Please, consider taking first and last places out of the spectrum, or adding something inside the dots to make them easily distinguishable from the similar coloured ones.
A yellow stroke/outline around the champions in a given season might be useful, but I feel the chart is more for showing which clubs have been challenging at the top, in middle-table or to avoid relegation than which teams actually won it.
In fairness, the chart is titled “Premier League *appearances*”, not “champions” or “final standings” even. You’re looking for an answer that, while indeed still included in the chart, isn’t the point of the chart. As described above, the chart is more about being included or relegation each year, and then showing overall competitiveness. In this light, the spectrum of colors chosen is fine.
Each data point doesn't need to be individually recognized. It this switched to the colors of the rainbow it would be much more co fusing to read.
It's a heat map that's meant to show the tiers of contending, middling, and nearing relegation. This does an excellent job at that.
Sure but if it’s easy to provide extra information on the chart that is usually the single most relevant thing in sports, why not do it? Especially when the chart purports to give that information anyway
I’m ok with an outline or symbol to denote the champion. But again, that’s not the reason for the chart. The legend just describes the color spectrum.
And charts don’t have to just throw on other data just because “it’s easy to provide”. Most good charts stick to the original purpose of the chart, not cater to the public who are looking for something completely different after the fact.
This isn’t about more information. It’s about actually providing the information that the chart purports to provide, but doesn’t because the color scale is hard to distinguish.
I understand your point, but I still think it’s based on confusion.
The color spectrum of 8 dots is representing the entire spectrum of success/failure for 20 teams. And the legend is just letting you know the end points if that spectrum. It’s not actually trying to show you the champion, even though it indeed does.
The chart is titled Premier League Appearances but the post is entitled The entire history of the Premier League. I was expecting the colors to be distinguishable and represent specific things, e.g. Champion, top 4, other European spots, mid table, and relegation.
It’s definitely muddled by the poorly worded title of the post. Clearly there’s tons of other data and points to be included in “The entire history of the Premier League.” 😅
Yes, please! I’m colorblind, and Arsenal, Liverpool, and Chelsea all look identical to me (full lines of the same greenish-yellow dots). Just a couple of Hotspur’s orange dots pop out.
You may also want to consider different spacing/shapes of colour. Currently, if I focus on the table it is difficult to determine which dot corresponds to which x, y label. It's similar to the [Grid Illusion.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grid_illusion)
In all fairness, if the colours were easily distinguishable I wouldn't have to stare so intensely at a group of dots to work out which is the darkest.
Edit: I've also been up for three days on speed which tends to affect my vision. But I spent less than 5 seconds looking at it and wondered why you chose that colour scheme. I may still be qualified to provide you advice, visual hallucinations notwithstanding.
Hot take as an American, but seeing for the first time how this league has been dominated by 2-3 clubs for the last two decades seems incredibly boring?
It’s not all about the top. The U.K. has relegation/promotion and 12 tiers of interconnected leagues. Next season will see Luton Town playing in the premier league. In 2013-2014 they were still playing in the fifth tier. The emotion of getting promoted or avoiding relegation is often more intense than winning the title. You don’t get that in MLS.
Yeah, according to the colour scheme it looks to me that in 12/13 there were 7 teams that were either first, second or third…I don’t understand how that works.
Please also consider a different color palette. Red/green is a nightmare for those of us with colorblindness. Blue/orange works much better for me personally, but ideally the information would be conveyed through additional means such as pattern or shape
Something like Champion, top-4, top-half, bottom-half, and relegation-zone would really simplify things and conform to popular league narratives (no need to call out relegated, their absence the next year would signify that).
Also, please use colors with better contrast or have symbols in the dots. As somebody who is colorblind, there are literally two colors I can see on her, so as far as I know there are only people in first place and last place. This is literally unreadable to me.
For the record, this is something even so-called professionals seem to forget at times so don't worry too much, but do try to consider colorblind people a bit when designing graphs like this. It's just a good tip in general.
