run. Say we draw to City at home and win to Crystal away. In the first system (12 hardest away games = par 1) we would then drop 2 points in the APLT against City and win 2 points against Crystal. In the second system (4 hardest home + 8 hardest away games = par 1) we would then play on par twice and thus remain level in the APLT.

What I like especially about the APLT, is that it shows teams that are on title course (or on a form good enough to become champions) by a horizontal line. If you play to par, you'll stay horizontal in the APLT. For example, since matchday 10, Manchester United have only dropped one point in the APLT. If they had not had their terrible start to the season, but played with the same form as the last 12 weeks, over all 38 matchdays they would end up with 86 points (dropping a point every 12 matchdays). What I like about the APLT is that there's par 1 and par 3 games, and you can remain on a horizontal line (on 90 points course, by our assumption on title course) by drawing a game, as long as it's a par 1 game and not a par 3. It also makes clear that losing a game isn't that bad as long it's a par 1 game, we'll only drop 1 point in the APLT, but losing a par 3 game is more catastrophic for a team's ambitions, the team will go down three. Same can be said about Soton; they were performing like a 90 point team would until the 11th matchday, but then came their horrible form in November and early December and they dropped 12 points in 5 games in the APLT. But since that horrible form, they've actually gotten back to performing better than a 90 points team with away wins over Manchester United and Newcastle, and a home win against Arsenal, and they've actually gone 4 points back up over 7 games and are now second in the APLT. It also shows we have dropped points in the APLT three times so far this season: the draw away at Sunderland, the loss away against Tottenham and the away loss against Newcastle. The away draw to Sunderland was a par 3 game, we should've won that one if we wanted to end up with 90 points at the end of the season but the game was a draw so we dropped 2 points in the APLT. The Tottenham and Newcastle away games were par 1 games, we would've been okay with a draw because we would then still have played to par (ended up with 90 points at the end of the season if all games are played to par). We lost those two games, so dropped a point per game in those two games. However, there have been 5 occasions where we've performed better than par this season as well; the Liverpool away win, the Stoke away win, the Everton away win, the Swansea away win and the Crystal Palace away win, and we have thus gone up two points per each of those games in the APLT, currently placing us on the 96 point line. If we win the City home game this weekend, we'll stay put and they'll drop a point, further opening our 15 point gap to a 16 point gap. If the game's a draw, we'll drop two points in the APLT and they'll stay put, closing the gap to 13 points. If they win, we'll drop three points in the APLT while they'll go up 2 points, closing the 15 point gap to 10 points. I do indeed think that's what Alex meant, I don't think there's anyone here who would argue City have an easier second half to the season. Even City fans are beginning to admit it. And exactly, like you say 76 point season isn't title contending anymore, hasn't been for quite some years, but it should still secure CL football, I think.

C'est un vieux message. Mourinho dit que David Luiz ne va pas partir. I don't think he speaks English, as he's asking in French if someone can translate the Mourinho quote for him from English to French.

I had also read that article earlier today and while I thought it was a good read, I hated the following remark: If they can make that note, saying that Kun has been playing less minutes and thus has a higher goalscoring rate, I feel they should also point out that Aguero is City's penalty taker while Costa isn't ours. Should Kun not be their penalty taker, he'd have 13 goals instead of 15, opposed to Costa's 17. He actually has a lower minutes per open play goal than Costa. But I haven't seen a lot of people pointing that out

