Alarming second half of the season stats for Leeds

[weasel]

I decided that if the league couldn't be restarted then the fairest way of working out the table would not be based on current points but worked out in a fair way. This way was to basically take results of teams that have played each other twice and half the outcome and have those results go hand in hand with the results from matches where the teams played each other only once. For example Leeds played WBA twice and Leeds won one and drew one. As such for the Leeds v WBA result Leeds would get 2 points (the 4 points for the win and draw but halved as if it was just 1 match) and WBA would get 1/2 point (a draw and loss totalling 1 point but halved).

This would for me seem the fairest way so teams couldn't moan about 1 team playing more of the easy games and 1 team playing harder game. If a team had played 'easier games' then they would expect to have won both of them but would now only get 3 points instead of the 6 if they had won them both. If a team had lo

This enables a table to be produced from the results of 23 matches with the results as fair as possible. Half the points from the matches where teams played each other twice and full points when teams had only played once - okay it can be argued that a team might have ended the season with a great run or a team might have gone into freefall but that would just be guessing at results not using actual results as fairly as possible.

Alarmingly out of the 14 matches where Leeds had played a team twice our results were the same 7 times (such as beating Huddersfield twice, drawing twice with Preston etc) but worse 6 times (drawing then losing to Forest, beating then drawing with WBA etc) and only better on 1 occasion when we beat Millwall after losing to them first time around.

I then doubled the outcome from the 23 matches and the end table saw WBA win the league with 91 points, Leeds were in 2nd with 85. Interestingly the 4 teams currently in the play-off positions all stayed in exactly the same position (Fulham on 79 points, Brentford and Forest on 77 and Preston on 74). 7th place was a significant 6 points behind which would for me make it fair if the play-offs were played based on the current teams. The only change of any real significance (apart from us finishing 2nd instead of top) was that Wigan got relegated in my model whereas Charlton would if the league had finished after 37 matches.

It means little but for me if the EFL was postponed it would seem fair to base promotion on the current table. More worrying though is why we did so poorly second time round against teams. Perhaps it is just a bit of an anomaly as we would have expected to get better results against the likes of Charlton, Swansea and Fulham as we lost to all 3 of them. We also had draws with Cardiff and Derby where we should have won both games so may have fared better in those reverse fixtures too and would be hopeful of replicating our wins over Barnsley, Blackburn, Luton and Stoke so it may well have been that we'd have suffered no more worse results from our remaining fixtures.

[1964white]

Important point to remember is we were on a roll & would have slammed the majority of those we were due to play. Had lockdown been implemented a week later I reckon we'd have more or less achieved promotion after we conquered Cardiff & sent the Cottagers back home with their tails between their legs.

[YorkshireSquare]

If we take the half way table West Brom were ahead of us by 3 points, we had just had that draw with Cardiff and defeat against Fulham. It was the start of our poor run. If we consider the fact that in your system West Brom would be 6 points ahead surely that means the first half and second half of the season have actually been comparable?

But as Leon says, when the season stopped we were on a roll of good results...

[WhiteRose]

Still far from certain deciding the positions will make any difference. Prem clubs now suggesting they will only play at neutral venues if relegation is taken off the table - selfish tw@s. And the prem dont want more teams in the league. If it ends up there is no way leeds get promoted I'd rather they just scrap the whole thing, no European qualification and no league winners - not fair if some are rewarded and others not.

[1964white]

Still far from certain deciding the positions will make any difference. Prem clubs now suggesting they will only play at neutral venues if relegation is taken off the table - selfish tw@s. And the prem dont want more teams in the league. If it ends up there is no way leeds get promoted I'd rather they just scrap the whole thing, no European qualification and no league winners - not fair if some are rewarded and others not.

Not much fairness in football especially amongst the elite WR

Anyway it's our centenary year so it's almost certain to go tits up

[YorkshireSquare]

Did a few calcs based on likely outcomes, this is essentially the same as using mirrored results for the remaining fixtures...

https://motforum.com/article.php?page=39395

[WhiteRose]

Not much fairness in football especially amongst the elite WR

Anyway it's our centenary year so it's almost certain to go tits up

Tis true and was ever thus. I'll stick to my usual mantra of expecting nothing then I can only be pleasantly surprised when the unexpected occurs.

[weasel]

Did a few calcs based on likely outcomes, this is essentially the same as using mirrored results for the remaining fixtures...

It is yes. It is staggering though how the table near enough keeps all the teams in the most important positions in the same positions as they are now.

Equally it is impossible to say a team on a good run, such as us, would carry on that good run. Just look at how poorly we did for a few matches after our winning run came to an abrupt end against Cardiff. Equally teams saying stuff like easier run in or harder run in don't really have a leg to stand on given how the combination of mirrored results and actual results when home and away matches were played basically leaves the table as it was.