The pre-match predictions for Premier League matchweek 9 finished with 2 hits from 4 and 2 misses. The weekend’s biggest stories were two games where the process and the result disagreed: City had 21 shots and 62% possession yet lost at home to a Brighton set piece, and Liverpool had 17 shots without one on target and lost to Arsenal at Anfield, leaving Arsenal alone at the top on 24 points with Brighton up to third. I went against the market for Liverpool before the game and the market was right. (United, City, Liverpool and Arsenal all play again in the Champions League; see the matchday 4 prediction guide.)
The Two Hits: Both Had a Red Card in Them
Chelsea 2-0 United. Both the pick and the under fallback landed. Before the game I wrote that Chelsea would have to lean on Morgan Rogers up front, and he scored the first goal in the 50th minute (Lavia assisting); Palmer came back from suspension and scored a penalty in the 64th.
But to be honest, the process behind this ✅ was rewritten by a red card. It was level at 0-0 and an even game until the 59th minute, when United’s Lisandro Martínez picked up a yellow, then a second yellow in the 63rd and was sent off, and Chelsea won a penalty a minute later, which is when the game turned one-sided. Shots were 18 to 12 and shots on target 9 to 5, so the numbers look good for Chelsea, but nobody can predict a red card, and I’ve been caught out by them before; this time luck was on my side. The schedule worry I raised before the game also didn’t materialise: Chelsea went to penalties at Anfield in the League Cup on Wednesday, losing 6-5, yet Penders, Fofana, Caicedo, Rogers and Lavia, who had all played then, started again on Saturday, so “Chelsea lacking full rest” didn’t turn into anything; United had a full week off and were no better for it. After this, United are winless in nine in all competitions, on 7 points and 17th.
Spurs 2-0 Palace. Both the pick and the under fallback landed. I wrote that Palace would struggle to create anything away from home, and they had just 2 shots, 1 on target and no corners; but that read was also exaggerated by a red card: Palace’s Mateta was sent off directly in the 13th minute, so Spurs played 77 minutes with 11 against 10, with 79.4% possession, 34 shots (9 on target, 13 blocked) and 19 corners. Palace really do have a sizeable problem going forward, but those numbers can’t all be put down to their attack.
What the game did confirm from my pre-match read was that Spurs’ attack is still not top-class: with a man advantage and 34 shots they scored only 2, both set-piece headers (Gray 25’, van Hecke 73’). The pre-match injury calls were mostly right: Simons, Odobert, Mudryk and Bergvall weren’t in the squad and Bentancur was suspended; Udogie came off the bench and Maddison wasn’t in the starting line-up or among the substitutes used. Spurs have now won three straight in the league (Coventry, Chelsea, Palace), on 12 points and 8th.
The Two Misses: Better Process, Worse Result
City 0-1 Brighton. I picked City to win with both teams to score as the fallback, and it finished 0-1, a ❌. Brighton scored in the 11th minute, Ayari finishing from a De Cuyper set-piece assist, and after that had only 7 shots and 3 on target, yet held out against City’s 21 shots (8 blocked, 6 on target) and 62.4% possession.
My core argument before the game was “City’s midfield is physically strong and presses and runs harder, so Brighton’s high-speed style will actually expose space behind them”. That argument was right on process: City did attack the space behind Brighton and did control the game (21 shots to 7), but couldn’t turn it into goals and conceded to a set piece again. It’s a classic case of right process, wrong result, and modern football has never been about the side with more of the ball always winning, so I won’t say City played badly. The both-teams-to-score fallback missed too: Brighton scored, but City’s 21 shots produced nothing.
I also wrote that City would rotate in the League Cup and so be able to field a full-strength side against Brighton in the league. City’s rotated team drew 2-2 with Brighton on 10/28 and won on penalties 4-3; in the league City put Foden and Cherki back on the bench and started Haaland, Doku and other regulars, but that reshuffle didn’t bring a win, and Brighton’s league starters Ayari and Gross had also played in the League Cup, so fatigue didn’t beat them. On the injuries, Semenyo was out and Brighton’s Kadıoğlu and Mitoma weren’t in the squad, as expected; Chema Andrés started and Wieffer came on as a substitute. Brighton are now third on 19 points and City are 3 behind Arsenal.
Liverpool 0-1 Arsenal. I went against the market for Liverpool before the game (the market had Arsenal 41%, Liverpool 32%), and it finished 0-1; the market was right. Havertz scored from close range in the 16th minute (Rice crossing), after which Liverpool had 17 shots (9 blocked) and not one on target, while Arsenal had 10 shots, 3 on target, and Raya made no saves.
My arguments beforehand were “Arsenal’s attacking problems are only temporarily hidden”, “Liverpool win through their attack” and “Barcola’s wide runs will be the weapon to tear the defence apart”. Arsenal’s attacking wasn’t fluent (10 shots), but one lapse by their opponents in the first 16 minutes was enough to win, and their defence then made sure none of Liverpool’s 17 shots was on target. “Arsenal have an attacking problem” still holds, though even though I’ve always rated their defence highly, I didn’t expect them to really hold out for 90 minutes.
On the injuries, Saka was out (correct); Calafiori, Wirtz and Gakpo all started (uncertain beforehand); Szoboszlai I wrote as out, but he actually came off the bench, so my pre-match information didn’t match the facts, and I admit that. The over 2.5 fallback missed with 1 goal in total, though I’d written in the pre-match piece that the goal-line odds weren’t good and I wouldn’t specially consider a fallback, so there was never really a commitment there. I had also noted that Liverpool had scored only 4 goals in 4 home games and that Anfield wasn’t a strength this season, and they failed to score again; that was my own evidence supporting Arsenal, and I picked against it anyway.
Summary: Better Process Isn’t a Win, and Both Hits Needed a Red Card
Both misses were “better process, worse result”, but of different kinds: City had 21 shots to 7 and 62% possession and lost to a single set piece, with some luck involved; Liverpool had 17 shots to 10 and none on target, which reflects Arsenal’s defence and also suggests Liverpool’s attacking quality still needs work. Both hits also involved red cards (United in the 63rd, Palace in the 13th), which were factors that couldn’t have been foreseen before the game.
Of my four picks this round, two were helped along by red cards and two were undone by games that were better in process than in result, so a 2-from-4 record hides quite a lot of noise: if United’s Lisandro Martínez had avoided one yellow card, or Palace’s Mateta hadn’t been sent off in the 13th minute, those could have been completely different games; and if one of City’s 21 shots had gone in, or one of Liverpool’s 17 had been on target, the results might have been different too. All I can do is write down the reasoning behind the picks clearly, then look back after the game at what I read correctly and what was just luck being on my side. Betting always carries risk, so please bet responsibly.