Jamie Vardy: How Does Fantastic Mr Fox Rank?

As someone who frequently places bets on the weekend's action, I shudder to think the odds that last weekend's achievement would have drawn at the start of the season. To score in three straight games is a run of good form for any striker, but to do it in 10 is nothing short of extraordinary.

And if that wasn't enough, Jamie Vardy has done it in a side hardly recognised as world-beaters. Ok, the fact that Leicester currently sit proudly atop the Premier League seems to undermine that argument somewhat. However, speaking of odds, I wonder what bookies would have laid on the Foxes topping the table after 12 games? My point is, few would have ever expected that the side that struggled to escape relegation last term would have found within their midst a true Premier League predator capable of this feat.

However, ever the cynic, I feel the need to dampen the enthusiasm of Leicester fans who will undoubtedly proclaim Jamie Vardy's goalscoring run the 'greatest of all time' - let's just hope they can do it in a more intelligent way than the current chant of 'Jamie Vardy's having a party'. Lyrical genius... And we wonder why the music industry is dumbing down!

Let's start by looking at the man whose record he could usurp if he nets against Manchester United next weekend: ironically enough, United hitman Ruud van Nistelrooy. Now, in order to gauge the achievements of the pair, and accurately compare them, we have to understand the circumstances under which they were done. I have already mentioned the fact that Vardy has completed this nine game run in a side hardly recognised as a league leader, while van Nistelrooy was part of the United side that bulldozed its way through everyone in the early 2000's. So, on the face of it, 1-0 Vardy, right?

Well, I wanted to delve a little deeper than that. It is also worthwhile considering the opponents that these goals came against. To score nine games in a row is impressive regardless, but scoring against eight of the top ten in the league is certainly more so than knocking in goals against the lesser sides.

When looking at van Nistelrooy's run, we see he scored 15 goals in his 10 games, with hat tricks against Fulham and Charlton, and a brace at home to Liverpool. In those games, he scored against the sides in 14th, 5th, 3rd, 2nd, 6th, 10th, 12th, 7th, 8th and 5th. If we were to average this out, it equates to 7th place - a pretty impressive feat for anyone. If we compare this with Jamie Vardy's recent form, we see quite a different story. His ten games have him scoring 12 goals, with braces against Arsenal and Southampton - ironically the two most difficult sides the Foxes have faced during this run. The teams he has scored against currently sit in 19th, 20th, 11th, 4th, 16th, 8th, 10th, 12th, 13th and 17th, giving Vardy an average of 13th place. I think this is emphatically 1-1.

There are a few more important factors to take into account. Firstly, it's worth noting that van Nistelrooy's run did come over two different seasons, with the last two games the start of the 2003/2004 season. I'm not sure if that removes a little of the gloss off his achievement or adds to it. On the one hand, it could have taken pressure off the Dutchman towards the end of the run, as he may not have remembered his strong form at the start of the new year. However, it could also be the case that it made it more difficult, as momentum and form plays a huge part in the continuing success, and any break in time could have an adverse effect on the mindset of the striker involved.

However, if this was going to be a negative, we should certainly bear in mind the fact that, including all competitions, Ruud van Nistelrooy actually went on a 12 game scoring streak in 2003. This was the previously mentioned eight Premier League games, in addition to Champions League goals, both home and away, against Real Madrid, and goals for Holland against the Czech Republic and Moldova. He therefore completed both a long term run based on momentum, and a run over the course of two seasons.

In comparison, if other competitions were included in Jamie Vardy's current run, the striker would only actually have managed a four game scoring streak, as Premier League games were punctuated by goalless appearances in the Capital One Cup and the England team. Is that really so impressive?

It certainly isn't when we compare it to the all-time greats, and longest scoring streaks. Josef Bican's incredible 19-game run for Slavia Prague has been going strong since 1939, only matched by Lionel Messi (who else) in 2013. Some argue that as Messi was then injured and never got the chance to continue the record, we will never know how far he could have gone, and some even count the two goals he scored immediately after his return as part of the record, but I don't buy it.

