To those who keep saying Fulham deserved promotion more than us (sorry stats)

I keep hearing that Fulham deserved to be promoted more than us, and the majority of that is down to the way that they played.

Looking back at the positions in the table I'm amazed at how consistent we were, for 15% of the season we were in 1st, for 52% we were in 2nd, 22% in 3rd, and 11% in 4th. At no point of the season were we lower than 4th position.

Now to compare that with Fulham, they were never 1st, they were 2nd for 2% of the season, and they were in the playoff positions for 37% of the season. So for 61% of the season they were outside of the playoffs, and for 26% of the season they were bottom half of the table. Fulham didn't get into the playoff places until the 29th game of the season, didn't get to 3rd until the 38th game, and reached 2nd at the 42nd game - they stayed there for 1 round of matches.

Yes they were probably easier on the eye, and yes they did have a great run and pushed us all the way, but as we can see it's about a 46 game season not a a 23 game season.

I agree with you, however...

52% of the time in 2nd. 23 game run for Fulham. It doesn't really mean anything though because over 46 games we got more points than they did. That is the only stat that counts and we deserve it, no matter what lies the media might spout about Fulham. They have an agenda. They are thinking of the headlines for next season.

I've heard pundits saying things like "great achievement for Cardiff but they will probably go down next season". Why do people need to make snap judgements on things months before the season even begins? Who knows what will happen.

it is absolutely the points that count. My post was just a reinforcement of it being a 46 game season not a 23 game season.
I find it strange that people are writing us off already, we have done no summer business at all as yet, let's see who comes and goes first.

I also read somewhere that there are odds out already on who's going to win and be relegated etc... next season. How can they put odds out there when they don't even know the full make up of the league? Surely they will be different odds if Swansea stay up compared to if Southampton/Huddersfield stay up, or if it's Derby, Fulham, Boro, or Villa who go up.

Absolutely bang on there mate. Since when did a run of games make people forget about what happened before it? 23 games is job half done and they always fail to mention that they lost 5 games in about 6 weeks before that run.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shute

Absolutely bang on there mate. Since when did a run of games make people forget about what happened before it? 23 games is job half done and they always fail to mention that they lost 5 games in about 6 weeks before that run.

---

I've not heard anyone saying Fulham deserved it more. Over 46 games Cardiff were the better team. League tables don't lie, form tables do.

A fit/playing Cairney was the big factor. Injured - Fulham struggled; fit, they prospered.

Which does not augur well if they sell him in the summer

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cyclops

A fit/playing Cairney was the big factor. Injured - Fulham struggled; fit, they prospered.

Which does not augur well if they sell him in the summer

---

I think Tom Cairney fits really well in the way Fulham play.


He was average at best at Hull so,I’m not sure if he would benefit a move elsewhere.

The same could be said for Sone Aluko who was Fantastic when he played for Fulham, yet average at Reading.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rs3100

I keep hearing that Fulham deserved to be promoted more than us, and the majority of that is down to the way that they played.

Looking back at the positions in the table I'm amazed at how consistent we were, for 15% of the season we were in 1st, for 52% we were in 2nd, 22% in 3rd, and 11% in 4th. At no point of the season were we lower than 4th position.

Now to compare that with Fulham, they were never 1st, they were 2nd for 2% of the season, and they were in the playoff positions for 37% of the season. So for 61% of the season they were outside of the playoffs, and for 26% of the season they were bottom half of the table. Fulham didn't get into the playoff places until the 29th game of the season, didn't get to 3rd until the 38th game, and reached 2nd at the 42nd game - they stayed there for 1 round of matches.

Yes they were probably easier on the eye, and yes they did have a great run and pushed us all the way, but as we can see it's about a 46 game season not a a 23 game season.

---

Sums it up well. That bizarre blip at Christmas, without that we’d have been out of sight aswell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by goats

Sums it up well. That bizarre blip at Christmas, without that we’d have been out of sight aswell.

---

I agree with this, if we had beaten just Fulham during this period , we would have been promoted a lot earlier imho

I think it's fair to say that Fulham were unfortunate not to go up. but not that they deserve it more than us.

They're the best team I can think of that hasn't gone up automatically, by some distance. The points they got is usually enough too.

They're just unfortunate to coincide with a wolves team who have spent ridiculous amounts on players.

Since the half way point in the league they have got comfortably the most points in the league, more even than wolves, but they're paying for a bad start.

its a marathon not a sprint

Fulham played well

We played more consistently over the course of the season

If Middlesbrough go up as well the type of football being played by the bottom half of the premiership will be just like the championship

Will suit us to a T

Over the course of the season they failed, we didn`t. They have another chance to show everyone how good they are in the play offs, if they deserve promotion they will do it , if they fail then they are not as good as the London media / Cardiff haters say they are ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TISS

its a marathon not a sprint

---

Spot on. Have a look at the table; City averaged nearly 2 points a game.

Suspect their team will be broken up if they fail in the PO's again.

Read somewhere Mitrovics goals gained Fulham 21 points. Makes sense as they were hardly a force before he came. Take off them points and where do they finish?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

I think it's fair to say that Fulham were unfortunate not to go up. but not that they deserve it more than us.

They're the best team I can think of that hasn't gone up automatically, by some distance. The points they got is usually enough too.

They're just unfortunate to coincide with a wolves team who have spent ridiculous amounts on players.

Since the half way point in the league they have got comfortably the most points in the league, more even than wolves, but they're paying for a bad start.

---

The Brighton team that didn't go up were as good, as they got promoted at a canter the season after with Newcastle. They also got 88 points.