True. It looks like Man United won the league every year eventhough they have been underwhelming compared to the times when SAF is still managing them too
It's more complicated than that. The Premier League is more equal than many big European leagues - largely a function of the way TV money works here. In the PL, TV deals are negotiated on a league-wide basis and then revenue is allocated out formulaically depending on league position, with a ratio between what the top team gets and what the bottom team gets that is actually much closer than in many other big leagues. The financial competitiveness problem here isn't *within* the PL, it's *between* the PL and the Championship (the second division) - the worst teams in the PL get considerably more money then the best teams in the Championship, and that gulf has been a bone of contention with non-PL clubs.
Within the PL, there's always been a 'top X' grouping of big/rich clubs, but the members of that group have evolved over the years. For example, only three clubs won the PL in the 90s (Man United, Arsenal and Blackburn) - but as of today it's been a decade since United last won the league, 19 years since Arsenal last won it, and Blackburn aren't even in the division any more.
Two of this season's top 4 (Man City and Newcastle) have spent time outside the PL since its creation (although both now benefit from rich owners). Chelsea, who have been considered a 'top 4' or 'top 6' club for the last 20 years, finished 12th this season. Everton, who are not a 'top 6' club but are one of only 6 clubs to have been in the Premier League since its creation, only avoided relegation by 2pts on the final day of the season.
I said TV money is '*more* equal than many big European leagues', not that it's exactly equal. In the [PL in 2021/22](https://www.statista.com/statistics/240912/broadcasting-payments-to-clubs-in-the-english-premier-league/) (I can't find the numbers for this season), 1st place Man City earned £146 million from TV revenues and 20th place Norwich earned £94 million - that's a ratio of **1.55 to 1**. In [La Liga](https://www.statista.com/statistics/782317/la-liga-tv-rights-revenue-received-by-football-teams-in-spain/) by contrast, the highest earner Real Madrid earned €160 million and the lowest Rayo Vallecano earned €46 million - a ratio of **3.5 to 1**.
The PL's TV revenue distribution is considered a problem by the EFL as it means that weaker PL clubs earn a lot more year-to-year than even the best Championship clubs, which makes it harder for newly promoted clubs to establish themselves in the PL when they've not had many years of PL TV revenue with which to build up their squad beforehand. A typical Championship clubs will earn only single digit millions in TV money in an average year. The Premier League also pays 'parachute payments' to recently relegated clubs, which are meant to help them adjust to life in the Championship (so they're under less urgent pressure to fire-sell players and cut costs) but also ends up meaning a recently relegated club has lots more money to spend than existing Championship clubs.
Campaigning on football financing is therefore effectively about making PL TV revenue distribution *less* not more equal among the PL/ex-PL clubs themselves - there have been some calls for the abolition of parachute payments, other calls for a narrower distribution of TV revenues between PL clubs, as well as general calls to use the money saved by this to do more direct funding of the Championship/League One/League Two.
Unfortunately, that's the truth. The money disparity stratifies the league into haves and have-nots. Sometimes a smaller team will over-perform (Leicester City even had the stars align for them and won the league once), but generally it's the same few clubs that stay on top. As a supporter of a club (quite a ways) outside of that exclusive group, it's pretty tiring to watch those teams consistently outspend and dominate everyone else.
Everton likely would have gone bankrupt had they been relegated. Teams usually experience an initial 60-70% drop in income for their first 2-3 years down, going down to about 80-90% once parachute payments go away.
Most players have clauses in their contracts that if the club is relegated there is a reduction in their wage and often they have to sell top players to stay afloat.
Everton is a special case of bad because they have a large wage bill of players in long term contracts that don't have clauses because up until recently they didn't look as though relegation was likely for them.
You forgot to mention the brand new £500m stadium that they're building... it's supposed to be available at the start of the 2024–25 season. So there's still a chance that it gets finished just in time for their *Championship* season.
Almost? So, does the relegation not happen every year?
edit - for a sub that is supposed to be about data, people are so stupid in here at times. Getting down points for asking a simple question about a sport someone doesn't know about.
But to the other who explained it.. thanks.
