715
Scout Notes

West Ham assets disappoint ahead of Blank Gameweek 31

West Ham United warmed up for Blank Gameweek 31 in underwhelming fashion on Saturday.

The Hammers fell to a 2-0 defeat at relegation-threatened Cardiff City, a side that had lost all three of their previous Premier League fixtures and who had conceded ten goals in the process of doing so.

This was West Ham’s sixth away match without a victory.

There was more concern for Felipe Anderson‘s owners after the Brazilian winger was hooked at half-time but the positive news for those Fantasy managers with West Ham assets in their squads is that Manuel Pellegrini’s side are at home in Blank Gameweek 31 and are unbeaten in five at the London Stadium.

The Hammers’ latest defeat on the road is the primary focus of this Scout Notes article, while we will also run the rule over the Crystal Palace v Brighton and Hove Albion below.

Cardiff City 2-0 West Ham United

  • Goals: Junior Hoilett (£5.0m), Victor Camarasa (£4.6m)
  • Assists: Josh Murphy (£4.8m)

Manuel Pellegrini said Felipe Anderson‘s (£7.2m) half-time substitution on Saturday was tactical in nature, allaying any fears of an injury for the Brazil international ahead of Blank Gameweek 31.

While concerns over fitness will have been assuaged, there will still be unease among the 15.8% of Fantasy Premier League managers who own the attacking midfielder ahead of the hugely appealing home fixture against Huddersfield Town next Saturday.

Anderson has been an ever-present in the league this season and is clearly a favourite of Pellegrini’s but the fact that he was withdrawn at the interval after yet another sub-par display must be a worry.

As is the fact that the Hammers are now blessed with attack-minded options ready and waiting for a start: Michail Antonio (£6.8m), Samir Nasri (£5.2m) and Marko Arnautovic (£6.8m) all began Saturday’s game on the bench and came on as substitutes in the second half.

Pellegrini said of Anderson’s withdrawal:

Just a tactical change because we didn’t create chances in the first half and, at least in the second half, Marko had a shot which was blocked by the goalkeeper and we had another shot from Declan Rice off the post.

Cardiff didn’t create too many chances also, but they scored their two goals.

We didn’t have many chances in the first half and that’s why we tried to make tactical changes, first with Marko Arnautovic and after that with Nasri and Antonio.

We improved a little bit but we didn’t create the amount of chances you need if you want to win away.

Anderson has registered just two shots in the last six Gameweeks, neither of which was on target.

The Brazilian midfielder has only created three chances in the last four Gameweeks, meanwhile.

On Saturday, Anderson didn’t register a single shot, key pass or penalty box touch.

He wasn’t alone in turning in a poor performance, however.

Javier Hernandez (£6.1m) also failed to register a goal attempt or create a chance in his awful 90-minute showing up front, while Manuel Lanzini (£6.4m) – who only sporadically flickered into life – did likewise before being substituted just before the hour mark. Robert Snodgrass (£5.0m) was similarly ineffective on the right flank.

West Ham had only two attempts on goal in the first hour and it wasn’t until Arnautovic stung Neil Etheridge‘s (£4.7m) palms after 74 minutes that the visitors registered a shot on target.

The Austrian striker was perhaps one of the few winners out of this defeat, as it would surely only serve to further his chances of a start in Gameweek 31.

Given that bottom-of-the-table Huddersfield visit the London Stadium next weekend, Pellegrini may even decide to play Arnautovic alongside Hernandez in a 4-4-2 and abandon the 4-1-4-1 system he has used recently.

“Out of position” defender Declan Rice (£4.6m), who was on the scoresheet in Gameweek 29, struck the upright from open play in the second half with West Ham’s only real other serious attempt on goal.

The Irons were repeatedly exposed at the back, too, with Lukasz Fabianski (£4.8m) called on to make five additional stops.

Pellegrini said of West Ham’s ongoing struggles away from home:

More than a disappointing result, it was a disappointing performance. We must review what we are doing when we are playing away because in four [of the last five] away games we didn’t score one goal and we conceded too many.

We knew that today we would find a team that was in a difficult moment with three defeats in a row that are fighting against relegation, but they didn’t have to do much to score two goals.

We were not concentrating for both goals. You can play badly but you can at least draw nil-nil. I think that was a very bad performance.

Maybe we improved a little bit in the last 15 minutes of the first half, but we didn’t create chances. We had two in the second half with Marko and one shot hitting the post but this was not enough to win a game away against a team fighting against relegation.

The good news for owners of West Ham assets is that the Hammers face Huddersfield at home in Gameweek 31 – and Pellegrini’s troops are a different prospect at the London Stadium than they are on the road.

The Irons are unbeaten in five matches on home soil and the below comparison of their goal threat in their last six home fixtures (left) versus last half-dozen away games (right) emphasises their more potent attacking menace in east London:

Andy Carroll (£5.4m) missed out on Saturday, meanwhile, with Pellegrini explaining his absence thus:

Andy was not considered for this game. He has some problem in his ankle, so he was not in the [squad] list.

Cardiff assets now take back seat in Blank Gameweek 31 and with both Chelsea and Manchester City to come thereafter (potentially in a Double Gameweek 32), there will be few Fantasy managers interested in their assets despite this much-needed win.

As bad as West Ham were, the Bluebirds were much improved on their recent dismal showings.

Neil Warnock’s side got about their visitors with real venom in the first half, bullying their opponents from the off and showing plenty of attacking intent.

Josh Murphy (£4.8m) and Junior Hoilett (£5.0m) were recalled on the flanks as Warnock reverted to a 4-4-1-1 and it was those two wingers who combined for Cardiff’s opener after just three minutes.

The excellent Victor Camarasa (£4.6m), back in the “number ten” role, bundled in his side’s second goal after the restart and could have had another strike of his own when Fabianski made a terrific double-stop from both the Spaniard and Oumar Niasse (£5.0m).

Niasse also scuffed an excellent one-on-one opportunity wide as Cardiff were well worthy of their first win since Gameweek 26.

Camarasa and Joe Bennett (£4.4m) both limped off in the second half and Warnock provided updates on the pair after full-time:

Victor has got cramp. It’s quite physical to play for us. He apologised when he went off but I said: ‘Don’t worry, you did enough in an hour!’

Joe has just snicked a hamstring, nothing serious. But it’s three weeks until the next game, so he should have an opportunity there.

Warnock praised his side’s performance, meanwhile:

There are a lot of positives today, a lot of answers for the critics. That’s our eighth clean sheet, I would like to see how many other teams in the bottom half have eight clean sheets this year.

The centre-backs and full-backs were fabulous then you go into midfield with Gunnarsson running the show.

Arter got the crowd involved with his energy, Camarasa oozed class and Oumar played a part, the centre-halves knew they were in for a tough game today.

I asked the wide players to contribute to goals and you couldn’t have asked for much more. Wingers always get criticised but today I thought they were fantastic.

