Showing posts with label liverpool. Show all posts
Showing posts with label liverpool. Show all posts

Thursday, 8 May 2014

In Man City's hands?

Hi,
just so no-one gets misled by all the journalism suggesting the title was in Man City's hands now that they've beaten Aston Villa, putting them two points up with a much better goal difference, meaning that they only need a draw to win the title.
Here's the actual breakdown.
2 games that are interesting: Man City-West Ham and Liverpool-Newcastle.
That makes 3*3=9 possible result combinations:
1) City win, Liverpool win > City champions
2) City draw, Liverpool win > City champions
3) City lose, Liverpool win > Liverpool champions
4) City win, Liverpool draw > City champions
5) City draw, Liverpool draw > City champions
6) City lose, Liverpool draw > City champions
7) City win, Liverpool lose > City champions
8) City draw, Liverpool lose > City champions
9) City lose, Liverpool lose > City champions

1) is all down to City winning - a ninth of hands to City
2) is all down to City drawing - another ninth to City
3) is down to Liverpool winning and West Ham winning - so an eighteenth to each of them
4) you can either say well done City or well done Newcastle - so an eighteenth to each of them
5) ditto
6) well done Newcastle - a whole ninth to them
7) you can either say well done City or well done Newcastle - so an eighteenth to each of them
8) ditto
9) well done Newcastle - a whole ninth to them

Adding all that up, we get:

City: 1/9 + 1/9 + 1/18 + 1/18 + 1/18 + 1/18 = 4/9
Liverpool: 1/18
West Ham: 1/18
Newcastle: 1/18 + 1/18 + 1/9 + 1/18 + 1/18 + 1/9 = 4/9.

So as we see, West Ham and Liverpool have quite little bearing on the title, but it's quite extensively in Newcastle and City's hands!

Let's see what happens on Sunday!

Monday, 21 April 2014

Not as easy as it looks this hands business

Hello,
in the last post, I had a look at a hypothetical situation with the Premier League looking like this before the last day of the season.

Liverpool, played 37,  86 points, vastly superior goal difference.
Chelsea, played 37, 84 points, vastly inferior goal difference.
Man City, played 37, 82 points.

Liverpool play Stoke.
Chelsea play Hull.

This gave me nine possible result combinations:

1. Liverpool win, Chelsea win
2. Liverpool win, Chelsea draw
3. Liverpool win, Chelsea lose
4. Liverpool draw, Chelsea win
5. Liverpool draw Chelsea draw
6. Liverpool draw, Chelsea lose
7. Liverpool lose, Chelsea win
8. Liverpool lose, Chelsea draw
9. Liverpool lose, Chelsea lose

and I ended up saying the title was in:

Liverpool's hands: 12/18
Hull's hands: 4/18
Stoke's hands: 1/18
Chelsea's hands: 1/18

Possible error
I think I may have made an error here, because I put the first six possibilities in Liverpool's hands. However,  possibilities 2, 3, 5 and 6 are just as much under the influence of Hull's hands as they are under Liverpool's.

Revision
Adjusting the results for this error, we have to say that 2, 3 5 and 6 give an eighteenth to both Liverpool and Hull, making a net change of -4/18 for Liverpool and +4/18 for Hull. This gives us a final result of the title being in:

Liverpool's hands: 8/18
Hull's hands: 8/18
Stoke's hands: 1/18
Chelsea's hands: 1/18

What do you think about that?





They've got the whole title in their hands. Or have they?

Hello,
it's a common football punditry cliche to say that a team has got their fate in their hands if all they have to do to e.g. win the league is to win all their games. One recent example of this is Robbie Savage's piece from 13th April, written after Liverpool beat Man City.

"we saw why the title is now solely in their hands" he said.

Some critics, such as @MikeBenchcapon, dispute this approach as it ignores:
a) the fact that sometimes more than one team can win the league by winning all their games. Think about a cup final – there the above logic would suggest that the destination of the cup was solely in both teams' hands.
b) the teams playing the team in whose hands it supposedly is obviously also have some say in the result.

