This isn't about what was won and what wasn't. It's about the advantage of playing teams at certain times of the season over others. Last year we had all the top 6 sides at home in the second half of the season. It was a huge advantage, and we won every game bar one. The impact of the earlier results at City and Arsenal were recovered at home. Ditto Hull. The neighbours were dismantled by half time. That wouldn't be the case if they were all away.
My point regarding Suarez was that playing United, traditionally one of the hardest and biggest games of any season, without him was a "disadvantage" because of when that fixture was placed. Yet we still came away victorious. But even if we had six of the "easiest" games to start the season with, it would of been a disadvantage not having Suarez there because despite how well we did without him, it was plain to see we were better with him. So who we had didn't matter.
As for having the rest of the top six at home in second half as an advantage, I still don't see it. It could be seen as a disadvantage because we would of been expected to be playing catch up by this point. After all, we lost to the rest of the top four away from home last year. We have to play them.
Toure's error cost us 2 points. The next night, City lost at home to Chelsea. We beat Sunderland at home, City and Chelsea couldn't. Errors and dropped points can be recovered if time allows.
City meanwhile had their own advantage last season, knowing what results they needed from games in hand for several months. After our late season mistakes, we were relying on favours from their opponents. They won at Palace, we didn't. They beat Villa at home, we didn't. So they finished first, and we finished best of the rest.
But we didn't make up those two points we dropped to the Baggies, it's just City didn't take advantage of our slip. That's my point here, once the game has gone you can't make up for it. If you fail to get three points in any said game, the points have gone. The error weren't reversed, it just wasn't captialised on by our rivals.
And City, knowing their results can be seen as a disadvantage. We knew that one draw and two wins from our final three games would be enough once City had fu**ed up one too many times. We didn't take advantage of that.
You are right. As am I. I was hoping all season long, that we wouldn't have to go to a ground we hadn't won in 14 years on the last day to get a result. But it turned out that we had to go there and get it, and we didn't. I also hope that going to Chelsea this year when we do doesn't decide our fate.
I also hope we don't have to go to Chelsea this year to get a result, I hope we've got the League tied up well before then.
If you want to win the cup, you have to face the top sides. That doesn't mean you want to play them in Round 3, when there are other possibilities available.
Not necessarily. Take the League Cup for example in 2001, our run was a Chelsea side who finished below us the season before at Anfield, a second division Stoke side away, a first division Fulham side at home, a first division Crystal Palace in the semi finals and a first division Birmingham side in the final.
The way the Cups are, mean if you get lucky with the draw you can have it relatively easy and don't have to face the "top" sides.
Logged