Cardiff City XI (4-2-3-1): Etheridge; Peltier, Morrison, Manga, Bennett (Bacuna 62′); Murphy, Gunnarsson, Arter (Paterson 84′), Hoilett; Camarasa (Ralls 68′); Niasse.

West Ham United XI (4-1-4-1): Fabianski; Fredericks, Diop, Ogbonna, Cresswell; Rice; Snodgrass, Noble (Nasri 58′), Lanzini (Antonio 58′), Anderson (Arnautovic 45′); Hernandez.

Crystal Palace 1-2 Brighton and Hove Albion

  • Goals: Luka Milivojevic (£6.3m) | Glenn Murray (£6.3m), Anthony Knockaert (£5.2m)
  • Assists: Andros Townsend (£5.9m)| Lewis Dunk (£4.4m), Dale Stephens (£4.3m)

Crystal Palace and Brighton are without a league fixture in Blank Gameweek 31, as both teams are in FA Cup action this coming weekend.

Saturday’s “M23 derby” was the two clubs’ final league fixture before the international break and there is the very real prospect of both sides having a Double Gameweek 32 when the domestic action resumes at the end of March.

Brighton’s victory over their rivals was much-needed from their point of view but it meant a frustrating afternoon for owners of Crystal Palace assets, with the Eagles yet again demonstrating familiar failings on home soil.

Roy Hodgson’s side have the second-worst home record in the Premier League this season, with only Huddersfield having lost more games on their own patch.

Defensively, they are fairly solid: only six teams have conceded fewer goals on home soil and the Eagles were only beaten on Saturday by two superb strikes from Glenn Murray (£6.3m) and Anthony Knockaert (£5.2m).

Brighton, indeed, only had four shots on goal all game.

Palace’s goal threat is letting them down at Selhurst Park, though: again, only Huddersfield have scored fewer home league goals this season.

The hope for owners of Wilfried Zaha (£6.9m), Michy Batshuayi (£6.5m) et al ahead of this match was that the visit of Brighton would be the perfect opportunity to remedy that problem, as the Seagulls had conceded two or more goals in each of their last five away league matches.

Palace had also scored more goals in the preceding eight Gameweeks than all teams bar Manchester City and had been on the scoresheet in every one of their Premier League fixtures in 2019.

However, Palace again found it difficult to overcome a side that set out to defend.

As blistering as they are on the counter-attack away from home, Palace lack inspiration when their opposition are camped inside their own box.

Their only goal on Saturday came from the penalty spot, with Luka Milivojevic (£6.3m) dispatching his eighth spot-kick of the season after Andros Townsend (£5.9m) had been felled.

Clear-cut opportunities for Palace were few and far between, with Jeffrey Schlupp (£4.5m) – again playing “out of position” in central midfield – blazing the best of their chances over in stoppage time.

A long-distance attempt from Batshuayi and a looping James Tomkins (£4.3m) header were the only efforts that Mathew Ryan (£4.4m) had to deal with, as Brighton’s solid backline blocked seven of the hosts’ 15 shots.

Hodgson reflected on Saturday’s performance compared to their more impressive recent displays:

It’s a poor performance in the sense that we weren’t able to do enough with the amount of possession that we’d got. But they are such different games so I don’t know quite how you compare them. The last two games, we were playing against teams where we’d had 40% of possession against a team that’s had 60% of possession.

We’d had great opportunities to use our counter-attacking threats and to use those opportunities whereas today of course we were up against a packed defence who had the benefit from 15 minutes into the game to be sitting on a 1-0 lead. I don’t quite know how the performances can be compared particularly. Can we play better? I suppose we can.

Chris Hughton meanwhile paid tribute to his centre-back pairing of Lewis Dunk (£4.4m) and Shane Duffy (£4.7m), who played a large part in keeping Palace at bay:

I thought Lewis was very good. Both him and Shane needed to be. Anything less from our two centre-halves and I don’t know if we end up winning the game.

They were put under a lot of pressure, a lot of balls into the box, and they had to stay on their feet. I thought Lewis defended particularly well.

Murray wasn’t even meant to be starting on Saturday but his replacement in the Brighton XI, Florin Andone (£5.0m), suffered a thigh injury in the warm-up.

The veteran striker lashed in a brilliant half-volley from a difficult angle to give Brighton the lead, after Tomkins had misjudged an up-and-under from Dunk in the swirling wing.

Hughton said of his strike options:

Glenn had been playing recently and we have good competition up there. We had Andone on the bench in our last game and he changed the game with the winning goal. He deserved the start.

Sometimes if it’s early in the warm-up, you know you’re making a change, but this was very late, almost as the players were coming off.

If Andone starts, he might have done well and got the winner. But equally if you have to make that change late before the game, Glenn’s not a bad option to bring in.

Away from home you need to try and stretch the team, more so. Andone probably would be stronger at that because he’s got more pace than Glenn so he’d give us more dynamic stretching of the team but Glenn’s clever. He’s very clever in the way that he does it and he works [hard].

Knockaert’s winner was a brilliant curling strike from distance but the winger was perhaps fortunate to still be on the pitch after a first-minute tackle on Milivojevic.

Hodgson said, magnanimously:

He committed a bad foul early on but I don’t think it was a malicious foul. It was a winger’s tackle, wasn’t it? Trying in a derby game to show his commitment. It was over the ball of course and it was a bad foul of course but I presume the referee gave him the benefit of the doubt on that one.

You’d have to ask the referee. We were incensed by the challenge of course, I thought it looked like a very dangerous one. I was very pleased to see Luka Milivojevic get to his feet again. My first thought was to turn to Cheikhou Kouyate and to tell him to get warmed up. I had visions of him not being able to carry on.

Crystal Palace XI (4-3-3): Guaita; Wan Bissaka, Tomkins, Dann, Van Aanholt; McArthur (Benteke 77′), Milivojevic, Schlupp; Townsend (Meyer 77′), Batshuayi, Zaha.

Brighton and Hove Albion XI (4-5-1): Ryan; Montoya, Duffy, Dunk, Bernardo; Knockaert (March 75′), Bissouma, Stephens, Propper, Jahanbakhsh (Locadia 90′); Murray.



715 Comments Post a Comment
  1. Saint & Reevesy
    • Fantasy Football Scout Member
    • 7 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    what’s the thinking on when GW32,33 and 35 will be updated?

    1. TONY123
      • 4 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      After next weekend

    2. potatoace
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 8 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Between gw31 and gw32

    3. KingOllie
      • 4 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      FA cup games to go, then they will start getting confirmed

  2. tsintisin
    • 2 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Aguero+Pogba to Hazard+Higuain for -4?

  3. KingOllie
    • 4 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    the Fraser/Wilson double up is essential . no 2 players have had better synergy this year (assisting each other)

    1. Holmes (specialist in failu…
      • 6 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      essential for blanks only

    2. Pras Scott Talent
      • 7 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Would you say even more than Haz/Higuain - only considering 31/33?

      1. Would Ed Woodward
        8 months, 13 days ago

        I would, I think you only need 1 of Haz/Hig.

