Talk:2021–22 Premier League

Can y'all provide a source? ☎️ Churot ^DancePop 02:08, 8 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Usually, a team's availablity for the next season is dependent on the possible number of maximum points the top team in the relegation zone can get at the end of the season. TB Chigz (talk) 10:26, 11 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TB Chigz: Sure, I know that, but you're not providing any sources. It also seems like you're calculating it yourself and adding the info here. If I'm not mistaken, that counts as original research. Thoughts? ☎️ Churot ^DancePop 15:07, 11 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

As far as Manchester United's location is concerned, both the club's page and the page of their home stadium, it clearly states that they are based in Old Trafford. Why people keep reverting it to Manchester or simply Trafford is my guess. How best can we solve that problem? TB Chigz (talk) 16:51, 29 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Can you also provide a link of "both the club's page and the page of their home stadium" where it "clearly states that they are based in Old Trafford" so that it'll be helpful to others? Thanks, Clog Wolf _Howl 18:46, 29 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

It looks stupid the way it has Old Trafford, followed by Old Trafford, doesn't even say Manchester in the location which I feel is a floor. Govvy (talk) 18:53, 29 May 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TB Chigz:, you still haven't answered to my previous comment. Clog Wolf _Howl 09:12, 1 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

The links are those pages I've mentioned. If people access them, they'll find the information they're looking for. TB Chigz (talk) 09:17, 1 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

@TB Chigz: Pardon me, when you said "the club's page", I thought you meant their official webpage. And yeah, they're definitely based in Old Trafford. Clog Wolf _Howl 10:35, 1 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Seriously, if no one fixes the double Old Trafford soon I will, this is like bad tautology. Govvy (talk) 12:54, 9 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Well, that double Old Trafford cannot be removed because both the stadium and the location have the same name. The solution I see is adding "Old Trafford, Manchester" in the club's location. Clog Wolf _Howl 14:54, 9 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Should be Manchester in normal text and Old Trafford in small then, like the others in the list. Govvy (talk) 15:15, 9 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

  Done Yeah, that seems fine. Clog Wolf _Howl 15:28, 9 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, should be done like that on the other previous seasons also. Cheers. Govvy (talk) 18:13, 9 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

This appears to be a resurfacing issue. I'm sure I've changed the club location to "Old Trafford, Manchester" previously but it still reappears in single-name format again. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 18:54, 9 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

How about we change the club's location to "Trafford, Manchester"? – PeeJay 06:21, 10 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

Since that's the case, shouldn't we add Manchester City's specific location as well if we're going to use that format? TB Chigz (talk) 20:20, 13 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

On the table, the link cite is for last season and needs updating, I can't see the new handbook yet know. Govvy (talk) 09:45, 12 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

I've removed it. When the new handbook is released, we can cite that instead. Clog Wolf _Howl 10:14, 12 June 2021 (UTC)Reply

I've added it now that it's released. Clog Wolf _Howl 10:45, 2 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

On the sentence They replaced Fulham, West Bromwich Albion (both teams relegated after a year back in the top flight) and Sheffield United (relegated after two years back in the top flight). Do you need the word "back" in top flight? Would it be better to say after a year in the top flight? I was pondering what is better... Govvy (talk) 07:49, 2 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

"Back in the top flight" implies they had been in the top flight before the spell that just ended. "In the top flight" on its own contains no extra information. – PeeJay 10:23, 2 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

The departure of interim manager is not listed in the "managerial changes" section, this has been the case in every other season's page. I wonder why people keep adding Ryan Mason. Clog Wolf _Howl 14:47, 7 July 2021 (UTC)Reply

Most caretaker spells don't end in the off-season. How else would you suggest we indicate Nuno's appointment as Spurs manager? It would be weird to leave the outgoing manager section blank, and Mourinho left far too long ago. – PeeJay 09:23, 2 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

@PeeJay: That does make sense though. I, like you, have to change my mind. Clog Wolf _Howl 10:21, 2 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Clog Wolf: It didn't make sense to list Mason at the time as Spurs hadn't appointed a replacement yet. Now that they have, what would you suggest as a solution? We obviously have to list Nuno's appointment, but what would you do about the outgoing manager line? – PeeJay 10:37, 2 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

Exactly what PeeJay said, It seems odds to not note the new incoming Spurs manager. Govvy (talk) 10:30, 2 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

I had the same opinion as well, but removed it after seeing other season's pages. Anyways, nevermind. Clog Wolf _Howl 10:37, 2 August 2021 (UTC)Reply

I've seen this particular section on the pages of other European leagues (i.e. La Liga, Ligue 1; some of these also have a 'results by round' section though that's a different matter) and I'm wondering if I should add one for the PL? Below is what it would look like.
The following table shows the positions of teams after each round of matches.

