Premier League final day

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

I'm not surprised. It would be a quite a job.

:hehe:

---

It’s too late for my brain to process what I was trying to say

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

A good run of results? Swansea were in the top six almost all of the season.

---

yeah but throughout the season they outperformed their stats, they seemed to have a knack of picking up wins from games they had no right to. dodgy last minute penalties etc.
great habit to have but not a repeatable one in the long run

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

Indeed. A functional Norwich side was able to gather 97 points due to the fact that the Championship was largely rubbish this season.

---

or a really good Norwich side, with a core of premier League quality players won a decent quality championship

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

yeah but throughout the season they outperformed their stats

---

:hehe:

Throughout the season Swansea were one of the top six sides in the division. They entered the top six after game 3. They were still in the top six after game 46.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

or a really good Norwich side, with a core of premier League quality players won a decent quality championship

---

If you genuine believe this season's Championship was 'decent quality', then nothing I'm going to say is likely to change your mind. You're deluded, but no doubt you'll find some bizarre set of stats that will 'prove' otherwise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

:hehe:

Throughout the season Swansea were one of the top six sides in the division. They entered the top six after game 3. They were still in the top six after game 46.

---

:shrug: that doesn't mean they didn't outperform their stats

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

that doesn't mean they didn't outperform their stats

---

The phrase 'outperform their stats' is idiotic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

great habit to have but not a repeatable one in the long run

---

They apparently managed to repeat it from game 1 until the play-off final.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

The phrase 'outperform their stats' is idiotic.

---

weren't you just saying that Norwich were average despite getting 97 points? as they picked up a lot of single goal wins?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

weren't you just saying that Norwich were average despite getting 97 points? as they picked up a lot of single goal wins?

---

No, I didn't say they were average. They were clearly well above average in what was a desperately poor division. I said they were functional. They got the job done regularly, but narrowly more often than not. They rarely blew teams away because they were functional rather than spectacular.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

No, I didn't say they were average. They were clearly well above average in what was a desperately poor division. I said they were functional. They got the job done regularly, but narrowly more often than not. They rarely blew teams away because they were functional rather than spectacular.

---

We won more games by a 3 goal margin than Norwich did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

We won more games by a 3 goal margin than Norwich did.

---

Norwich were very consistent for much of the season. For instance, in December and January their results were as follows (Norwich score first):

2-1, 2-1, 2-1, 2-1, 2-0, 0-1, 1-1, 1-0, 2-0, 2-1, 2-0, 0-0.

Best game of the day was at Forest Green the rest of the days games were in its shadow. Bless the super 6 and its greed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

The phrase 'outperform their stats' is idiotic.

---

Why is it idiotic?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

Why is it idiotic?

---

Because your stats are your stats.
You can’t “out perform” them 😂

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

I'm not surprised. It would be a quite a job.

:hehe:

---

On reflection, I think I was suggesting the bottom 3 of the PL this season we’re worse than usual, would our points totals in our two campaigns have kept us up this season, ie more than 28 points? I haven’t a clue if this is relevant to what’s being talked about but I’m sure the thread was about the last day of the PL season.....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

Why is it idiotic?

---

He was in a funny mood yesterday, probably drunk watching PL matches in his kitchen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croesy Blue

Why is it idiotic?

---

It makes no sense. Gobbledygook. Means nothing.

Swansea didn't outperform their stats. They outperformed the 20 clubs below them over the course of the season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by goats

On reflection, I think I was suggesting the bottom 3 of the PL this season we’re worse than usual, would our points totals in our two campaigns have kept us up this season, ie more than 28 points? I haven’t a clue if this is relevant to what’s being talked about but I’m sure the thread was about the last day of the PL season.....

---

"The sides coming down performed badly too, 29 points keeps you up...."

I'm pretty sure you meant two of the three sides going up performed badly (the other performed very well).

As for 29 points keeping you up, I can understand what you were driving at - 29 points might have kept Burnley up. But they got 39 points anyway. The points tallies City achieved in their two seasons in the Premier League would have been enough to finish above the three bottom sides this season, but the flaw is that City would have replaced one of Fulham or West Brom and still wouldn't have reached Burnley's points total.

As for the three bottom clubs being worse than usual, it might have felt that way but Sheffield United actually gained more points than the bottom side in 2015/16 (Villa), 2018/19 (Huddersfield) and 2019/20 (Norwich).

Fecking hell what the feck is going on in this thread

Its funtime at the zoo