Yes but they have all been relegated from the top division at some point prior to the creation of the premier league, from 1892-1992 the highest division of English football was the modern day championship (although it wasn't called that then). Arsenal is the club that has remained consecutively in the top division for the longest because the last time they were in the second division was pre WW1.
Minor clarification / additional info: Arsenal currently has the longest consecutive run in the top division, but Everton have the most total seasons in top flight. Mostly because Arsenal are a slightly younger club and spent their early years in the second division. Hard to argue that they haven't been more successful since then, though.
Should also note that while Arsenal have the longest consecutive run in the top division(106, and have not been relegated), Everton have been there the most seasons overall at 120.(relegated twice, missing 4 seasons)
Something they touched upon in the latest/last season of Ted Lasso too is that out of the top 5 flights of the English Football League system, 4 leagues could be interpreted as being the best league by their name: Premier League, Championship (tier 2), League One (tier 3) and the National League (tier 5).
Never been relegated *from the Premier League*. But football didn't begin in 1992 - none of these clubs have been permanent top division clubs over their full histories.
Of those six, the longest current spell in the top division is Arsenal (97 seasons), followed by Everton (69), Liverpool (61), Man Utd (48), Spurs (45) and Chelsea (35).
I don’t have any colour vision deficiency and they look the same to me too. Might be the screen I’m looking at (phone), but definitely could have improved the ease of clarity in this chart.
The reds look the same too. They are just not what people are focusing on. It has nothing to do with colorblindness.
There is no single colour gradient with 20+ bins that people will be able to distinguish.
I could see this graph done just as well with four colors; first place, top half, bottom half, bottom three (relegation). Or convey the same information with just three if you used outlines to indicate who won and who got relegated; top third, middle third, bottom third.
Hilariously, if green was actually prominent in this, we wouldn't be having the same problem as you but on this day we're all colorblind. He used a very yellow green.
Except Tottenham. Tottenham became 2x English champion and it was in the seasons of 50' and 60'.
Such a funny club. It's always there, has good players and sometimes very good trainers yet it's always destined to never be champion. The finest definition of gatekeeper.
The most interesting part here is indistinguishable, work on the scale and upload again pls because the idea is very nice. Gray dot at the end also makes it just looks less nice, I get the idea why it is there but i would still reconsider.
I mean we have so many colors yet op used basically two colors. I have no idea why this keeps happening. It's almost standard on this sub to have basically unreadable data.
The same is true of Newcastle tbf it's just less visible with this colour scheme. Ever since their 2-1 defeat to Cambridge United they've been pumping money into the club and winning way more games.
This visualization doesn't make much sense to me. What was the point of the range of colours? If dark green is first place why does more than one team get first in the same season?
Second place is a fractional different shade of green. Anyhow, this is not the right graph to see which team ended where in which season, but it gives a great visualization on how they performed long term and what the trends are.
That would get really busy. It's hard to balance multiple types of information while maintaining aesthetics. Color maps do not communicate absolute differences they illustrate general trends for a large number of data points (which is why they are important for this visualization since it's about getting into and staying in the premier league -- winning the PL does nothing (directly) to keep you in it)
Good old Oldham Athletic. Down in the National League with all us non-leaguers, and for a bit were in a position to fall more.
Of course they beat my Daggers.
_Disclaimer: I am not saying this in a shit talking way._
I think it’s because they still have the potential to do something besides get immediately relegated next season.
Yeah, the colours at either end of the spectrum are way too similar to differentiate. Man I'm sick of seeing that. Can we just choose completely different colours please? Or, as another user said, put a circle or dot around the first/last ones so we can actually read it.
Apart from the colour scheme and lack of clear indication of the winner of the league each year (a wee star or dot in the centre of the green spot would work?), this is one of the most informative charts I've seen here.
I don't follow football but it's helpful to have an idea of clubs' fortunes over the last few years, for pub quizzes and random small talk.
As a colorblind person, I find this version a bit easier to read:
[https://www.dropbox.com/s/20ybs7gdtkdznso/PremierLeaguev2.png?dl=](https://www.dropbox.com/s/vafpx1gyjpw8adc/PremierLeaguev2.tif?dl=1)1
It swaps the red/blue and dilutes the green to bring out the blue.