Wikidroid 2000 (talk) 20:07, 4 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

@Wikidroid 2000: There would need to be a discussion in order for a consensus on weather or not to add it to be found. The last one went on for a while and ended narrowly in favour of not adding these tables to PL articles. You could ask at WT:FOOTY if you want more opinions. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 10:42, 5 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

No thanks, We've been through this enough. Govvy (talk) 22:17, 13 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Agreed. We don't need to keep bringing this up every year, and in fact we should be making moves to remove these tables from other leagues' articles. – PeeJay 11:24, 14 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Tables like these are still in Ligue 1, Primeira Liga and Serie A articles. So, should be removed soon. Clog Wolf _Howl 12:27, 14 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

I have removed such tables in accordance with previous consensuses on the matter in the past, but I'm not gonna remind you how that went... REDMAN 2019 (talk) 14:26, 14 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

I thought I remember removing some of these tables from Netherland articles, but I might be wrong, they appear to be back on there. We really would need a wider RFC. Govvy (talk) 10:43, 15 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

I suggest that we add this list, but not until it's full - After the season. 83.250.73.248 (talk) 02:17, 24 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Adding it after the season is over wouldn't solve any problems. We still have the issue of some "rounds" being played over the course of several months due to postponements, etc. Do we treat Round 4 as complete when all the games that were originally supposed to be played that week have been played, or do we ignore postponed games? It's a minefield. – PeeJay 21:46, 24 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

I was just looking at the table, there is nothing down for Europa Conference League places in the table like we have for last season. Any news on that front? Does it need to be added to the table? Govvy (talk) 15:18, 20 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Not yet, as that place goes to the winner of the EFL Cup. Spike 'em (talk) 15:36, 20 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Though I guess we could add as "Potential qualification to ECL". The BBC has dashed lines either side of 7th place already, but the PL website only around 5th Spike 'em (talk) 16:48, 20 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Is there any reason that the table of managers uses {{sortname}} when the sort-key is already set? For example the top row, for Arsenal has:
|data-sort-value="Arteta, Mikel"|{{flagicon|ESP}} {{sortname|Mikel|Arteta}}
|data-sort-value="Aubameyang, Pierre-Emerick"|{{flagicon|GAB}} {{sortname|Pierre-Emerick|Aubameyang}}
I can see that the |data-sort-value= is needed to deal with the flags, in which case the rest of the field can be replaced with a straight wikilink. Spike 'em (talk) 19:22, 1 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

And related to this, should the unsorted "Managerial changes" table use {{sortname}}, particularly as adding a sort to the table defnition will currently have little effect as it will sort on the country name in first instance, rather than the manager name. Spike 'em (talk) 13:16, 15 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

I see there has been an edit-skirmish about including Jones in the list of changes (and that his spell is currently in there). In previous seasons we only seem to list caretaker / interim managers in this list if they stay until the end of the season (e.g. last season) but if a permanent manager is installed then we don't show the temporary ones (e.g. Michael Appleton for Leicester, Leon Britton for Swansea and Gary Megson for West Brom (all managed 2 games according to relevant list of managers) in 2017 or Freddie Ljungberg for Arsenal (6 games) and Duncan Ferguson for Everton (4 games) in 2019–20). I say we should remove Jones..... Spike 'em (talk) 10:23, 15 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

I prefer seeing the list how it was before you edited, it gives a better timeline of events, can't we restore that? Govvy (talk) 10:48, 15 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

If there is consensus, then yes, of course. It just seems to be that there is an implicit consensus in previous years to not include the temporary manager spells. These have seen changes like this and this which just remove the interim managers. Spike 'em (talk) 11:10, 15 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Ye, but over long periods? I just feel you're doing the reader a disservice. Govvy (talk) 11:19, 15 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

(According to individual club manager lists: Newcastle,Everton, Arsenal) Ferguson was a couple of days shorter, but more games; Ljungberg was longer and more games. Spike 'em (talk) 11:39, 15 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

And I see you made the same point in December 2019, presumably about the above cases, but nobody responded! Let's see if anyone else replies here, as my feelings on this are not set in stone. Spike 'em (talk) 11:45, 15 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

