It's been a tad negative on here recently and given some of the arguments and labels that we've been bang average, I thought I'd take a look at what is an average season for West Ham United.
So, I've taken our league positions for the last 10, 20, 30 and 40 years and taken the average. In the seasons where we lay in the 2nd tier, I have added the number of teams in the top division to the league position for that year. So, if we finished 7th in the old Div 2 in 1989/90, our corresponding league position for the average was 29 as there were 22 teams in the top flight. For the 2011-12 season, we finished 3rd in the Championship, so our average league position was 23 as there were 20 teams in the Prem that year.
Following? Excellent.
So, here are the results:
10 Year Average: 13.6
20 Year Average: 13.55
30 Year Average: 15.23
40 Year Average: 14.9
We are currently sitting 11th in the table, after last years over achievement, it's a little bit of a disappointment, granted. However, in terms of being West Ham, it's above average. This in a season that has seen us move into a new stadium, a move not without it's problems. It's also been a season that has seen us lose our best player. Yet, despite all that, we are still performing above what is our average.
Slav seems to be getting a bit of stick on here and I just don't get it at all. We've been relegated with better squads than this and in seasons where a lot less had been going on.
How's about cutting him and the team a bit of slack?