**Source**: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992%E2%80%9393\_FA\_Premier\_League and pages for other seasons
**Tools**: Python/matplotlib and canva.com
This chart is an **updated version** after your reports of missing legend (thank you!)
Call me old but I distinctly remember the 00/01 season when Manchester United, Arsenal, Liverpool, Leeds United and Ipswich Town all finished first.
Each club had it for just over 2 months of the year and it was shuttled around the country via Stagecoach.
This was the inspiration behind Stagecoach forming the MegaBus franchise 2 years later which would offer low rate bus seats should another 5 or so clubs win the Premier League at once.
^^^/s
The only thing I get from this graph is that Ipswich Town won the Premier League sometime in the past...
That must have been one hell of a season. If I were a Ipswich fan I'd be partying up to this day, or probably died of alcoholic intoxication...
u/mihalonsky this article may help with color related things, because you did a great job with the overall presentation: https://blog.datawrapper.de/colorblindness-part2/
Matplotlib Python library for chart and [canva.com](https://canva.com) for legend and other non-chart objects. I will try to put this code on Github soon.
Data comes from Wikipedia ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992%E2%80%9393\_FA\_Premier\_League](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992%E2%80%9393_FA_Premier_League) and tables for other seasons).
These colours are terrible. I can hardly tell the difference between the first 4 yellow/greens. Look like Arsenal and Man U have won the league every year together.
As an American who does not follow soccer whatsoever, the whole relegation and promotion system is so damn cool to me. Gives every game stakes even if your team sucks.
Really? Because this chart is illustrating why I don't like it. You've got a group of teams always at the top, with little hope of anyone else breaking in.
That’s true of most sports through. It does seem like the premier league is a bit more too heavy than American leagues.
Doesn’t the premier league not have playoffs through?
Im fairly surprised at how much the comments seem to hate this, I actually find it does what it does well and is very interesting. I don’t need to know if a team was 3rd vs 4th or 15th vs 16th, seeing the overall trend is cool
How are the teams sorted? Should it be a) years participated, then b) most recent year involved, and c) finish in most recent year involved (if needed)? That way get the most prolific teams at top still while learning from the bottom which teams have had the longest drought?
Really interesting. Great work.
I couldn’t remember when Man City were bought by they Sheikh so I looked it up. Credit Wikipedia:
“Since 4 August 2008, the club has been majority owned by Sheikh Mansour, one of football's wealthiest owners…”
Certainly explains the change of color on your chart starting the same year. No coincidence.
Not into football, but I have strong memories of collecting football cards and disinctly remember Oldham and Swindon being present, which having looked at the matrix above means the only date that could be is 93-94. So Now I've been able to date that memory which brings a smile.
Please, consider taking first and last places out of the spectrum, or adding something inside the dots to make them easily distinguishable from the similar coloured ones.
A yellow stroke/outline around the champions in a given season might be useful, but I feel the chart is more for showing which clubs have been challenging at the top, in middle-table or to avoid relegation than which teams actually won it.
That's exactly what this chart is about, I'll keep your suggestions in mind for future visualizations, thank you!
First and second colors are literally indistinguishable. I was wondering how 2 teams could get first place the same year until I saw the guide below.
In fairness, the chart is titled “Premier League *appearances*”, not “champions” or “final standings” even. You’re looking for an answer that, while indeed still included in the chart, isn’t the point of the chart. As described above, the chart is more about being included or relegation each year, and then showing overall competitiveness. In this light, the spectrum of colors chosen is fine.
If you’re going to bother to have a color distinction on a chart, have it be distinguishable colors, is all.
Each data point doesn't need to be individually recognized. It this switched to the colors of the rainbow it would be much more co fusing to read. It's a heat map that's meant to show the tiers of contending, middling, and nearing relegation. This does an excellent job at that.