    3. Would Ed Woodward
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Their link up is ridiculous, to the point where Fraser didn't get a return while Wilson was injured I think?! Then instantly hauls when he's back.

      1. avfc82
        • Fantasy Football Scout Member
        • Has Moderation Rights
        • 9 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        That stat is true, but if King converts his 2nd penalty against Wolves Fraser would have had an assist, and he came close to scoring against Arsenal. Way too many on here last week saying Brooks was the best option.

    4. donlobatto
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 2 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Yeh tbh I'm frustrated can only sensibly get both for 31/33 if I ignore Vardy which doesn't feel wise ahead of these fixtures, as I already have Higuain and Barnes

    5. The Wizard of Ozil
      • 9 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      do we think Jimenez -> Wilson is worth it? FH next week but no wc left

      1. Debauchy
        • Fantasy Football Scout Member
        • 6 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        Tough choice with no WC, I would try and hold then

  4. altan8797
    • 2 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    bottomed. for GW31

    a) arnie or vardy
    b) fraser, fandy or maddy

    Im on FH and the rest of my attackers are hazard, mane, mo, higuain and king atm.

  5. RAFA THE GAFFA
    • 3 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Got Sergio @ 11.2 (now 11.9), would you keep and bench or switch out to get Hazard in for the blank?

    Will FH32 and WC33/34

    1. RAFA THE GAFFA
      • 3 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      S.p 11.5

    2. Pras Scott Talent
      • 7 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Switch out mate. No prizes for TV at the end.

      1. #FPLBhuna
        • Fantasy Football Scout Member
        • 2 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        this x100

      2. RAFA THE GAFFA
        • 3 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        True. Just means if I want Kun on FH or WC I’ll have to pay premium

    3. No Salah
      • 2 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      A lot of forward options available for BGW 31/33 where as quality mid is not so many, I believe you need to take Aguero out

    4. FAITHNOMORENO
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 7 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      if city lose to swans,you'd need him in gw33

  6. #FPLBhuna
    • Fantasy Football Scout Member
    • 2 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    interesting statistics

    currently only 1847 of the top 10k (18.47%) have both salah and mane

    I expect that'll go up slightly, but some nice potential for a green arrow there

    1. Holmes (specialist in failu…
      • 6 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      have been nice differential since few weeks, hoping for some more hauls and price rises before I get rid of both on WC

      1. #FPLBhuna
        • Fantasy Football Scout Member
        • 2 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        snap!

  7. Totally Hammered
    • Fantasy Football Scout Member
    • 6 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    So at the moment I have 10 playing in 31/33 (inc. Billing and Anderson) Would you
    A) take a -4 to upgrade Billing to Fraser which would still give me 10 players
    B) upgrade a defender for -4 to get 11 out (have 3 pool and Luiz) so possibly Azpi or Ake but could be anyone..
    C) Do nothing....

    Cheers All....

    1. #FPLBhuna
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 2 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      think I like B, azpi looks a good bet

      1. Totally Hammered
        • Fantasy Football Scout Member
        • 6 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        Cheers Bhuna....am swaying that way I think although double Chelsea defence might bite back...

        1. #FPLBhuna
          • Fantasy Football Scout Member
          • 2 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          there is that, but on the other hand if it pays off, you are winning at life haha

          good luck mate

          1. Totally Hammered
            • Fantasy Football Scout Member
            • 6 Years
            8 months, 13 days ago

            Too true.... be nice to win at FPL every now and again let alone life..

            Good luck to you too!!

  8. MGD
    • Fantasy Football Scout Member
    • 3 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Fab
    TAA - Yedlin - AWB* - Shaw*
    Salah - Mane - Hazard - F Anderson - Masuaku*
    King

    Hamer - Jimenez* - Doherty* - Aguero*

    0,7IRB 1 FT.

    9 starters (not counting Masuaku) without a hit.

    1 or 2 hits to field 11?

    Aguero -> Vardy probably one..

  9. OneDennisBergkamp
    • Fantasy Football Scout Member
    • 4 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Have 6 players for GW31, was always planning on FH this week, but do I need to? Is it enough?

    My team for GW32 will potential have 11 DGWs if Ben Crellins spreadsheet is near enough accurate...

    1. Holmes (specialist in failu…
      • 6 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      depends who are they

    2. 1966
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 2 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      I’m in the same predicament with only 6 players for next game week. Have you got a link please for Ben’s gw 32 spreadsheet?

  10. The Train Driver
    • Fantasy Football Scout Member
    • 4 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Rice or Cook for the 2 bgws?

    1. Iceball
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 4 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Cook Rice kAke sounds excellent 🙂

  11. Pariße
    • 4 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    8 players for GW31, Alonso for a hit as the 9th?

    1. kalmoffit
      • 5 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      No

    2. MTPockets
      • 10 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Check Alonso's minutes

    3. HamezMace
      • 5 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      No way.
      Azplicueta if you must.

    4. Hotdogs for Tea
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 4 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      I am selling Alonso for a hit

    5. Garlana
      • 4 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Counts as more of a -2 perhaps...I don't see the problem with it

      1. Garlana
        • 4 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        Probably better to get azpi tho as not nailed

    6. potatoace
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 8 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Not Alonso

    7. DMil
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 5 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Don’t think it’ll be worth it. Can’t see any defenders worth taking a hit on other than maybe Liverpool.

      1. pingissimus
        • Fantasy Football Scout Member
        8 months, 13 days ago

        This

        Last week should be the warning sign - vvd and Robbo scored 2 between them and that was at home to Burnley. Pereira magically got 2 also - like many I’m still well down on bringing him in.

  12. Garlana
    • 4 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Anyone taking a -12 and above?

    1. kalmoffit
      • 5 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      In 33

    2. Murder On Zidanesfloor
      • 1 Year
      8 months, 13 days ago

      I have. For players playing both 31 and 33

    3. Garlana
      • 4 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Good to hear, as I'm close to doing the same

    4. spyda12001
      • 2 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      -8 for me a

  13. Shields and swords
    RedLightning
    • Fantasy Football Scout Member
    • Has Moderation Rights
    • 9 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Last week's Scoutcast discussed the idea of swords and shields, but this is not an entirely new idea and there seems to be some confusion about exactly how it works. This is how I understand it:

    Squads should ideally contain four main categories of players.
    1. Players with high effective ownership amongst experienced players or in the top 10k or amongst your mini-league rivals - these can be regarded as shields, since owning them helps to protect your overall ranking or your mini-league position. You probably won't be able to afford all of these, so choosing a better selection of these than others do should improve your ranking.
    2. Shield alternative differentials, who are less popular than the shields they are replacing but whom you expect or hope to outperform them - these can be regarded as swords, and can result in bigger rises or falls in your ranking or mini-league position.
    3. Enablers, cheaper players who may spend a lot of time on your bench.
    4. The rest. If well chosen they can also improve your ranking, and with less risk than for the shield alternative differentials.