At this level you normally have interim managers/coaches who take charge, if they manage at least one game then I feel they should be included in the list. Taking charge of training isn't enough, the interim must manage at least one game for me to consider them classed as such. Now I wondering what the statistics buff PeeJay thinks of that! Govvy (talk) 12:03, 15 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

Agreed, if they are in charge for at least one game they should be mentioned in the list. – PeeJay 12:09, 15 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

How is this defined in cases where the club statement does not make it clear? Given the edit warring over OGS's departure how do we determine this? In some cases (Bruce / NES pt I) the club statement uses the word "mutual", in others (NES pt II) make it clear they have been "relieved of their duties". Most of the rest use more vague wording, but is there any difference in Man Utd :"left his role", "regret that we have reached this difficult decision" and Villa : "parted company ", "we have decided to make a change now". Spike 'em (talk) 17:34, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

a couple of news sources : BBC describe it as "Man Utd sack manager"; Guardian said the "board decided to sack" but later that it would "refer to a mutual agreement". Spike 'em (talk) 17:47, 24 November 2021 (UTC)Reply

I see that the edit skirmish is continuing over OGS departing. Would anyone making a change either way care to comment here? Spike 'em (talk) 09:15, 3 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Having looked at various sources, I would refer to this as departure by mutual consent. The board decided to sack him but allowed him to leave on his own first. Therefore it was officially a departure were both sides came to an agreement. AKA mutual consent, not a sacking. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 12:45, 3 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Which sources? Spike 'em (talk) 13:40, 3 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

This is still edit-warring with no comments here. I think "sacked" is supported by more sources than "mutual consent" (neither are explicitly mentioned in the Man Utd statement). Spike 'em (talk) 10:26, 13 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Didn't notice the edit war here, but I've seen this situation before, we trust the independent sources. That was the case on Mourinho's departure from chelsea in 2015, Chelsea's site clearly states mourinho left by mutual consent(yes, the words mutual consent were in the title), and yet BBC reports he was sacked. Wikipedia went with BBC. Throwing out my opinion here - The manner of defeats was bad enough that he should be sacked, and in his last interview after watford, Ole did mention about "future plans" to improve united, as if he was planning to stay.

One more important thing here, There were 3 different sources discussing jose's sacking at chelsea - Chelsea's website which said "mutual consent", BBC which said Sacking, and mourinho himself in an interview, in which he said he was sacked. So, the club statement may not be accurate everytime. Also, people are usually paid after sacking, until the end of contract, not so sure about mutual consent.

Daiyusha (talk) 03:49, 19 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

One decent reference saying "OGS sacked by Man Utd" would suffice, not one where it’s just hinted at.--Egghead06 (talk) 05:25, 19 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

BBC says he was sacked.Spike 'em (talk) 05:34, 19 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Then I’m not sure why we’ve been faffing around for so long. Use this reference to verify his sacking. Sounds simple enough?--Egghead06 (talk) 06:08, 19 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

I created this discussion at the time, but everyone kept edit warring over it rather than discussing. Spike 'em (talk) 07:04, 19 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

I think it is misleading that the beginning says there is a break from 23 January to 7 February. First there are national team games this week. There are not normally national team games at this time of year, but there are because previous times were canceled because of the pandemic. Then there are FA Cup games, with 14 of the 20 Premier League clubs having reached the Round of 32. Therefore most Premier League players will play or be on the roster at some point during that time. It's not like all the players can spend two weeks wherever they want. The page will be read by knowledgeable fans who know what I said, and casual fans such as Americans who are not used to players having national team games and club tournaments during seasons, and who may be misled into thinking the players get time off. Another minor accuracy is that Burnley will host Watford on 5 February in a makeup game due to the pandemic. That wasn't known when the sentence was written, but it could be added. EvanJ35 (talk) 18:29, 30 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

I don't think it is misleading: this is an article about the Premier League season and deals with fixtures in this competition.Spike 'em (talk) 22:29, 30 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Is there a reason for the wayback machine link in the external links?? Seems pointless to me. Govvy (talk) 13:18, 27 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Seemed pointless to me too, especially for an archive from 2012, so I've removed it. Benjamin112 ☎ 03:24, 20 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

someone has vandalised the pages as it appears that arsenal have already played their 38 ganes when they haven't according to the table Katherine Northey (talk) 15:08, 18 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

  Done The vandalism in question looks to have been reverted. Benjamin112 ☎ 03:24, 20 March 2022 (UTC)Reply