To put it in perspective, should we even be that overawed by the achievement of scoring in 10 straight? Below is the list of the 10 longest goal streaks in history, all of whom have gone significantly beyond the feat achieved in the Premier League:

Longest goalscoring runs in history:
19: Lionel Messi (FC Barcelona 2012–13)
19: Josef Bican (SK Slavia Praha 1939–40)
16: Gerd Müller (FC Bayern München 1969–70)
16: Teodor Peterek (Ruch Chorzów 1937–38)
15: Filip Johansson (IFK Göteborg 1924–25)
15: Tor Henning Hamre (FC Flora Tallinn 2003)
15: Fin Døssing (Dundee United FC 1964–65)
14: Fernando Gomes (FC Porto 1984–85)
13: Serge Masnaghetti (Valenciennes FC 1962–63)
13: Peter Dubovský (ŠK Slovan Bratislava 1991–92)
13: Tom Phillipson (Wolverhampton Wanderers FC 1926–27)

With this in mind, Jamie Vardy's run is the best moment of his career so far, and certainly warrants congratulations, but as with so many things, we have a tendency to get carried away by feats, particularly when completed by an Englishman. However, Vardy needs to go some to match the greatest ever, and I'd argue that he needs to consistently score against better opposition to be considered alongside Ruud van Nistelrooy as a top striker. Hang on, I'm sure I came to a similar conclusion about another overrated English striker...

In any case, while I hope I'm proven wrong, I do fully expect this run to come to an end against Manchester United this weekend. United have proven their ability to mark better players than Vardy out of the game, and I suspect the Foxes will find it much harder to score. He may still finish as top scorer this season, but at some point in the season, he will have a lean spell and it is always the mark of a good striker to see how he recovers from that.

One Man Team: How Much Of A Miss Was Aguero?

We all remember these words: 'Balotelli... Aguerooooooooooooo!' Martin Tyler's commentary of the famous final day of the 2011/2012 season has been immortalised over the last few years, but it's the goalscorer who wrote himself into City folklore. Since joining from Atletico Madrid for a club record £38m in July 2011, Aguero has been an integral cog in the City machine. The record Premier League goalscorer, eclipsing his countryman Carlos Tevez, Aguero has scored an impressive 69 goals in 110 City games.

As a result, I have to admit, as soon as I saw Sergio Aguero hit the deck in the third minute of City's game with Everton in December, I feared for the Blues' season. Such has been the form the little Argentine has been in this season, he had carried them through the tough spots, most notably in Europe.

This has led to so many pundits calling City a one-man team. However, we have seen numerous examples - perhaps more than in recent seasons - of numerous clubs seeming overly reliant on one player. With Aguero back to full fitness, was this the case with City, and is it any worse than any of their competition?

Before I look at statistics, it is important to consider the form of Man City during Aguero's injury. In the seven games including the one he departed early against Everton, City were unbeaten, winning six. Even more impressively, City scored 12 goals without a recognised striker, conceding just three. That seems to indicate that although Aguero has been a key player for City, carrying them through certain games, he is not the be all and end all.

But let's look at the stats, shall we? Interestingly, as I showed before, City have performed exceptionally well as a team since the Argentine has been unavailable. This form is certainly far superior from anything seen while Aguero was playing, averaging 2.6 points per game in the league without him while only managing 2.0 points per game with him. This certainly doesn't support the notion of a one-man team, though the return of David Silva from injury certainly will have helped City's cause.

On a more individual level, as a striker, Aguero's primary role is to score goals. Certainly, he has been the most in-form Premier League striker this season, rivalled only for this role by Diego Costa's excellent start to the year and Harry Kane's storming mid-season. But has he been so dominant in the Manchester City scoring stakes that suggests he has an abnormal amount of influence going forward?

Up to 6 December, the day Aguero was injured, Manchester City had scored 29 Premier League goals. Of those, the little Argentine had scored 14 - almost half. On top of this, Aguero also contributed to over 50 per cent of City's Champions League goals, dragging them through what appeared to be an impossible task in their group.