    But I have seen the terms shield and sword used more frequently when applied to captains.
    Captaining a shield player does not necessarily turn them into a sword - if they are top of the captain poll and have a high effective ownership then captaining them merely makes them a stronger shield.
    However, If you owned say Salah, Sterling and Vardy in GW30, then you would have had a choice between Salah as a shield captain (because he had a high effective ownership and was a close second to Aguero in the captain poll) and Sterling or Vardy as a sword captain. In this case, sword captain Sterling outscored the other two and those who captained him shot up the rankings, but it doesn't always turn out that way!

    1. MGD
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 3 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Great post.

      But i think captaining i.e. Robertson turns him from a Shield to a Sword.

      1. jia you jia you
        • Fantasy Football Scout Member
        • 3 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        ...that's exactly what I'm hoping for GW31 as he will likely be my 16th captain of the season 🙂

      2. RedLightning
        • Fantasy Football Scout Member
        • Has Moderation Rights
        • 9 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        Yes, Robertson would have been a sword captain, whereas Salah was a strong shield captain.

        1. WesMantooth
          • Fantasy Football Scout Member
          • 8 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          Captain almost Always turns in to a sword. Salah was a sword if you captained him last gw. Owned by 85% but captaincy made his EO almost 130% meaning every point he scored would give those who captained 0.7pts more than those that simply owned him.

          Only in the small number of times where some players reach 150-180% eo, can captained players be regarded as shields in a gwk.

          1. RedLightning
            • Fantasy Football Scout Member
            • Has Moderation Rights
            • 9 Years
            8 months, 13 days ago

            Salah was a shield captain last week, because you risked a big rankings drop if he scored well and you failed to captain him, but merely protected your ranking if you did captain him.

            A sword captain would be someone who would not protect your ranking if they failed but could improve it significantly if they outscored the more popular choices.

            1. tisza
              • Fantasy Football Scout Member
              • 4 Years
              8 months, 13 days ago

              even more so on this short GW. Salah against the like of Mane, Wilson to name a few. Particularly with what happened in last season's short gameweek,

            2. WesMantooth
              • Fantasy Football Scout Member
              • 8 Years
              8 months, 13 days ago

              He wouldnt hurt you anymore than a regular sword does. If you simply owned him, you would loose just shy of 0.3pr point he scored, which is similar to what mane did against those who didnt own him this week.

              1. WesMantooth
                • Fantasy Football Scout Member
                • 8 Years
                8 months, 13 days ago

                Im ofcourse talking about rank, not ML's

              2. RedLightning
                • Fantasy Football Scout Member
                • Has Moderation Rights
                • 9 Years
                8 months, 13 days ago

                It's all relative really.
                If you captain the player with a high effective ownership (EO) then you get a smaller rise or fall in the rankings than if you captain a player with a lower EO.
                So in that case, Salah (who had the higher EO) would be your Shield Captain option, and Mane a Sword Captain option.

                Similarly, other things being equal (which they usually aren't), if you own a player with high EO then you get a smaller rise or fall in the rankings than if you own a player with a lower EO instead.
                And since players having high EOs for a reason, the player with the higher EO should outscore players with lower EO in most (but not all) cases.
                This doesn't tell you which are the better choices though. You can play safe or take a risk - it's up to you.

      3. TONY123
        • 4 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        Captaining Robertson mostly turns him into a blunt kitchen knife though.

        1. G-Whizz
          • Fantasy Football Scout Member
          • Has Moderation Rights
          • 2 Years
          8 months, 12 days ago

          😆

    2. #FPLBhuna
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 2 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      does triple captaining my shield, make him a sword? 🙂

      1. WesMantooth
        • Fantasy Football Scout Member
        • 8 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        Very much so.

    3. pingissimus
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Point to add here is that shields accumulate value almost per se as more and more transfer them in. Loads of people then hold on too long as they don’t want to lose value - especially I suspect conservative managers who dislike hits and always gave another more pressing transfer. Shields are psychologically hard to transfer out.

      Shields can also become chinks in the armour if they are retained solely defensively or to retain value. This season FA, Rich, Alonso and arguably Doherty are classic cases of this and Rashford could be the next.

    4. Deulofail
      • 3 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      I really find this analogy to be detrimental to decision-making, though of course useful for romanticising the game and bantering with friends.

      The reason is that these categories are not "natural classes", which means that the data do not show a distinction between categories. The differences are continuous, not categorical. And so the categories are an attempt by the human to make sense of the data.

      However, if you following any guidelines which shoehorn a specific number of players from each category into your team, or which influence your decision on the basis of these categories, I believe your team and your decision is less likely to be the best you could possibly make.

      1. RedLightning
        • Fantasy Football Scout Member
        • Has Moderation Rights
        • 9 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        I wouldn't recommending trying to shoehorn a specific number of players into these categories or expect them to be permanent, and most categorisation involves grey areas rather than being entirely back or white.
        I'm just saying that most of your players will belong in one or another of these categories.
        Are there some of your players who don't fit into any of them?
        And if you find it difficult to decide which category some of your players currently fit into then it doesn't really matter anyway.

        As far as the Sword Captains and Shield Captains go though, I think it is useful to realise that a Shield Captain is a safe choice that will protect your rank but won't shoot you up the rankings, whereas a Sword Captain is a more risky choice which might have the opposite effect.

        Like your suggestion of playing your Free Hit in GW38. It's a risky Sword-type suggestion that could go disastrously wrong or turn out to be brilliant, whereas following the herd and playing your Free Hit in GW32 (providing that you can follow it up with a Wildcard in GW34) is a much safer Shield-type option.

        1. Deulofail
          • 3 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          "And if you find it difficult to decide which category some of your players currently fit into then it doesn't really matter anyway."

          This is my point really. It doesn't matter.

          I have to agree with the usage of thwe words "safe" and "risky" on here. For me, the risky plays are simply going against the moves that you expect the most points from. Likewise, the safe decisions are the obvious choices (obvious to yourself after consideration of FPL points potential). But of course I recognise that many use it in reference to ownership. In my mind though, following the crowd when you don't think it's the safest route to points is the risky move not the safe move.

          1. Deulofail
            • 3 Years
            8 months, 13 days ago

            I have to disagree*

            Surprise surprise haha

    5. pingissimus
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Add in another term - bulwark. These are players you keep season long cone what may despite fluctuations in form as you’re sure they’ll produce in the long run. Two easy examples are Hazard and Sterling. Past form suggests they’ll be excellent buts over the season and are probably underpriced.

    6. Hotdogs for Tea
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 4 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      What about Dragons and Dungeons ? 😉

      Raz can be a Dragon, Fanderson can be a Dungeon ? 🙂

      I find these geeky terms a bit cringeworthy though (in a MBA gobbledygook sense) - eye test, differential, nostalgia pick, any abbreviation of a player’s name 😉 ...

      1. Deulofail
        • 3 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        Agree except for the abbr.

        1. Hotdogs for Tea
          • Fantasy Football Scout Member
          • 4 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          😉

      2. RedLightning
        • Fantasy Football Scout Member
        • Has Moderation Rights
        • 9 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        I find Sword Captain and Shield Captain to be useful terms.