Useful, but inaccurate
Whilst I do recognise the usefulness of an expression that means "they win the league/stay up/etc. if they win all their games", the critique is valid that "in their hands" is somewhat inaccurate. To demonstrate in whose hands the title really is, I was going to do an analysis of all the teams still involved in potentially title-deciding matches to be played after Savage's article.

Noble, but unfortunate
Unfortunately, at the time of Savage writing, even Arsenal and Everton could still have won the league and only four teams, Spurs, Fulham, Stoke and Swansea, weren't involved in any matches which could possibly have had any bearing on the title. This large number of games remaining and indeed teams involved makes the calculations horrifically complicated – not difficult really but just very very many, which would make just setting up the spreadsheet take more time than I have.

So what I've done is I've worked out a couple of hypothetical but not unrealistic examples using a proposed model, just for interest really and I suppose to demonstrate just how spread the fate of a title can be across multiple hands.

Example №1: Two-horse race on final day of season
The first example situation sees the league table as follows:
Liverpool, played 37,  86 points, vastly superior goal difference.
Chelsea, played 37, 84 points, vastly inferior goal difference.
Man City, played 37, 82 points.

Liverpool play Stoke.
Chelsea play Hull.

It doesn't take long to work out that any draw will do for Liverpool whereas Chelsea need to win and hope Liverpool lose. Man City are out of it. Some would say the title is in Liverpool's hands, but to what extent is that true?

Breaking it down
Now, we have two games, each of which has three possible outcomes, a home win for the title-chaser, a draw and a defeat. This gives us a total of nine possibilities.

1. Liverpool win, Chelsea win
2. Liverpool win, Chelsea draw
3. Liverpool win, Chelsea lose
4. Liverpool draw, Chelsea win
5. Liverpool draw Chelsea draw
6. Liverpool draw, Chelsea lose
7. Liverpool lose, Chelsea win
8. Liverpool lose, Chelsea draw
9. Liverpool lose, Chelsea lose

So each of these results has a 1/9 contribution to the overall spread of the title across various hands.

The first six result possibilities (Liverpool win or draw) lead to  Liverpool winning the title and are down to Liverpool having made good use of their hands to such an extent that all other hands (particularly Chelsea's) are rendered irrelevant. So the amount of title in Liverpool's hands is:
6*(1/9)=6/9=2/3

Chelsea get the title in possibility 7, which is done by them winning and by Stoke beating Liverpool. This means that their hands share this 1/9, giving Chelsea's and Stoke's hands an 1/18 from possibility 7.

In possibilities 8 and 9, the Liverpool-Stoke result doesn't matter, and the title has been decided by Hull's salvaging a draw/landing a shock win. So their hands get both of these ninths.

To sum up, and converting to eighteenths to aid comparability, the title is in:

Liverpool's hands: 12/18
Hull's hands: 4/18
Stoke's hands: 1/18
Chelsea's hands: 1/18

Whilst Robbie Savage (I haven't asked him) might think it is a bit silly to say that Hull have more say in the title race than Chelsea, I think it makes complete sense given that they only need a draw or a win, whereas Chelsea need a win. I mean, each football match is contested by two teams with equal numbers of hands and an equal say in the outcome of the match. You could adjust for teams being better by saying that their hands are more secure, if you wanted to, but for now I'm weighting all teams' hands equally. 

The other example is a bit more complicated and I think I've made my main point here so I'll save the other example for a later post. 

Comments welcome as ever. Thanks.



Saturday, 15 January 2011

England

English translation follows the German text.

„Vermisst du England?“ hat man mich neulich gefragt?
Ich kann diese Frage immer noch nicht richtig verstehen, und hier folgt die verkürzte Erklärung, warum.

