We’ve all done it. When our team has had games in-hand,
we’ve all banked the theoretical points available and adjusted the table accordingly.
But just how valuable are they?
In theory, knowing what you have to do could be an advantage.
But psychologically, being far behind everyone else might be counterproductive. “
It’s never great to play catch-up,” a former Premier League manager told The Athletic,
“particularly if you’re playing under pressure, anyway.”
It also turns out that those at the top of the game can subconsciously delude themselves
in much the same way as the rest of us.
“It’s a difficult one,” says a manager and former Premier League assistant,
“because games in hand can sometimes give players and management a false
sense of security. But then when the actual games come, there is that added pressure,
the feeling that we must get something out of this game and quickly, that can transfer to the crowd.”
The Athletic canvassed opinion from Premier League managers,
coaches and players, and while there were acknowledgements that having games in hand
could play psychological tricks on your near rivals, the general opinion was universal:
it’s always better to have the games in the books and the points in the bag.
So, what of Burnley, who had played just 18 Premier League games by the beginning of February?
Sean Dyche has played down the possible impact both physically and psychologically when asked
about it, but there’s no hiding that he and his players would rather have points already on the
board but the belief within the group remains, and having games in hand is viewed as an opportunity,
rather than something to cause panic about being bottom of the table.
Burnley’s six games in hand is the most a top-flight team has had
since Luton Town in 1987-88. That season, Luton reached the League Cup final, the Simod Cup final
and the FA Cup semi-final plus, for some reason, accepted an invitation to play in the Mercantile
Credit Trophy, an April tournament at Wembley celebrating the centenary of the Football League.
In total, Luton played 58 first-team games that season,
so at various points in the latter weeks, they had six and seven in hand,
which all culminated in a frantic last fortnight in which they had to play seven times:
Saturday-Monday-Wednesday-Saturday-Monday-Friday-Sunday. They won one, lost one and drew the rest,
and the last two symbolised the fixture chaos: they were both against Nottingham Forest.
Despite all of that, an ageing Luton side finished ninth, their third-highest placing ever,
got to two Wembley finals, and won one of their only two major trophies. They were running on
empty by the end but having all those games in hand didn’t impact them in a hugely adverse way.
In the Premier League era, a team has never had more than Burnley’s six games in hand
but both QPR and Liverpool had five in the 1994-95 season. The Liverpool example was
really a quirk of the calendar: they were only five behind the rest for one day,
on a weekend when they played on a Sunday and the others played on the Saturday. Nevertheless, when
they had those five games in hand, they were fifth in the Premier League, and they finished fourth.
QPR, though, had five in hand on a few occasions throughout February and March of that season,
and their fortunes improved dramatically after that point. The last day they were
five behind was March 6, at which point they were 16th with 35 points from 28 games.
They ended up eighth, winning eight of their last 14 games despite not having a midweek off from the
middle of March, picking up points at 1.78 per game, as opposed to 1.25 per game before that.
“It was my first season in the first team,” says Kevin Gallen,
who was a key part of that QPR side. “In the latter few weeks, I was a bit burnt out.
It all got on top of me a bit but we had a really experienced bunch of players.”
Gallen echoes what others have said, that having games in hand can either be a blessing or a curse.
“We had a really good end to the season. When your confidence is high,
those games — Saturday-Tuesday-Saturday-Tuesday — can’t come quick enough.
But when you’re losing, it’s the opposite.”
There’s more. According to Opta, there have been 12 teams who have,
at some point in their respective Premier League seasons, had four games. Eight of
those finished the season in a higher league position than they were when they were behind,
and the remaining four all only dropped a single place.
Manchester United were one of those teams in the 1999-2000 season,
when their jaunt to the Club World Cup in Brazil caused a series of games to
be rearranged, but having been second when they started to play catch-up,
they lost just one of their remaining 19 fixtures and won the title by 18 points.
More pertinent to the current situation is Southampton in 1994-95. In mid-March,
after 30 of the 42-game season, they were 18th, only out of the relegation
zone on goal difference and having won just twice since the start of October.
“Everyone thought we were relegated,” remembered Jason Dodd.
They were not only playing catch-up, having to play every midweek bar one, but they also
had to face seven of the eventual top nine. “We went to Forest and got turned over 3-0.
It was after that game where we said, ‘Boys, come on, we’ve got to get our arses in gear’.
“Then we had Newcastle and Spurs — we beat them and scored seven goals in the two games.
We went to Stamford Bridge and turned them over. Wimbledon, we won 2-0. We were on a roll then.”
Southampton won six of their last 11 games and ended the
season in 10th place, collecting an average 1.7 points per game.
“People thought we were down, so that took the pressure off us. We could go
out and enjoy our football. We scored goals and picked up some great results.
None of this is to necessarily argue that having games in hand is an inherent
advantage — just to say that, in the Premier League era, despite the anecdotal concerns,
it hasn’t had a negative impact on a team’s form.
How useful are games in hand? Well, it depends who has them.