        Applying the Sword and Shield terms to merely owning the players is less useful though, since we already have other terms such as Templates and Differentials (and not all the non-template players are swords).

        1. Hotdogs for Tea
          • Fantasy Football Scout Member
          • 4 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          Isn’t it simply an attacking Captain selection or defensive Captain selection ?

          And a highly owned players etc ?

          Made up terms for player types that can be adequately described with plain language ?

          1. RedLightning
            • Fantasy Football Scout Member
            • Has Moderation Rights
            • 9 Years
            8 months, 13 days ago

            That's true, but they are terms that are quite widely used and understood elsewhere.

    7. Hotdogs for Tea
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 4 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Do we still use Magic Bean ? Asking for a friend 🙂

      1. RedLightning
        • Fantasy Football Scout Member
        • Has Moderation Rights
        • 9 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        Wan-Bissaka is this season's super-Magic Bean, but Joe no longer uses the term.
        It was so last season!

        1. Deulofail
          • 3 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          I like magic bean! It is what it is. It works and it's fun.

        2. Hotdogs for Tea
          • Fantasy Football Scout Member
          • 4 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          It’s such a nostalgia term 🙂

        3. WesMantooth
          • Fantasy Football Scout Member
          • 8 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          I'm actually of the weird impression that Wan might have hinderet people more than he has helped. Call me crazy, but i actually think hes been a far to comfortable cushion to sleep on.

          1. Deulofail
            • 3 Years
            8 months, 13 days ago

            Saved people transfers though, along with Doherty. I remember spendinf FTs on defenders almost every other week last season, doing my nut in, and not getting much in the way of a return from it.

            This season, I think I've only spent 8 FTs on defenders so far, and 3 of those were simply down to injuries rather than trying to gain a fixture/form advantage.

            Actually AWB one of the players I despite no injury, but I've happily trusted him when the fixtures have been good.

            1. Deulofail
              • 3 Years
              8 months, 13 days ago

              Argh.
              AWB one of the players I sold*

            2. WesMantooth
              • Fantasy Football Scout Member
              • 8 Years
              8 months, 13 days ago

              True! Which makes my thoughts really hard to fathom. After all he's/was very cheap, and have probably given his owners a fair amount of points the times he's been used.

              But as you've mentioned, there's Doherty as well. He's probably had the same "status" as Wan. Cheap, and great points for his price.

              But then there's the lfc-defence, that have been staples in most teams since the start of the season.

              There's also the case of Marcos Alonso, that many viewed as a staple until his falling out of the XI.

              Many defences went stale. People stopped looking at that part of the squad, stopped making transfers to maximize the output of their defence as a unit. Alonso stayed for far too long. Wan was benched in the wrong games, Dock's usage became that of a premium defender.

              Ultimately people lost out on points.

              My point is that with non-premium defenders, rotation is key. If Wan and Dock are both gonna stay in your team indefinately, then rotation becomes hard. If you use them to much, their value goes down. If you never use them, theyre taking up valuable slots in your team. Slots that could be used to Get players that you'd think could do bits. My guess is that some people might have gotten 4.5-5.5ppg from 10-12 performances from awb. But what interests me is what they've gotten from the player in "Wan's slot" the weeks they have'nt played him. This is a thing that gets largely overlooked imo.

              Wan and Dock are taking up slots in your team. How your team copes the weeks with them, as well as the weeks without them matters.

              1. RedLightning
                • Fantasy Football Scout Member
                • Has Moderation Rights
                • 9 Years
                8 months, 13 days ago

                Wan was initially an enabler, not a cheap rotator, so his points were a bonus - but he turned out to be far better than that - the perfect magic bean.
                I sold him in GW8 in order to play five at the back but the lack of a really cheap enabler in defence made it more difficult to upgrade my forwards and midfield as much as I would have liked. He was 0.4m more expensive by the time I eventually brought him back in with my Second Wildcard.

                1. WesMantooth
                  • Fantasy Football Scout Member
                  • 8 Years
                  8 months, 13 days ago

                  Firstly, I dont believe in the idea of enablers as good for FPL. With 15 slots in your XI, I think all players should be doing bits. Having a player only cuz hes cheap is not a good enough reason alone for me.

                  But yeah, his price certainly enabled a lot of people to Get better players in other positions, but perhaps they would be better off with lesser players and a player with higher usagerate in Wan's position?

                  Perhaps Wan should have been part of peoples squads in the periods where the fancied playing him a lot, and not in the parts they didnt?

                  1. RedLightning
                    • Fantasy Football Scout Member
                    • Has Moderation Rights
                    • 9 Years
                    8 months, 13 days ago

                    There's a difference though between a non-playing enabler who merely increases the budget available for other players in the squad, and a playing enabler such as Wan-Bissaka who, though purchased at minimum cost, is a regular starter who has a good chance of getting a couple of points whenever he needs to come off your bench.
                    And as it turned out, he is actually good enough to be used in defensive rotations - but that's an unexpected bonus.

                    1. WesMantooth
                      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
                      • 8 Years
                      8 months, 13 days ago

                      I Get hat your saying. My point was they need to offer more than two points off the bench. A player deemed worthy of aplace in your 15, should also do bits in your 11 from time to time. Not debating Wan on this one. Just my approach to squadusage.

    8. Hotdogs for Tea
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 4 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      What about the Cash Cow .... so many have them but so few even want to sell them ... ‘cos I ‘ave too much profit tied up in ‘im ... 😉

      1. RedLightning
        • Fantasy Football Scout Member
        • Has Moderation Rights
        • 9 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        Isn't a cash cow something that continues to make a steady profit without the need for further investment, rather than an investment that you can't afford to sell because then you might not be able to afford to buy it back later at a higher price?

        1. Hotdogs for Tea
          • Fantasy Football Scout Member
          • 4 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          Maybe it’s a piggy bank then and Joe got it wrong ?

        2. J0E
          • Fantasy Football Scout Member
          • Has Moderation Rights
          • 10 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          My take on cash cow is an expensive player that you are happy to sell. He’s a good player to invest in but when the time is right - cash him in.

          Good egs this week are sterling and Aguero.

          Cash cows help with flexibility - with a hit or two frees you can use them to pump funds into a different position .

          1. J0E
            • Fantasy Football Scout Member
            • Has Moderation Rights
            • 10 Years
            8 months, 13 days ago

            The ultimate cash cow is Eriksen.

    9. Hotdogs for Tea
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 4 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Shield - a really boring pick that you pick because everyone has that pick and you don’t have the nerve to pick who you actually want

      Sword - a player everyone knows they really should get with the fixtures turning but can’t afford because they have all those stupid Shields that are trolling them

      Cash Cow - a player bought early that has piled up the profit that you always intend to kill off with a Sword, but you love the poor lamb so much that you keep it and never taste the benefit

      Magic Bean - typically you go through 5 of them every year and end up with one that sprouts, about every 3 years

      Passed the Eye Test - played well ... why use 2 words when you can use 4 ?