Für mich ist es unmöglich, bestimmte Aspekte meines Lebens in England mit dem Land oder gar dem Wort „England“ gleichzusetzen. Wenn ich England vermissen würde, sollte ich doch sofort Großbritannien vermissen – oder das gesamte Vereinigte Königreich (Großbritannien und Nordirland) – und dann warum nicht gleich die britischen Inseln (Großbritannien und Irland) oder gar ganz Europa? Natürlich, ganz Europa zu vermissen wäre schwer, denn ich bin noch in Deutschland, was wahrscheinlich noch zu Europa gehört. Bin aber in Ostberlin, also konnte ich das ehemalige Westblock schon vermissen, oder?

Oder ist das absurd? Ich sollte vielleicht doch nur England vermissen. Die Grenze also da ziehen, wo ein Land einen eigenständigen Namen und eine eigene Fußballmannschaft hat. Aber dann warum nicht Liverpool? Liverpool hat auch einen Namen und einen Fußballverein– zwei sogar. Ich wohnte aber gar nicht wirklich in der Stadt Liverpool, auch wenn ich schon im fußballerischen Sinne schon im Einzugsgebiet für Liverpool-Fans war. Also Liverpool könnte ich vermissen – nur: ich bin kein Liverpool-Fan, denn ich bin in Nordlondon geboren und bin entsprechend Spurs-Fan. Nordlondon kann ich aber schwer vermissen, denn ich wohnte nur ein Jahr da, bis ich nach (Großraum-)Liverpool gezogen bin. Schwierig. Vielleicht ist das mit dem Fußballverein doch nicht so wichtig. Dann vermisse ich die Wirral, die Halbinsel neben Liverpool, wo ich aufgewachsen bin – die Wirral hat zwar einen Fußballverein, aber er spielt nicht sehr gut und heißt nicht mal FC Wirral, also zählt er nicht. Das wäre schon möglich.

Nur: Mein Leben auf der Wirral war das Leben eines Schülers. Wenn ich jetzt zur Wirral für einen Urlaub zurückkehre, hat mein Leben viel mehr mit meinem jetztigen Leben in Berlin gemeinsam als mit meinem damaligen Leben auf der Wirral. Ich meine, ich gehe nicht mehr in die Schule, ich kann jetzt in die Kneipe gehen, ich bin da, wie hier, verheiratet. Das sind Dinge, die ich eher mit Deutschland verbinden könnte als mit der Wirral.

Was ist denn noch auf der Wirral, was auch früher da war und was nicht in Berlin ist, was man also vermissen könnte? Meine Familie? Ja, das stimmt. Einigermaßen. Meine Brüder sind nicht mehr da, aber meine Eltern schon. Aber dann sollte ich doch meine Eltern vermissen und nicht gleich eine ganze Halbinsel. Es wäre ziemlich missbilligend den eigenen Eltern gegenüber, sie mit einer Halbinsel gleichzusetzen. Ich will sie auch nicht nur deswegen vermissen, weil sie noch zufällig auf einer bestimmten Halbinsel wohnen, wo ich aufgewachsen bin – würden sie umziehen, wären sie wohl immer noch vermissbar, denke ich, hoffe ich zumindest.

Oder vielleicht ist die Wirral noch zu groß und die Eltern zu klein. Ich vermisse schon den Geruch des Meeres. Das ist eigentlich gelogen, aber ich merke auf jeden Fall, wenn ich wieder an der Küste in West Kirby bin, dass die Luft nach Salz riecht und da kommt schon irgendwie ein Heimatgefühl hoch. Also vermisse ich salzige Luft. Das kann sein. Aber salzige Luft vermissen und England vermissen sind nicht ein und dasselbe. Denn es gibt nicht überall in England salzige Luft. Ich habe auch drei Jahre in Cambridge gewohnt, wo es nur sehr kalte, salzfreie Luft gab. Die Luft in Cambridge vermisse ich überhaupt nicht. Obwohl etwas, was ich in Cambridge doch sehr gemocht habe, war, dass ich für den Einkauf meiner eigenen Lebensmittel allein zuständig war (anders als wenn man in einer Familie wohnt) und entsprechend verhältnismäßig viele Pork Pies und HP-Sauce kaufen konnte. Pork Pies und HP-Sauce vermisse ich schon ein bisschen. Sie sind aber nicht nur mit Cambridge verbunden, sondern auch zum Teil mit der Wirral oder sogar London, denn ich habe sie ja auch auf der Wirral oder in London gegessen.

