Premier League Review

Current teams

With Premier League team building now complete, it is appropriate to examine the prospects of the competing teams. The averages of the declared one-to-seven for the Premier League teams are tabulated below:

Team

No 1

No 2

No 3

No 4

No 5

No 6

No 7

Total

Adjusted

Arena Essex

8.82

8.48

6.96

5.51

5.33

4.26

3.90

43.26

43.26

Berwick

9.64

8.36

8.03

7.16

5.79

3.00

3.00

44.98

44.98

Edinburgh

9.32

9.04

7.70

6.73

5.36

3.69

3.00

44.84

44.84

Exeter

9.03

7.90

7.53

5.31

5.01

4.58

3.70

43.06

43.06

Glasgow

9.36

9.06

8.80

7.14

4.43

3.00

3.00

44.79

43.79

Hull

10.90

9.45

6.38

5.85

5.14

4.22

3.42

44.08

43.08

Isle of Wight

11.22

7.96

7.74

6.18

5.55

3.00

3.00

44.65

43.65

Newcastle

9.67

9.00

7.80

6.25

5.87

3.00

3.00

44.59

44.59

Newport

11.80

9.23

5.60

5.53

5.37

4.40

3.00

44.93

43.43

Reading

11.00

8.94

7.19

5.62

5.18

3.68

3.00

44.61

43.61

Sheffield

10.34

9.60

7.73

5.73

5.50

3.00

3.00

44.90

44.90

Stoke

8.80

8.72

8.34

6.34

6.11

3.34

3.00

44.65

44.65

Swindon

8.21

7.99

6.55

6.44

6.12

5.54

3.00

43.85

43.85

Workington

10.01

8.20

7.86

6.36

4.87

4.32

3.00

44.62

44.62

Assessment

The total points for each team is indicative of the strength of that team. However, several riders have dropped down from the Elite League on averages that are totally unsustainable. For example Ben Howe is on 11.80, Ray Morton on 11.22, Armando Castagna on 11.00, Gary Stead on 10.90, and Richard Juul on 9.36. Juul and Morton have averaged around eight points in the Premier League previously. Carl Stonehewer, now a Grand Prix rider, only averaged just over ten points! A revised total is presented after reducing the averages of such riders by a nominal one point except for Newport where the reduction is one and a half points.

Obviously the initial strength of teams is only one factor in their likely success. This analysis is based on five factors: strength, potential for improvement, cutting edge from the top four, balance of team, and away scoring potential.

Factors

The strength of teams is based on the adjusted points totals and is given in points out of ten. A team totally 45.00 points would score 10 while one on 41.00 points would score zero. The results are tabulated below range from 9.9 for Berwick to 5.2 for Exeter.

The balance of each team is assessed using the 'spread' measured by the standard deviation. A low value for the standard deviation indicates a good balance. The results are given in the table below. The score for balance is given in points out of eight. A standard deviation of one would give a score of eight while a standard deviation of four would give a score of zero.

The scores for improvement are given out of eight points. The potential for improvement is taken rider by rider. This is a very difficult factor to assess. A rider with great potential for increase is given two while a rider with modest potential is given one. In the case of Edinburgh, Ross Brady and Christian Henry are taken as having good potential for improvement. Blair Scott has put a nearly point on his average for each of the last three seasons and looks a fair bet to to do so again. Kevin Little has been a consistent improver up to his injury in the middle of last year. He should be set for a modest improvement bearing in mind his low starting average. The return of Robert Eriksson to Armadale should help him to a modest increase in average to nearer than he obtained in 1997. That gives Edinburgh a score of seven. Sheffield are also assessed at seven thanks to the potential of Simon Stead, Paul Lee, Simon Cartwright, and James Birkinshaw. Workington also rate a improvement score of seven.

In order to win matches any team need the cutting edge of a strong top-four. This depends firstly on having a genuine number one who can average in excess of nine points and can regularly score double figures home and away. A team must have three genuine heat leaders who can score double figures consistently at home and who can score points away on all types of track. Finally, they should have a good number four rider capable of challenging for a heat leader place. Teams are allocated one or two points for their number one, three points for their heat leader trio and one point for their number four if they are strong enough. Edinburgh, Glasgow, Sheffield, Workington and Berwick all score maximum points here. Newcastle, for example, drop a point here because of doubts about Stuart Swales as a heat leader.

Finally, it is the ability to win away matches that sorts out the championship contenders from the 'also-rans'. The measure involves giving two for each rider capable of scoring almost as well away as at home and one point for each rider who average away from home and none for riders who are bad away from home. Edinburgh rate seven points on this criterion. Ross Brady contributed two points, Blair Scott none and the rest of the team one each. Workington and Sheffield will probably edge out Edinburgh on this criterion.