      FAnderson .... no, just don’t

      Nostagia Pick .... a term for the Scouts to use before they get a recommendation so so wrong 🙂

      1. Mysterion
        • 1 Year
        8 months, 13 days ago

        Based on that definition, Shield may as well be Sheep 😉

      2. Mysterion
        • 1 Year
        8 months, 13 days ago

        And how has your cow morphed into a lamb?

        1. Hotdogs for Tea
          • Fantasy Football Scout Member
          • 4 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          Poetic license 🙂

        2. Hotdogs for Tea
          • Fantasy Football Scout Member
          • 4 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          But I think it’s a pig now anyway 🙂

          1. Deulofail
            • 3 Years
            8 months, 13 days ago

            This thread has made me feel simultaneously hungry and guilty for wanting so many animals dead at the same time

      3. Christina.
        • Fantasy Football Scout Member
        • 9 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        milf?

      4. The Rumour Mill
        • 2 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        Spot on, the FAnderson one really gets me too. Just say the guys name for goodness sake. There isn't even another Anderson in the league!!

        And then when there are 2 Barnes' and 2 Mendy's, we don't get Harnes and Aarnes or Bendy and Nendy. Absolute bollocks, the lot of it!

        1. Deulofail
          • 3 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          We dont get Harnes and Aarnes because they aren't as satisfying as Fanderson 😉

          1. The Rumour Mill
            • 2 Years
            8 months, 13 days ago

            I suppose if you want Harnes and Aarnes somewhere like Fantasy Eliteseiren is probably the place to look!

          2. Hotdogs for Tea
            • Fantasy Football Scout Member
            • 4 Years
            8 months, 13 days ago

            Why do we get Bavies and no other X‘avies’

            1. Deulofail
              • 3 Years
              8 months, 13 days ago

              Bavies is more satisfying. Consonant-vowel syllables are the most basic and universal building block for words across languages. Babies have a preference for them. Babies prefer Bavies. 😉

              H is a consonant, but it's not a good one. Regardless, it's unnecessary when not paired with Aarnes.

              I much prefer Burnes/Barnesly and Barnster/Barncester.

              What other [X] avies would you (not) like to see?

              1. Hotdogs for Tea
                • Fantasy Football Scout Member
                • 4 Years
                8 months, 13 days ago

                Tavies

        2. Hotdogs for Tea
          • Fantasy Football Scout Member
          • 4 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          Why use 8 letters when you can use 9 😉

        3. Hotdogs for Tea
          • Fantasy Football Scout Member
          • 4 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          Bilva 🙁

          1. The Rumour Mill
            • 2 Years
            8 months, 13 days ago

            Bilva and Dilva are amongst the worst disgraces ever commited to text. Same goes for Bavies.

            1. Mysterion
              • 1 Year
              8 months, 13 days ago

              David is Merlin
              Bernardo can be Berlin

        4. GARY AND JAMIE
          • 6 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          its cos people cant be bothered or are scared to spell Felipe wrong.

          1. Mysterion
            • 1 Year
            8 months, 13 days ago

            Hard to get Anderson wrong though 😉 I reckon it started because FPL use Felipe Anderson instead of just Anderson for some reason and it snowballed from there

            1. Deulofail
              • 3 Years
              8 months, 13 days ago

              He has the "F." on his shirt, too. I reckon that's the driving force. Some ironic use to pander to the player, resulting from others copying and suddenly we've reached the TIPIING POINT. And it's permanent

              1. Deulofail
                • 3 Years
                8 months, 13 days ago

                TYPING POINT*? 😀

              2. Mysterion
                • 1 Year
                8 months, 13 days ago

                M. Salah could've turned into something ugly... disaster averted

        5. RedLightning
          • Fantasy Football Scout Member
          • Has Moderation Rights
          • 9 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          Back in 2011/12 there were three defenders named R Taylor, S Taylor and N Taylor, so we called them Raylor, Saylor and Naylor. No-one objected to this at the time.

          1. Hotdogs for Tea
            • Fantasy Football Scout Member
            • 4 Years
            8 months, 13 days ago

            What was wrong with R Taylor, S Taylor and N Taylor ? Newbies joining the site looking for some differential magic bean cash cow (actually should be a piggy bank) that past the eye test called Raylor ? Give the kid a fighting chance lol 😉

          2. Mysterion
            • 1 Year
            8 months, 13 days ago

            Wish there was a T Taylor, now that would've changed the game...

            1. Hotdogs for Tea
              • Fantasy Football Scout Member
              • 4 Years
              8 months, 13 days ago

              Imagine if there was a Fred and Simon Tucker, or Chris & Shellie Hunt 🙁

    10. fedolefan
      • 5 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Lol, what nonsense are people getting caught up with.

      1. TopMarx - H2H L4 D5
        • Fantasy Football Scout Member
        • 6 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        Oh come on it's fun!

    11. TopMarx - H2H L4 D5
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 6 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Hi RL,

      Good points. In my Gameweek article when I asked the question would making a shield player your captain turn him into a sword, I wasn't trying to be definitive with the answer. It depends on the situation, as you point out.

      For instance last weekend Salah was a shield but for those who captained him he became a sword. But perhaps only a little sword - a dagger captain perhaps? 🙂

      It's not always the case obviously; if everybody captained the same shield, the player is still a shield. However in the context of a split captaincy vote, such as last gw, I thought this was a question worth asking.

      Last gw if you owned Salah and didn't captain him it would harm your rank if he scored (admittedly not as much as if you didn't own him at all), but if you captained him you wanted him to score as that would mean a rank increase.

      Yes completely agree that captaining Sterling was bigger sword captain choice. In terms of risk/reward it was a bolder choice.

      I get your point that compared to captaining Sterling, Salah was a shield option. So was Aguero. I still think, however, that when a captaincy vote is fairly evenly split between two shields, the player captained becomes a sword. Or a dagger if you prefer.

      1. RedLightning
        • Fantasy Football Scout Member
        • Has Moderation Rights
        • 9 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        According to your theory, every captain is a sword.
        The difference between a shield captain and a sword captain is that the shield captain is a more defensive move, and the sword captain a more aggressive one.
        We're comparing two captain choices, not the difference between captaining or not captaining the same player.

        1. RedLightning
          • Fantasy Football Scout Member
          • Has Moderation Rights
          • 9 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          Apologies to Top Marx - I accidently deleted his comment, so here it is again:

          "According to your theory, every captain is a sword."
          Well I asked a question, I didn't make a statement of fact.
          It depends on the context, last week whichever of Salah or Aguero you captained became a sword. Sterling was already a sword (certainly in comparison to Salah or Aguero), and he simply became an even bigger sword if captained.

          "The difference between a shield captain and a sword captain is that the shield captain is a more defensive move, and the sword captain a more aggressive one."
          I agree.

          "We're comparing two captain choices, not the difference between captaining or not captaining the same player."
          Ok, but why can't I also compare the difference between captaining and not captaining the same player?
          The different terms or concepts for discussing FPL help to give us different perspectives, it's not that there's a definitive right way to think. I think it is helpful to frame ideas in different ways.