Hello everyone, I'd thought I'd introduce something new to the forum, and I hope it catches on. What is it? It's a new way to look at the table in the premier league. Why? Because we can, because it's fun, because we're members of a football forum so like me you probably invest a lot of time in discussing football online, and, most of all, because I think the current premier league football table doesn't tell the whole story. Is the current table wrong? No, of course not. It lists the amount of points a team has gathered, and at the end of the season, the team with the most points wins. Easy no? Yes. But the table is deceiving. Team A could have played ten difficult fixtures (away games, or more capable opponents) and be three points behind Team B, who have had ten easier fixtures. Is Team A then really doing worse then team B? It's difficult, with just looking at the table, to know if a team has played harder or easier fixtures. So I have been, for some time now, looking into other ways of listing a team's standing in the premier league. There are many different ways to just the normal premier league table, such as the Cann table and many others. But there's one I found and liked and have been regularly checking for the last three months or so. I don't know if it has an official name, but I found it online on a football blog and the blogger calls it the 'alternate premier league table'. I've also found the same system of calculating the 'alternate premier league table' on RAWK, but I don't know if the blogger or the poster on RAWK was the first and maybe they're even the same person. Anyway, I wanted to make a thread here on this forum to discuss the ALTERNATE PREMIER LEAGUE TABLE. Since I do not want to copy the images and text or just provide a link to the blog or RAWK, (mostly because anything a scouser does, I can do better ) I've made my own excel file with calculations and a graph earlier this evening and I'll update this topic after each matchday if enough people are interested and follow this thread. I will however copy some older images from previous seasons from RAWK to explain to you guys how it works. So how does it work? First of all, the APLT makes an assumption. It assumes you need 90 points to win the league. And it assumes you'll make top four (i.e. secure Champions League football) if you gather 71 points over a season. Of course, a team may win the league with less than 90 points, or two teams may end up having more than 90 points thus making the initial assumption wrong, but this doesn't matter. The assumption is just a guideline to compare yourself to, and if two team are about to finish above the 90 point line this is shown in the APLT as well. Similar for the 71 point line. But these lines are useful for reference. So, going by our assumption, a team needs 90 points to win the league. This can be done in many ways, for example by winning 30 random games and losing the other 8. But that wouldn't be a good benchmark, just selecting 30 random games, because not all opponents are equally capable and only half of the games are played at home. So instead, the APLT suggest that to get your 90 points, you need to win all your 19 home games, and draw your most difficult 12 away games, winning the other 7 as well. That means that if you lose a home game, you'll drop 3 points, draw a home game, drop 2 points from the 90 points line. If you lose or draw a difficult away game, you'll drop 1 or 0 points respectively from the 90 points line. It's not that hard, see? So, to recapitulate; 90 points for the season can be achieved by winning all home matches and the seven "easiest" away matches (the three promoted teams and the 14th-17th ranked teams from the previous season) and draw the 12 remaining away matches. So basically, there are two types of games: 26 games were we must get the three points (19+7=26) and 12 games were we must try to get one point. Similar to golf, I'll refer to these games as par 3 and par 1 games, were we must play on par to remain on the 90 points line (read: remain on course for the title) and if we perform worse, we'll drop below the line, if we perform better, we'll go up in the APLT. Is this system perfect? No it's not. Food for discussion, but fun to follow. So, what have I done so far? I've made an excel worksheet that I'll update as the season progresses. It's a pity I didn't start this back in August, but next season (if there's enough interest) I'll start from matchday one. So here's the excel sheet with the seven teams I made, currently listing the most interesting teams to follow. Each team has it's colour (for the graph) and I also highlighted a teams par 1 games in that team's colour to make them stand out. The seven teams in the graph are the usual top five, also Liverpool, and this season Southampton although previous season Everton would be more interesting to follow. You could put all twenty teams in the graph, but that'd be more work, more chaotic, and those teams won't win the title or CL spots anyway: As you can see in the above excel sheet, Chelsea has already had most of it's difficult away fixtures (the par 1 games) as has Southampton. We actually only have two more par 1 games (more difficult games) to go. On the other hand, both the Manchester teams have had mainly par three games, or easier fixtures, and will have more difficult games in the remaining part of the season. In the regular table we're 5 points clear of City, but in the APLT, it's more, because we've had a more difficult first half of the season. And it is exactly that, that is shown in the APLT. For example, after the Tottenham game, in the APLT we were 10 points clear of City, even though in the regular table we had an equal amount of points. All those 10 points mean, is that we've performed better then them, because we have an equal amount of points but from more difficult games. It also means that in the second half of the season, they have more par 1 games, meaning that if they win a par 1 they'll go up 2 points in the APLT, and we'll have more par 3 games, meaning that if we win, we stay put. But it's a nice representation of the premier league table to consider. To give you some clear examples, here are the APLTs from previous seasons, which I've copied from RAWK because I have only just tonight made my own excel file, so I only have 14/15. First I'll show last season: It shows how we were actually going for the title on matchday 29, close to the end, but than lost it because we lost two par three games... It also shows Liverpool losing at home (so dropping three points - par 3 game) and we winning at Anfield (par 1 game - so going up 2) which cost Liverpool the title and made City win it. It also shows City on top at the end of the season, meaning they win the title, but below the 90 points line. Meaning they performed worse than the initial assumption. But as I said, this doesn't matter. City's still above all other teams, four lines below the 90 points line making them finish with 86 points. Still, the initial assumptions aren't far of, City won it being four points of the assumption, and five (not four) teams are above the 71 points line or the CL line. Here's the season before that, which show the assumptions can be even more accurate. It shows a title winning team (Utd) with only one point less than the assumption, and exactly 4 teams above the 71 points line. But, enough of the past. I'm here to start a thread about the current APLT. I hope you find it as interesting as I do and we can follow it in this thread. I'll update my graph after each matchday, showing the current standings. For the moment, it's looking good for Chelsea supporters. Here's my own Excel graph: So according to this graph, even Southampton are currently outperforming City. That is because they, like us, have had a more difficult schedule in the first half of the season. So while the APLT is definitely correct (as just another way or representing the standings) you should also take in mind that because we'll have an easier second half of the season (more par 3 games) dropping points in those game will be costlier and we'll go down faster in the APLT, than say if City were to lose a game with them having more par 1 games (but also more difficult games, making it more likely they'll drop points). Another interesting way I'd like to look at it in the future (maybe from August on) is instead of counting the 12 most difficult away games as par 1's, maybe count the home games against top four as par 1's, and the 8 most difficult away games as par 1's, coming to twelve par 1's as well. But for now, let's do it the classic way with the 12 most difficult away games as par 1's. I hope I've peaked your interest.

BAMFORD SCOOOOOOOOOORES :blue scalf:

And that's why Thibault is no 1 We didn't play good today, but no harm done. We got an away goal, didn't lose, and have the second leg at the Bridge!