While that seems like a significant proportion of goals for an individual to score, it's worth looking at whether it is unusual, either for Manchester City, or the whole of the Premier League. Last year, Yaya Toure's 20 Premier League goals represented just 19.6 per cent of the total, though with injury denying Aguero for most of last season, this is perhaps not the most representative. In City's first title-winning season, Aguero scored just a quarter of their goals in the league, almost half of his current contribution this season.

But are City's rivals any better? Below is a table with the top Premier League goalscorers of each team, and their contributions in percentage to the total scoring charts:

Arsenal: Alexis Sanchez - 13/52 (25%)
Aston Villa: Christian Benteke - 4/15 (27%)
Burnley: Danny Ings - 9/24 (38%)
Chelsea: Diego Costa - 17/53 (32%)
Crystal Palace: Mile Jedinak and Dwight Gayle - 5/30 (17%)
Everton: Romelu Lukaku - 7/28 (25%)
Hull: Nikica Jelavic - 8/25 (32%)
Leicester: Leonardo Ulloa - 7/22 (32%)
Liverpool: Steven Gerrard and Raheem Sterling - 6/38 (16%)
Manchester City: Sergio Aguero - 17/59 (29%)
Manchester United: Wayne Rooney and Robin van Persie - 10/45 (22%)
Newcastle United: Papiss Cisse - 11/32 (34%)
Queens Park Rangers: Charlie Austin - 15/27 (55%)
Southampton: Graziano Pelle - 8/33 (24%)
Stoke City: Mame Biram Diouf, Jonathan Walters and Peter Crouch - 7/33 (21%)
Sunderland: Steven Fletcher and Adam Johnson - 4/22 (18%)
Swansea City: Wilfried Bony - 9/32 (28%)
Tottenham Hotspur: Harry Kane - 14/43 (33%)
West Bromwich Albion: Saido Berahino - 12/23 (52%)
West Ham United: Diafra Sakho - 9/36 (25%)

As you can see, based on the statistics, Manchester City actually rank eighth in terms of 'one-men teams' for scoring, with both Chelsea and Tottenham higher on that list. However, it is surprising to see that Arsenal not higher on that scale, as Alexis Sanchez has been seen as the leading light in their season. However, with Charlie Austin and Saido Berahino most prominent in the 'one-man team' stakes, perhaps, because the emphasis is not placed as heavily on the mid-table to relegation threatened teams, they are not placed under the same level of scrutiny as those higher up?

Clearly, Sergio Aguero has been Manchester City's most important player this season - even more so than some of their rivals - but there is certainly credence in the claims that this season has seen an increasing number of clubs relying on an individual to perform. While we have seen Arsenal and Chelsea discussed in the media, the likes of Leicester, West Brom and QPR have all seen players carry their seasons. Maybe Aguero isn't the only one-man teamer around, but he certainly is the most high profile. When fully fit and in form, he is arguably in the top five players in the world. I only wished he stayed fit for longer.

A Campaign Or Just Jose's Mind Games?

There is nothing as fickle, or indeed hypocritical, as a football manager (except perhaps football fans). Jose Mourinho's comments this weekend that referees, pundits and the whole football community are involved in some campaign against Chelsea are about as close to a conspiracy theory as aliens or JFK's assassination. I'll go through all the reasons that this is undoubtedly the case, before looking at the possible alternative reasons that Mourinho could have had for saying what he did, coming directly from the mind of a cynic.

Firstly, let's examine exactly what Mourinho said and the context in which he said it. Following his side's disappointing 1-1 draw with Southampton, the Portuguese manager was understandably livid with the decision by referee Anthony Taylor not to award a penalty for a clear foul by Saints defender Matt Targett. Worse still, he booked Cesc Fabregas for simulation, only adding to the sense of injustice felt by Chelsea. To this point, his anger is totally reasonable. We see a plethora of managers across the Football Leagues fined for outbursts in post-match interviews every year, particularly related to refereeing decisions. To that end, I do understand the difficulty of attempting to keep your emotions in check following a perceived injustice - particularly when you're presented with a camera in your face no more than five minutes after the incident!