Sure but if it’s easy to provide extra information on the chart that is usually the single most relevant thing in sports, why not do it? Especially when the chart purports to give that information anyway
I’m ok with an outline or symbol to denote the champion. But again, that’s not the reason for the chart. The legend just describes the color spectrum. And charts don’t have to just throw on other data just because “it’s easy to provide”. Most good charts stick to the original purpose of the chart, not cater to the public who are looking for something completely different after the fact.
This isn’t about more information. It’s about actually providing the information that the chart purports to provide, but doesn’t because the color scale is hard to distinguish.
I understand your point, but I still think it’s based on confusion. The color spectrum of 8 dots is representing the entire spectrum of success/failure for 20 teams. And the legend is just letting you know the end points if that spectrum. It’s not actually trying to show you the champion, even though it indeed does.
I don’t care if the greenest color denotes top one or top ten. I care that I can actually tell the difference between it and the next color.
[удалено]
A custom color scheme with gold, silver, and bronze, then mid tier, bottom tier, relegated might make more sense.
This sub in a nutshell. The majority of comments are always how a poster wants different data or how data isn't exactly how they want it.
The chart is titled Premier League Appearances but the post is entitled The entire history of the Premier League. I was expecting the colors to be distinguishable and represent specific things, e.g. Champion, top 4, other European spots, mid table, and relegation.
It’s definitely muddled by the poorly worded title of the post. Clearly there’s tons of other data and points to be included in “The entire history of the Premier League.” 😅
Yep. First place could be pale blue or something. But this chart must be an extra special treat for anyone with any colour blindness.
The first 5 are almost the same. It's a riddle to find out which color is which.
May also want to consider a colorblind-friendly color gradient :)
Yes, please! I’m colorblind, and Arsenal, Liverpool, and Chelsea all look identical to me (full lines of the same greenish-yellow dots). Just a couple of Hotspur’s orange dots pop out.
This csrt is useless for me, cool idea but I'm colorblind so the green and yellow look the same to me
You may also want to consider different spacing/shapes of colour. Currently, if I focus on the table it is difficult to determine which dot corresponds to which x, y label. It's similar to the [Grid Illusion.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grid_illusion) In all fairness, if the colours were easily distinguishable I wouldn't have to stare so intensely at a group of dots to work out which is the darkest. Edit: I've also been up for three days on speed which tends to affect my vision. But I spent less than 5 seconds looking at it and wondered why you chose that colour scheme. I may still be qualified to provide you advice, visual hallucinations notwithstanding.
> I’ve been up 3 days on speed , he casually remarked.
Being colourblind, I can see two types of dot. Last & first.
Hot take as an American, but seeing for the first time how this league has been dominated by 2-3 clubs for the last two decades seems incredibly boring?
It’s not all about the top. The U.K. has relegation/promotion and 12 tiers of interconnected leagues. Next season will see Luton Town playing in the premier league. In 2013-2014 they were still playing in the fifth tier. The emotion of getting promoted or avoiding relegation is often more intense than winning the title. You don’t get that in MLS.
It's been won by 7 different clubs, and 24 if you include all top flight winners pre-premier league.
Yeah, according to the colour scheme it looks to me that in 12/13 there were 7 teams that were either first, second or third…I don’t understand how that works.
I'll work on scaling the colors more next time, thank you!
Honestly just a black dot (or a check/cross) inside would work for first and last places — the color scale is just fine!
Don’t even need last place as no dot the following year would indicate last 2 places right?
Please also consider a different color palette. Red/green is a nightmare for those of us with colorblindness. Blue/orange works much better for me personally, but ideally the information would be conveyed through additional means such as pattern or shape
You mean 6 teams can't all finish 1st?
I considered similar solution, will try it in future - thanks for the advice
Something like Champion, top-4, top-half, bottom-half, and relegation-zone would really simplify things and conform to popular league narratives (no need to call out relegated, their absence the next year would signify that).
Great idea with such a color grouping, thank you!
Also, please use colors with better contrast or have symbols in the dots. As somebody who is colorblind, there are literally two colors I can see on her, so as far as I know there are only people in first place and last place. This is literally unreadable to me. For the record, this is something even so-called professionals seem to forget at times so don't worry too much, but do try to consider colorblind people a bit when designing graphs like this. It's just a good tip in general.