          1. RedLightning
            • Fantasy Football Scout Member
            • Has Moderation Rights
            • 9 Years
            8 months, 13 days ago

            When talking about Shield Captains and Sword Captains, we're comparing captains with other captains.
            For example, an FPL Manager might have said "My captain for GW30 will be either Salah (Shield) or Jimenez (Sword)". That is the context in which the terms are most commonly used, and it would not be helpful to call all captains Sword Captains.

            You asked whether captaining the most popular choice would make him a Sword Captain, and my answer is no.
            The most popular choice would only become a Sword Captain if you triple captained him. Captaining the most popular choice without triple captaining him is the least aggressive captain choice you can make, so it would never make him a Sword Captain. Last week, Aguero and Salah were almost level at the top of our Captain Poll, so neither of them would have been a Sword Captain.

            Comparing captains to non-captains merely confuses the issue. You have to captain someone, so the choice is between the various captain options. Any of them would expect to score more as captain than as a non-captain, but some would be popular safe defensive choices that would not affect your ranking compared to other managers who made the same decision (the Shield options), and others would be less popular but more aggressive choices that might result in a bigger ranking change, for better or worse (the Swords).
            When talking about Swords and Shields in a captaincy context, we are simply comparing players as captaincy options and then saying whether our choices are safer and more defensive options such as Salah or Aguero or the most popular captain option in your squad in GW30 (Shields), or riskier and more aggressive ones (Swords).

            1. TopMarx - H2H L4 D5
              • Fantasy Football Scout Member
              • 6 Years
              8 months, 13 days ago

              This is obviously getting into semantics but: "you asked whether captaining the most popular choice would make him a Sword Captain" - I didn't, I asked if it would make him a sword.

              I get that the terms "Sword Captain" and "Shield Captain" have their own meanings. However I still maintain that there is nothing wrong with what I asked - If a shield is captained does he get turned into a sword?

              Yes he can - not always - but last week Aguero and Salah became swords by being captained. Their ownership last weekend was 40.3% and 45.1% respectively, in the top 10,000 that goes up to 61.7% and 84.6%. If you don't own those players and they do well, your rank will suffer. Factor in captaincy, which in the top 10,000 took their EO to 99.7% and 129%, and it makes not owning them even worse - in the case of Salah if you own him but haven't captained him, then you want him not to score because you will get a red arrow.

              However, if you've captained him then he is a sword because you own 200% of him and you would get a green arrow if he does well.

              I feel like we are repeating ourselves and telling each other things we already know. What I fail to understand is why it's a problem to say captaincy could turn a player from a shield into a sword? or to simply ask the question!

              Surely these ideas are different ways of framing our thoughts about how FPL works, and how to think about playing the game.

              1. Deulofail
                • 3 Years
                8 months, 13 days ago

                I thought this was meant to be fun!? 😛

                1. TopMarx - H2H L4 D5
                  • Fantasy Football Scout Member
                  • 6 Years
                  8 months, 13 days ago

                  Oi! leave it out! WE ARE FUN, ALRIGHT?? xD

              2. RedLightning
                • Fantasy Football Scout Member
                • Has Moderation Rights
                • 9 Years
                8 months, 12 days ago

                Aguero and Salah were both Shield Captains last week.
                It is the fact that they were so highly owned and captained and that you would have got a big red arrow if you didn't captain them that made them defensive (Shield) Captain choices.
                It is more risky to captain someone with lower ownership - it can bring big rewards if it comes off, but a big red arrow if it doesn't. Aggressive risk-taking for a possible reward, that's a Sword Captain.

                But does a player that is in your squad because of his high ownership (a Shield player) become a Sword if you captain him? He might become a temporary Sword Captain when captained if he is not the Shield player with the highest effective ownership (EO), but he is still a Shield player in my opinion. And the player with the highest EO will always be a Shield Captain when captained, never a Sword Captain.

                1. RedLightning
                  • Fantasy Football Scout Member
                  • Has Moderation Rights
                  • 9 Years
                  8 months, 12 days ago

                  * if they scored well and you didn't captain them.

                  1. TopMarx - H2H L4 D5
                    • Fantasy Football Scout Member
                    • 6 Years
                    8 months, 12 days ago

                    I get that Salah and Aguero were the Shield Captain choices last GW.

                    But look at Aguero, he had near 100% EO in the top 10,000 after captaincy. If you owned him and didn't captain
                    him, he was a perfect shield, whatever he did, your rank doesn't move.

                    If you captain him you've now got him at 200% and you've turned him into a sword: he does well, you get green arrows.

                    Perhaps Salah at 129% ownership is more of a small sword if captained, Sterling a Claymore.

                    Obviously if Sterling doesn't do anything, perhaps the Claymore is too big and he accidentally chops off a limb, it only truly hurts if a shield option you don't own, with an EO great than 100%, delivers. If you owned Sterling and Aguero, making Sterling captain was pretty risk free because whatever Aguero did it wouldn't hurt you. Salah at 129% would hurt a bit if you owned him too.

                    Anyway, with apologies to Monty Python, can we call this a draw?

                    1. TopMarx - H2H L4 D5
                      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
                      • 6 Years
                      8 months, 12 days ago

                      I was just thinking that in week where Salah is the overwhelming captain pick, with an EO over 170% perhaps, he then becomes not much more than a penknife if captained.

                    2. RedLightning
                      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
                      • Has Moderation Rights
                      • 9 Years
                      8 months, 12 days ago

                      I think we have a fundamental disagreement over our usage of the Sword and Shield terms.
                      You may be correct according to your usage, but not according to mine.

                      So OK, let's call it a draw.

                      Perhaps it might be better to avoid medieval warfare analogies altogether and use other terms instead, such as rank-protecting and rank-changing.

                      1. TopMarx - H2H L4 D5
                        • Fantasy Football Scout Member
                        • 6 Years
                        8 months, 12 days ago

                        I agree!

    12. mrtapio
      • 4 Years
      8 months, 12 days ago

      Never heard of this. But it makes sense. After GW24 my OR was outside 1mill. From there I just threw away my shield and startet waiving my sword around like crazy.

      Now my OR is 222K with 6 straight green arrows - and somewhere around 75pts closer to the top 10K.

  14. Simmoo
    • 4 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Which 3rd Bournemouth player would you have in a free hit team besides Fraser and Wilson?

    Looking at Ake, Brooks or King.

    1. Pukki Party
      • 2 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      King

  15. Legomané
    • Fantasy Football Scout Member
    • Has Moderation Rights
    • 2 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Fabianski
    TAA Pereira Chambers (Doherty AWB)
    Salah Mane Hazard Fraser (Camarasa)
    Vardy (Rashford Jimenez)

    0FT 3.2 ITB
    A. Rashford Jimenez > Higuain Wilson (-8)
    B. Rashford Doherty > Higuain/Wilson and Azpi/Luiz (-8)

    Lots of funds tied up in Jimmy 5.6 > 6.8 fwiw - reckon A might have the highest upside?