Everton now have a left sleeve sponsor which is "Ukraine Humanitarian appeal" Katherine Northey (talk) 15:05, 1 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

it is not setting stone that Spurs/Man United are in the UEL next season

it could be possible for Spurs to qualify for the UCL rather than the UEL

With Man United, they might qualify for the UECL or not qualify for European compo's next season Katherine Northey (talk) 20:03, 8 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

The letters that link to the footnotes already explain this. The coloured rows / final column are linked to the position in table, not necessarily the team occupying them.Spike 'em (talk) 10:27, 9 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Is it explicit anywhere that we sort names alphabetically if there are ties? Son is a family name and the {{DEFAULTSORT}} for him is "Son, Heung-min", and for Salah it's "Salah, Mohamed". If we do go alphabetically, then Salah should be first. Spike 'em (talk) 18:18, 23 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

I would go with alphabetical. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 18:40, 23 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Premierleague.com have Salah first, [1], Govvy (talk) 18:59, 23 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

There is no cause for an individual match to merit an article. Merge to 2021–22 Premier League; this is where all the teams and results are listed. Whiteguru (talk) 20:53, 25 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Indeed, no evidence shown that this game is of lasting individual notability. Spike 'em (talk) 21:09, 25 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

O, it will have lasting notability, however I don't feel it's enough to warrant its own article, nor is this the right place to merge. Prose on the Man City season page is more than enough. Govvy (talk)

Looks like discussion over - it’s gone.--Egghead06 (talk) 04:02, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Definitely not notable enough for a article of it's own. There have been many comebacks like this. The Man City V QPR game in 2012 would have a decent shout but I don't think any others would. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 10:53, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

I think there are little to no comebacks that were from 2–0 to 3–2 in such a short amount of time, let alone winning the title because of it. Mwiqdoh (talk) 17:13, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

ye - the QPR 3-2 is still notable - still gets talked about today (There was a 10th anniversary thing on BBC website for example) - but I don't see this one having the same impact 148.64.30.134 (talk) 11:38, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Well we don't know that, we need to wait and see. Mwiqdoh (talk) 17:13, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

So wait a bit and see if it's justified. WP follows the sources, rather than predict them. Spike 'em (talk) 17:46, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

We don't create articles in the hope they might become notable, we create them after that has happened. This article is extremely premature. – PeeJay 19:28, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

I've been bold and redirected the new article to 2021–22 Manchester City F.C. season, which I believe is the most appropriate target. – PeeJay 12:33, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

@PeeJay: Still hasn't been merged with anything, so there is no point of redirecting currently. Mwiqdoh (talk) 17:13, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

There is no content in that article worth merging. Hope that explains things for you. – PeeJay 19:19, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hm, I would disagree that individual matches do not in themselves merit an article. However in this specific case I don't think the match is sufficiently notable, yet, to justify a standalone article. Maybe in a few years if there are notable retrospectives. FN17 (talk) 18:04, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Agreed, individual matches can merit an article, but again I agree that this one definitely doesn't. – PeeJay 19:19, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

For a min there, I thought you sent the article to AfD. I am not sure about a redirect, it seems more of a wiki search string than what people might type into a google or the engine here at wikipedia to find that info. Govvy (talk) 21:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

I'd be perfectly happy with the article being deleted; I was trying to be charitable by leaving a redirect. – PeeJay 22:02, 26 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

The Premier League has inaugurated some new official season awards this year. ie. most improbable comeback, gamechanger, fiercest goal, so far. Should mention of these on the Premier League season pages be ignored due to their dubious credibility / importance, or should they be included because they are official PL awards for completeness? Ratchet8865 (talk) 09:48, 28 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

At present I would say no. Are these awards being reported by independent sources, rather than just as a press release from the PL itself? We need coverage in reliable secondary sources to include it here as a minimum. Spike 'em (talk) 10:18, 28 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Do the club's websites of the awarded players and teams count as secondary sources as they are being reported on there? Ratchet8865 (talk) 11:42, 28 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

I would say no, as they are not independent of the subject of the story; I'd expect mainstream press coverage. Spike 'em (talk) 11:52, 28 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Spike 'em: But the gamechanger award actually is an award given to the player. I think that one specifically should be included. Mwiqdoh (talk) 08:42, 29 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

are there any independent sources reporting this? All I can find of the pl & the club doing so, neither of which could as RSes.Spike 'em (talk) 08:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)Reply