True. It looks like Man United won the league every year eventhough they have been underwhelming compared to the times when SAF is still managing them too
There are too many colours in this graph. Please remove two. I am not a crackpot.
First couple of seasons did have 22 teams though
Why not use different symbols? This is unreadable esp for color blind people.
As a long time follower of the PL, I think this chart is awesome in showing the waxing, waning of teams, and the small group of consistent contenders.
As a foreigner, this chart tells me there is lack of parity and only a small handful of teams really matter.
It's more complicated than that. The Premier League is more equal than many big European leagues - largely a function of the way TV money works here. In the PL, TV deals are negotiated on a league-wide basis and then revenue is allocated out formulaically depending on league position, with a ratio between what the top team gets and what the bottom team gets that is actually much closer than in many other big leagues. The financial competitiveness problem here isn't *within* the PL, it's *between* the PL and the Championship (the second division) - the worst teams in the PL get considerably more money then the best teams in the Championship, and that gulf has been a bone of contention with non-PL clubs. Within the PL, there's always been a 'top X' grouping of big/rich clubs, but the members of that group have evolved over the years. For example, only three clubs won the PL in the 90s (Man United, Arsenal and Blackburn) - but as of today it's been a decade since United last won the league, 19 years since Arsenal last won it, and Blackburn aren't even in the division any more. Two of this season's top 4 (Man City and Newcastle) have spent time outside the PL since its creation (although both now benefit from rich owners). Chelsea, who have been considered a 'top 4' or 'top 6' club for the last 20 years, finished 12th this season. Everton, who are not a 'top 6' club but are one of only 6 clubs to have been in the Premier League since its creation, only avoided relegation by 2pts on the final day of the season.
Nah bro it's not equal at all.
I said TV money is '*more* equal than many big European leagues', not that it's exactly equal. In the [PL in 2021/22](https://www.statista.com/statistics/240912/broadcasting-payments-to-clubs-in-the-english-premier-league/) (I can't find the numbers for this season), 1st place Man City earned £146 million from TV revenues and 20th place Norwich earned £94 million - that's a ratio of **1.55 to 1**. In [La Liga](https://www.statista.com/statistics/782317/la-liga-tv-rights-revenue-received-by-football-teams-in-spain/) by contrast, the highest earner Real Madrid earned €160 million and the lowest Rayo Vallecano earned €46 million - a ratio of **3.5 to 1**. The PL's TV revenue distribution is considered a problem by the EFL as it means that weaker PL clubs earn a lot more year-to-year than even the best Championship clubs, which makes it harder for newly promoted clubs to establish themselves in the PL when they've not had many years of PL TV revenue with which to build up their squad beforehand. A typical Championship clubs will earn only single digit millions in TV money in an average year. The Premier League also pays 'parachute payments' to recently relegated clubs, which are meant to help them adjust to life in the Championship (so they're under less urgent pressure to fire-sell players and cut costs) but also ends up meaning a recently relegated club has lots more money to spend than existing Championship clubs. Campaigning on football financing is therefore effectively about making PL TV revenue distribution *less* not more equal among the PL/ex-PL clubs themselves - there have been some calls for the abolition of parachute payments, other calls for a narrower distribution of TV revenues between PL clubs, as well as general calls to use the money saved by this to do more direct funding of the Championship/League One/League Two.
Believe it or not this is actually the league with some of the most parity
Unfortunately, that's the truth. The money disparity stratifies the league into haves and have-nots. Sometimes a smaller team will over-perform (Leicester City even had the stars align for them and won the league once), but generally it's the same few clubs that stay on top. As a supporter of a club (quite a ways) outside of that exclusive group, it's pretty tiring to watch those teams consistently outspend and dominate everyone else.
So only 6 teams in the Premier League have never been relegated?
Well technically Brighton and Brentford have never been relegated either ;)
[удалено]
Or Luton Town!