However, Jose Mourinho's reaction was on a whole other level. Here are his exact words from his interview with the BBC:

"The media, commentators, other managers are all doing it [putting pressure on referees]. There is a campaign against Chelsea. I don't know why there is this campaign and I do not care. 

"Everybody knows it was a penalty. The referee made a mistake, people make mistakes and he made a big mistake. He is a good referee and a good guy, he is young, he has years and years of football ahead of him but it is a big mistake."

This statement is ludicrous. It is, in fact, so outrageously idiotic that Mourinho himself realised how it sounded, as the second paragraph is considerably more measured and controlled. I particularly like the word 'commentators' in there - I think you were meaning 'pundits', Jose? I know as he has a great grip of the English language (certainly far better than my Portuguese), I have little room for mockery or complaint, however I found the notion of Howard Webb watching Match of the Day and being influenced by John Motson incredibly amusing!

Here a just a few reasons from this season that demonstrate just how ridiculous Mourinho's claims are:

1) There's no smoke without fire
If there is any element of truth in the idea that referees are not giving decisions Chelsea's way, it's probably because of their reputation developed over the last few games. Just like we saw from the likes of El Hadji Diouf, Cristiano Ronaldo and Gareth Bale, a reputation for diving often sees you fail to get decisions you really probably should. Following high profile cases of simulation from the Chelsea team (Willian, Diego Costa, Ivanovic and another high profile example that I'll use later), it's hardly surprising that referees and the rest of the footballing world are getting more than a little fed up with their antics. Not enough to warrant conspiracy theories, but the benefit of the doubt has long since vanished.

2) It's not just Chelsea, you know?
Another of my favourite things about football managers is their uncanny ability to be able to completely ignore anything that goes their way or anything that disproves their theory (which is why I'm not holding out much hope that Jose Mourinho is paying attention to what I'm writing - yeah, that's the only reason he wouldn't read this!). Neil Warnock is the master of this, and as a result has got himself into trouble more times than I can count. However, even this season, we have seen examples of exactly what happened to Cesc Fabregas happen to other clubs. The most high profile of these was also at St Mary's just a few short weeks ago. Despite clearly being clattered by Jose Fonte (arguably even more obviously than Saturday's challenge, which ultimately saw a centre back stumbling and colliding with a forward), Sergio Aguero was booked for simulation. We see numerous cases of footballing miscarriages of justice every year - that doesn't make it right, but if it stamps out diving once and for all, it's a price worth paying in my opinion. But no, Jose, it's not just your team it happens to.

3) I'm sure there's a saying involving glass houses and stones...
What makes Mourinho's comments even more ironic is the fact that Chelsea got away with the most obvious example of diving this season. Earlier this month, Hull's visit to Stamford Bridge (the location of this isn't a coincidence) saw Gary Cahill get away with footballing murder. Already on a yellow card (which was bordering on red to say the least), he made a quite ridiculous attempt to win a penalty, throwing himself through the air between two onrushing Hull defenders. The result - zero contact, but no second yellow. So when Jose talks about game-changing moments, he may want to remember a far more significant one that went in his favour.

We have very rarely seen managers completely lose the plot in front of the media. My favourite example of this remains Rafa Benitez's 'FACT' rant - though as a City fan most of what he said is absolutely true! I have seen people suggest that Jose's outburst is up there with him, however, those of you that have read my work before know that I'm far too cynical to believe that Mourinho lost control. He has already proven himself to be an expert in mind games, and is the only man I have ever seen get under the skin of Manuel Pellegrini. This has all the hallmarks of his own attempts to get into the referee's subconscious when the next dubious dive or penalty decisions come up, so we see more of the Cahill examples and less of the Fabregas ones.

To ridicule Mourinho for his comments misses the point of them entirely, and this is why he is so clever. By getting people talking about them ensures they remain in the public's, and perhaps even the referees', minds. I understand that by writing this post, I am somewhat contributing to this, but I rationalise this by saying that by highlighting the potential hidden reasons behind his comments, they will cease to have the desired effect.

Or perhaps Mourinho is just mad - he did make comments about Barcelona receiving favourable decisions thanks to their sponsorship with Unicef once upon a time, after all?