That is disgusting. But on topic, today is a great day!

Exactly. His number of assists is insane! Especially considering the season's only halfway! I'm not saying he should get 25, no way he's been a succes even if he makes no more assists and ends the season on 15. But I'm saying he could get 25 in the PL. That's scary. Well, for non-Chelsea supporters it is! It's even more insane if you take into consideration it's his first season in an entirely new team for him, and add to that the fact he's just ranking up the assists not from a CAM position, but from DM

Couldn't agree more :tophat:

Dude, I remember you this summer as being the main guy on this forum telling everyone we needed to sign Falcao. Some including me told you that his wages were to high and his loan fee was outrageous, and that he wasn't the same Falcao as in his Atleti days and you even got angry with me and others when we said these things. If by saying "glad we dodged this bullet" you mean you didn't see the bullet coming and are glad you dodged it, you've seen the light I'm happy you did. If you however mean "no wonder no one was interested in him" as "it was so obvious he was going to flop" then I'm sorry for you but you've completely did a 180 to how you thought just a few months ago or so...

Every time I hear our fans sign it during a match now I always think of Costa shouting along out of his car window

I love Diego! Score a goal tomorrow please

Of course it's not a fight. I'm not angry or insulting, am I? I never said you annoyed me, and I never tried to annoy you. Now, back on topic. I guess we just have different definitions of youth players then, brought up by our Academy. I would never consider Thorgan, and even more so the case of Thibault Courtois, youth products of the academy as Thorgan was molded into the footballer he is by Lens and Tubeke, and even more by Zulte and Borussia. Thibault was molded by the youth academy of Genk, and was made world class in Atleti's academy. Chelsea got him to Atleti, but I would never say Courtois is a youth product of Chelsea. Courtois and Thorgan were 19 when Chelsea bought them, hardly a Chelsea "youth" product. Same goes with Zouma. Young players, yes. But not my definition of youth at the moment Chelsea acquired them. I would however consider Ake and Loftus Cheek to be Chelsea's youth product, as their were molded by our academy and have been training at Chelsea from a much younger age. Especially Ruben Loftus Cheek, who's been here since he was a little boy, and to a lesser extent Ake, who joined from Feyenoord when he was 15 or 16 I think, can't remember. I would call that youth. They are the club's academy's own youth products. But I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. No problem

I never said he didn't play with our U21's. He did. I just said he can hardly be called a product of our Academy. I said he NEVER trained with our academy but if you want to nitpick, you're right, in the two and a half seasons we've owned him, he has been here for about a week or 5, maybe 8, I don't know exactly. My point being, pretty close to never. Each and every single club of Tubeke, Lens, Zulte and Monchengladbach have shaped Thorgan a lot more than our Academy ever has. In fact, Chelsea has hardly shaped him at all. So you can't really call him a product of our Academy. What Chelsea has done however, by buying him, was giving him a great opportunity which resulted in Zulte and Borussia loaning him and ultimately to Thorgan becoming a better player.

Thorgan never trained in our academy? During his youth he trained and was formed by Tubeke and RC Lens. He was then also bought by Chelsea when we bought Eden Hazard, at the start of the 12-13 preseason. So he has been Chelsea property for only two and a half seasons now, and the first two of those he trained with and played for Zulte Waregem, and the last half season he has been training and playing with Monchengladbach. The only times he has trained with Chelsea were short periods in the summer during preseason, usually very short because he trained most of the last three preseasons with the clubs he was loaned to. It's mental, claiming he's a product of our academy or Cobham

The longer you watch it, the more painful it becomes http://www.voetbalzone.nl/social_item.asp?uid=3341

I like Austin as a player, but to be fair, quite an amount of those goals where from the spot. He's still bagging goals, but his stats would be less impressive if QPR had a different penalty taker. Not that I'm complaining though, I have him in my fantasy team

Lol, Neuer to Benfica for 89 million!

I think it is appropriate. I did not call you names and I wasn't rude. I just said you copy pasted your post from a previous post, and I consider that spam and called you out on it. I was going to let that be the end of it, but since you replied to me, I will reply back. That is true, I did not see that. But it's not really my fault, when I read more than five lines in a post that I've already read, to assume I've read the rest of the post as well. People not reading your entire post is kind of a logical result to copying and pasting your posts. Ah but it was. Compare your two posts below: Yes you did add an alinea in the last post. I didn't notice that, because I never got to that point because I had already read the posts first four alinea's and so assumed all of it was a repost. Why not just post the new alinea? I never said it was a competition, or that it isn't about discussing calmly and with respect to all Chelsea fans. You don't have to apologize mate. Not to me. I'm just pointing out I (and others here) don't like reposts. First, because it's spam, and second, (even though you state that wasn't your intention) it feels like you're just trying to collect points. To me, the points don't matter though so I only care about the first reason. I think spam (or reposts in this case) decrease the discussions in the threads. But don't worry about it, no need to apologize, I'm not mad or anything. And you don't have to be afraid of me, I'm not a moderator

Happy birthday Eden!

That is just a repost, you already posted the EXACT SAME THING here. Just because people didn't like it, doesn't mean people didn't read it.