  16. Would Ed Woodward
    8 months, 13 days ago

    I'm considering Ake instead of Azpi/Luiz, is that crazy or a reasonable move?

    1. #FPLBhuna
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 2 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      crazy cause my rondon isn't blanking 😉

      1. Would Ed Woodward
        8 months, 13 days ago

        I have this feeling that a complete meltdown is always only just around the corner for this Chelsea side though.

    2. Roll The Dyche
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 7 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Reasonable considering how much Bournemouth's defence has improved...

      1. Would Ed Woodward
        8 months, 13 days ago

        Especially with two home fixtures, right?

        1. Roll The Dyche
          • Fantasy Football Scout Member
          • 7 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          Exactly

    3. Debauchy
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 6 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Like, I have brought him in. Especially so as 2 good homes 31 and 33. Has some goal threat , get on

  17. Wakanda 4ever
    • 2 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    You heard it here: Zidane back to Madrid.

    1. MeatPieSausageRoll
      8 months, 13 days ago

      I heard it from Sun journalists two weeks ago didn’t I?

    2. Old Man
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 8 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Juve are calling

    3. avfc82
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • Has Moderation Rights
      • 9 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Sounds like its a done deal.

  18. MeatPieSausageRoll
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Quite tempted to win the whole thing this year

  19. Jacky boy
    • 3 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Who do you think will finish better?
    Arsenal or Spurs?

    1. TONY123
      • 4 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Form and fixtures suggest Arsenal

      1. Jacky boy
        • 3 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        Spurs fixtures are great apart from city and liverpool.

        1. TONY123
          • 4 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          Thats 1/4 of their remaining games though.

          1. Debauchy
            • Fantasy Football Scout Member
            • 6 Years
            8 months, 13 days ago

            🙂

        2. Debauchy
          • Fantasy Football Scout Member
          • 6 Years
          8 months, 13 days ago

          Yeah but priority now will be CL. Arsenal will focus more on top 4 after yesterday's result, more doable

    2. Debauchy
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 6 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Arsenal , no doubt

    3. Fasya
      • 2 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      you already knew my answer

    4. avfc82
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • Has Moderation Rights
      • 9 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Tottenham IMO.

    5. #FPLBhuna
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 2 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      spurs - no bias.

  20. altan8797
    • 2 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    my last question regarding FH GW31. Would you rather have robbo or firmino as the 3rd Pool asset (alongside salah and mane obviously)

    1. TONY123
      • 4 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Robbo imo

    2. Debauchy
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 6 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Robbo

    3. The 5% Team
      • 1 Year
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Robbo

    4. altan8797
      • 2 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      robbo it is 😀 thx

  21. Would Ed Woodward
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Nuno linked with Chelsea today, imagine the possibilities, back to 5 in defence, new signing Doherty on the right, Alonso on the left.

    1. The Yorkshire Pirlo
      • 3 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      That would be a dream. Doherty straight into my team once again.

    2. jia you jia you
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 3 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      His style would certainly suit Chelsea better!

  22. The Yorkshire Pirlo
    • 3 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Two transfers.

    Option A/B gives me 11 playing. Option C gives me 10 playing but that extra Liverpool attacker. Already own Salah and Robbo.

    A) Kun, Bednarek > Vardy, any non-L’pool def
    B) Kun, Bednarek > Higuain, any non-L’pool def
    C) Kun, Alisson > Firmino, Fabianski

  23. Ole Trafford
    • 6 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Thoughts on this gw31 XI:

    Fabianski
    Robertson, Azpi, Rice
    Salah, Hazard, Manè, Fraser
    Vardy, Wilson, Arnie

    That’s the correct 3 Liverpool players imo? Although a case for VVD/TAA could be made.

    1. fenixri
      • 3 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      I dont like Arnie, everythin else top notch

      1. Ole Trafford
        • 6 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        Thanks. You don’t think after the Cardiff game he starts?

    2. Pep Pig
      • Fantasy Football Scout Member
      • 3 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      The Arnie pick is good. His lack of minutes in the last 2 games has put many off bringing him in. Although West Ham were poor on Saturday, Pellegrini did say West Ham improved 2nd half. I think he has to start Arnie against Huddersfield and he could turn out to be an excellent differential.
      Like me, if you own him, it will feel great. Though if you don't, then other options will feel better

      1. Hakim Ziyech
        8 months, 13 days ago

        I think so too. I also have him and I will keep

  24. McSlu
    • 3 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    On a FH.
    What do you guys think?

    Schmeichel
    pereyra, luiz, chillwell
    salah, mane, fraser, haz
    firm, higuain, wilson

    1. BigBillyBass
      • 1 Year
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Treble Leicester defence is dangerous

      1. Ole Trafford
        • 6 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        Very

    2. Would Ed Woodward
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Wow, that defence is either brave or crazy, Leicester haven't kept a CS since GW21.

  25. Thunder Warrior
    • 5 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Arnie or Wilson?

    1. BigBillyBass
      • 1 Year
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Wilson by a country mile

    2. fenixri
      • 3 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Wilson for me.

  26. melvinmbabazi
    • Fantasy Football Scout Member
    • 5 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    I've got double Liverpool defence + Salah , is it worth switching to Salah and Mane plus one defender or Stick?

    1. Ole Trafford
      • 6 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      See you team above. I’m unstre myself but I think it’s orobsbly wiser with Salah and Mane

    2. HamezMace
      • 5 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Stick.
      Must be a better use of your FT this week

  27. boogle
    • 6 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Play Digne (CHE) or do Hojbjerg > Barnes/Brooks for a hit?

    Team after Sterling > Haz is as follows:

    Schmeichel
    Robbo TAA Pereira Digne
    Salah Haz Anderson Fraser
    Higuain Arnie

    No bench

    Thanks!

  28. in sane in de bruyne
    • Fantasy Football Scout Member
    • 3 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Barnes -> Wilson/Vardy worth a hit for 31+33?

    1. Ole Trafford
      • 6 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      I’d say so

      1. in sane in de bruyne
        • Fantasy Football Scout Member
        • 3 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        I think it might

  29. Hiphopopotamus
    • 9 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Afternoon lads. Are there still some rearranged fixtures to be announced? In my head I thought there was going to be a huge DGW, but I can't see it on the ticker...

    1. Ole Trafford
      • 6 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Yeah after gw31 between31-32 there will be more added.

      1. Hiphopopotamus
        • 9 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        Cheers Ole

    2. HamezMace
      • 5 Years
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Yes.
      More GW32 fixtures to be confirmed after GW31/FA cup results.

      1. Hiphopopotamus
        • 9 Years
        8 months, 13 days ago

        Wow.. So does that mean they'll put the games in wk32..?

  30. fenixri
    • 3 Years
    8 months, 13 days ago

    Sterling, Jimenez -> Hazard, Wilson (-4)?

    GW31 team would be

    Fab/Boruc
    Robbo Taa Pereira
    Salah(C) Hazard Fraser
    Wilson Higuain

    1. Hakim Ziyech
      8 months, 13 days ago

      Yes, you do not have enough players for the gw So yes