 

Team

Points

45.00

Spread

(stdev)

Strength

10.0

Improve

10.0

Top 4

6.0

Balance

8.0

Away

10.0

Total

44.0

1

Edinburgh

44.84

2.3

9.6

7.0

6.0

4.5

7.0

34.1

2

Workington

44.62

2.3

9.0

7.0

6.0

4.6

7.5

34.1

3

Sheffield

44.90

2.7

9.8

7.0

6.0

3.4

7.5

33.7

4

Berwick

44.98

2.4

9.9

3.0

6.0

4.2

6.0

29.1

5

Newcastle

44.59

2.5

9.0

4.0

5.0

4.1

7.0

29.1

6

Glasgow

43.79

2.6

7.0

5.0

6.0

3.6

7.0

28.6

7

Stoke

44.65

2.3

9.1

2.0

5.0

4.6

6.5

27.2

8

Arena Essex

43.26

1.8

5.7

5.0

4.0

5.8

6.0

26.5

9

Swindon

43.85

1.6

7.1

5.0

2.0

6.4

6.0

26.5

10

Isle of Wight

43.65

2.7

6.6

6.0

4.0

3.5

5.0

25.1

11

Reading

43.61

2.7

6.5

4.0

5.0

3.6

6.0

25.1

12

Hull

43.08

2.6

5.2

5.0

5.0

3.8

6.0

25.0

13

Exeter

43.06

1.8

5.2

5.0

3.0

5.8

4.0

23.0

14

Newport

43.43

2.8

6.1

6.0

3.0

3.2

4.0

22.3

Prospects of the Premier League teams

The results of this analysis would make the main title contenders as (in no particular order) Edinburgh, Sheffield, and Workington. The first two have kept the core of a successful team from 1999 while Workington have built on the foundations of the useful team that ended the season. All have question marks over them. In the case of Workington, with the exception of Stonehewer, their team were markedly inconsistent last year. If they can produce consistency then the title could be heading their way. The other problem for Workington could be the distraction of the Grand Prix for Carl Stonehewer. Sheffield look a very solid team from top to bottom although possibly a bit weak at reserve, at least on away tracks. Edinburgh have the perennial trouble of indifferent away form at the big tracks.

Those on the fringe of the title chase will probably include Newcastle, Berwick, and Glasgow. Of these teams, Glasgow have a decent top end but the tail looks rather long. The Glasgow reserves are strong on promise but light on experience. They also suffer from having Richard Juul on an unrealistic converted average. Newcastle are not far away from title contnders but the lack of a third heat leader could cost them dear with Stuart Swales on a rather high looking average. Berwick look rather weak at reserve and will probably toil away from home despite a more than useful top-five.

Stoke and Arena Essex appear to be the pick of the remaining teams. Both have decent enough line-ups with three genuine heat leaders and respectable second strings. Stoke have put out their strongest team in years even if all bar one are over 33 years of age! Arena Essex will not be easy to beat but are light on points. If David Mason can finally make some progress, they could yet spring a surprise or two.

The teams with a mid-table look include Swindon, Reading, Isle of Wight, and Hull. All share the problem of having an ex-Elite League number one on a ridiculous converted average. This gives all these teams structural problems which may be addressed after the first issue of Green Sheets. This is dependent on them finding riders that they bring in at this stage. Many have tipped Swindon for bottom place but they do have arguably the best reserve in the league in Olver Allen. However their top end looks very weak. Frank Smart will be a great asset but lacks the consistency for a number one rider. The strength of the middle order will not compensate for this. There is little wrong with the Reading team apart from the eleven points taken up by Castagna. The Isle of Wight suffer similarly from having Ray Morton on an eleven point plus average which has an impact on the strength of their bottom-end. Hull are difficult to judge with Gary Stead and Paul Thorp on rather high averages but also have Lee Dicken, Mike Smith and Paul Smith on bargain averages. They do not look like championship contenders.

Exeter look on the weak side, especially away from home. They are nearly two points down on the 45.00 limit and this could prove to be very costly. They will probably be bullet-proof at the County Ground and this will probably ensure they avoid the wooden spoon. Three years back Exeter had a number of riders who can score points away from home notably Leigh Lanham, Frank Smart, and Michael Coles. Now only Coles remains.

That leaves Newport as favourites for bottom place for the second time in the last four years. Their team has been ripped apart from last year. They will miss Watson and Smart very badly. Craig Taylor will probably be a trump card at reserve in the early stages. With Ben Howe on a crazy average and Anders Henriksson also looking on the high side, the team lacks strength at the top end. None of their others riders looks capable of coming near to filling the third heat leader role. This could all change if they can find the cash to introduce Bjorn Gustafsson after the first Green Sheets have come out.


Teams: Northern Tracks

Teams: Southern Tracks


Monarchs Comment

Monarchs Home Page