Burnley performances are predictable but their results are not

What would Huang Po have made of Burnley? Huang Po was a ninth century Buddhist monk. He said: “The foolish reject what they see, not what they think; the wise reject what they think, not what they see.”

This is good advice as far as it goes, but it does not go as far as it could. Change your mind when facts show your opinion is wrong. If you can do this you can do more than most people. But how do you know when facts have shown that your opinion is wrong? You might have seen what was there, but what was there might not be what will always be there, or even what will usually be there.

Which is why I wonder what Huang Po would have said about Burnley.

Let’s start with this season in the Premier League. Burnley gained 24 points from the first 22 games and 25 points from the 12 games since. Just over half as many games and one point more.

During the 12 games Burnley lost only once, at Manchester City. They are in the top half of the table. Manager Sean Dyche has talked about qualifying for Europe again. Two seasons ago Burnley finished seventh in the Premier League and entered the Europa League.

Why did Burnley’s results differ so much from the first 22 games to the next 12? Well, in the first 22 games they conceded 37 goals and in the next 12 games they conceded nine goals. Just over half as many games, just under a quarter as many goals against.

So Burnley defended better? Arguably not.

I studied three sets of expected-goals stats – from Opta, FiveThirtyEight and Understat. Compilers of expected-goals stats consider how many shots a team faced and where from. They are trying to answer this question: how many goals would a team usually concede if they faced these shots?

Opta, FiveThirtyEight and Understat broadly agreed. They said a typical Premier League team facing the same shots as Burnley would have conceded 1.4 goals per game in the first period and also 1.4 goals per game in the second period. Burnley conceded 1.7 goals per game in the first period and 0.8 goals per game in the second period.

Judged on the quality and quantity of chances opponents were allowed, Burnley defended at the same level throughout. They could just have been unlucky to concede so regularly at one time and lucky to concede so irregularly at another.

Look out from an open mind through open eyes, but do not take what you see at face value. Something else might have been going on beneath the surface.

This is the third season in a row that Burnley have recorded very different results in one period than in another. Last season they collected 12 points from the first 19 games then 28 points from the other 19 games. The season before they accumulated 32 points in the first 19 games then 22 points in the other 19 games.

Last season they did play differently in the two halves. The season before was like this one. Then, too, the change in results was attributable primarily to a change in goals conceded. Burnley let in 15 goals in the first half of the season and 24 goals in the second half. This works out as 0.8 goals per game in the first half and 1.3 goals per game in the second half.

Expected goals stats said that a typical Premier League team facing the same shots would have conceded 1.5 goals per game in the first half and 1.4 goals per game in the second half. Then, too, Burnley defended at pretty much the same level throughout, in the sense that they allowed opponents chances of a similar value and volume. They could just have been fortunate to concede so rarely at the beginning.

Opposing managers say they always know what they will get against Burnley: a hard game in which their players will have to work hard to make chances.

They say this win, draw or lose. They say it after a good result to congratulate themselves, and they say it after a bad result so supporters should not criticise them too harshly. Perhaps modern managerial insight adds what was missing from ancient monkish wisdom.

A late lead is the easiest to hold on to

Bill Leslie was right, up to a point. Last Sunday I was watching Sky Sports as Burnley scored in the 43rd minute of their Premier League game at home to Sheffield United. I turned on the sound to hear what the commentators would say. Leslie said it was a good time to score.

There is some evidence that he is correct. Premier League and EFL teams in past seasons were more likely to win if they scored the first goal just before half time than a bit earlier or shortly after half time.

You can see this on the graph. You can also see something else.

Scoring the first goal in the 43rd minute was not as good as scoring it in the 62nd minute. Burnley opened the scoring in the 43rd minute against Sheffield United and in the 62nd minute in their previous game at Crystal Palace. Sheffield United equalised and drew 1-1. Burnley beat Palace 1-0.

And scoring the first goal in the 62nd minute was not as good as scoring it in the 73rd minute. Before Burnley played Palace they were at home to Watford. They opened the scoring in the 73rd minute and also won 1-0.

The best time of all to take the lead is with the last kick of the game. There is no time left for opponents to equalise. As a rule of thumb, the later a team go in front the more likely they are to stay in front.

Not got a bet365 account? Sign up today and get up to £100 in bet credits.

Up to £100 in Bet Credits for new customers at bet365. Min deposit £5. Bet Credits available for use upon settlement of bets to value of qualifying deposit. Min odds, bet and payment method exclusions apply. Returns exclude Bet Credits stake. Time limits and T&Cs apply.

CLAIM OFFER HERE

MORE FREE BETS

Today's top sports betting stories

Follow us on Twitter @racingpostsport

Like us on Facebook RacingPostSport