Aber hier sind wir wieder. Es wäre ziemlich missbiliigend Pork Pies und HP-Sauce gegenüber, sie mit einem ganzen Land gleichzusetzen, das der Welt auch Prince Charles, Camilla Parker Bowles und Konzentrationslager gegeben hat. Also kann ich Pork Pies und HP-Sauce, salzige Luft und meine Eltern vermissen. Aber England? Nicht wirklich. England hat es bei der WM nicht mal ins Viertelfinale geschafft.



„Do you miss England?“ I was recently asked.
I still can’t really understand this question properly and here’s a shortened version of why.

For me it’s not possible to equate particular aspects of my life in England with the country of even the word “England”. If I were to miss England, then I should surely also miss Great Britain – or the entire United Kingdom (Great Britain and Northern Ireland) – and then why not the British Isles (Great Britain and Ireland) too or even all of Europe? Of course, missing all of Europe would be difficult because I am still in Germany, which probably still belongs to Europe. I am however in East Berlin, so I could miss the former western bloc, couldn’t I?

Or is that absurd? Maybe I should just miss England. So draw the line there, where a country has its own name and its own football team. But then why not Liverpool? Liverpool has a name and a football team as well – two in fact. But I didn’t live in the actual city of Liverpool, even if I did in a footballing sense live in the catchment area for Liverpool fans. So I could miss Liverpool – just: I’m not a Liverpool fan, because I was born in North London and am so a Spurs fan. But I can’t very well miss North London, because I only lived there for a year before moving to (the region of) Liverpool. Tricky. Maybe having a football team isn’t so important. So I could miss the Wirral, the peninsula next to Liverpool where I grew up – the Wirral has a football team but it’s not very good and isn’t called Wirral FC so it doesn’t really count. That would be possible.

Only: My life on the Wirral was the life of a schoolboy. When I now return to the Wirral for a holiday, my life there has a lot more in common with my current life in Berlin than with my life of yesteryear on the Wirral. I mean, I don’t go to school anymore, I can go to the pub, I am there, as here, married. Those are things that I would be more likely to connect with Germany than the Wirral.

So what is there still on the Wirral which was there before and which isn’t in Berlin, so something I could miss? My family? Yes, that’s true. To a certain extent. My brothers aren’t there anymore but my parents still are. But then I should surely miss my parents and not an entire peninsula. It would be quite unfair to my parents to equate them with an entire peninsula. And I don’t just want to miss them because they still happen to life on the particular peninsula where I grew up – if they moved, they would surely still be missable, I think, I hope so at least.

Or maybe the Wirral is still too big and the parents are too small. I do miss the smell of the sea. That’s actually a lie, but I certainly notice when I’m back on the coast in West Kirby, that the air smells of salt and then I do get a kind of feeling of being home. So I miss salty air. That’s possible. But missing salty air and missing England are not one and the same thing. Because you don’t have salty air everywhere in England. I also lived for three years in Cambridge, where there was just cold, salt-free air. I don’t miss the air in Cambridge one bit. Although something, which I did very much like in Cambridge, was that I alone was responsible for buying my groceries (as opposed to when you live in a family) and so I was able to buy comparatively many pork pies and lots of HP sauce. I do miss pork pies and HP sauce a bit. But they’re not just connected with Cambridge, but also party with the Wirral, or even London, because I have, of course, also eaten them when I’ve been on the Wirral or in London.

But here we are again. It would be quite unfair to pork pies and HP sauce to equate them with a whole country which also gave the world Prince Charles, Camilla Parker Bowles and concentration camps. So I can miss pork pies and HP sauce, salty air and my parents. But England? Not really. England didn’t even make it to the world cup quarter-finals.