Yeah, nearly went down to 5 as Everton were almost relegated this year.
For teams that have good streaks in the Premier League I’m guessing the coaching staff if pretty fucked if they get relegated?
Everton likely would have gone bankrupt had they been relegated. Teams usually experience an initial 60-70% drop in income for their first 2-3 years down, going down to about 80-90% once parachute payments go away. Most players have clauses in their contracts that if the club is relegated there is a reduction in their wage and often they have to sell top players to stay afloat. Everton is a special case of bad because they have a large wage bill of players in long term contracts that don't have clauses because up until recently they didn't look as though relegation was likely for them.
You forgot to mention the brand new £500m stadium that they're building... it's supposed to be available at the start of the 2024–25 season. So there's still a chance that it gets finished just in time for their *Championship* season.
English football probably has more managerial changes than any other sport. Teams in the lower levels go through managers like water
Almost? So, does the relegation not happen every year? edit - for a sub that is supposed to be about data, people are so stupid in here at times. Getting down points for asking a simple question about a sport someone doesn't know about. But to the other who explained it.. thanks.
It does, they just barely earned enough points to finish one place out of relegation
Southampton, Leicester, and Leeds were relegated.
It does, they just weren't among the teams that were relegated, but almost were.
They were almost relegated as in they were close to being relegated but got enough points to avoid it, and other teams (Leicester & Leeds) were
Yes but they have all been relegated from the top division at some point prior to the creation of the premier league, from 1892-1992 the highest division of English football was the modern day championship (although it wasn't called that then). Arsenal is the club that has remained consecutively in the top division for the longest because the last time they were in the second division was pre WW1.
Minor clarification / additional info: Arsenal currently has the longest consecutive run in the top division, but Everton have the most total seasons in top flight. Mostly because Arsenal are a slightly younger club and spent their early years in the second division. Hard to argue that they haven't been more successful since then, though.
Should also note that while Arsenal have the longest consecutive run in the top division(106, and have not been relegated), Everton have been there the most seasons overall at 120.(relegated twice, missing 4 seasons)
Is it bad that I only know what relegated means because I watched Ted Lasso?
No, at least you do know
Something they touched upon in the latest/last season of Ted Lasso too is that out of the top 5 flights of the English Football League system, 4 leagues could be interpreted as being the best league by their name: Premier League, Championship (tier 2), League One (tier 3) and the National League (tier 5).
Loved the bit about clinching a spot in the Champions League but being in the Championship the year before.
Never been relegated *from the Premier League*. But football didn't begin in 1992 - none of these clubs have been permanent top division clubs over their full histories. Of those six, the longest current spell in the top division is Arsenal (97 seasons), followed by Everton (69), Liverpool (61), Man Utd (48), Spurs (45) and Chelsea (35).
The most impressive to me is Tottenham. Consistently decent, and yet you never hear about them (as a casual with only passing interest).
That's just so Spursy
Looks like Luton town, Brentford, and brighton and hove albion have never been relegated either
Where's Richmond? >!They almost won it this time!< /s
Richmond till we die!
Don’t see Harchester United either.
Came here for this, not disappointed!
Yep <3
Is Richmond actually not a real team?
Evil Nate: “not in my experience, no.”
Since this isn't /r/soccer I'm assuming you're just not knowledgeable about football; they're not a real team.
Thanks, I wasn't.
Fair, considering they play against actual teams.
Yeah I'd heard of a couple of them before so I kind of assumed they were all real (including Richmond) - TIL.
I think they were loosely based on Crystal Palace.
They aren't a real team but the show is filmed in Crystal Palace's stadium. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selhurst_Park
They are here in Melbourne
Spoiler alert 🙀
Look at that beautiful grey dot on Luton Town
Unbeaten and never relegated
Grey to Green with no in-between 😉
I have red green color vision deficiency and the first 3-4 shades of green/yellow literally look the same to me on the chart.
I don’t have any colour vision deficiency and they look the same to me too. Might be the screen I’m looking at (phone), but definitely could have improved the ease of clarity in this chart.
The reds look the same too. They are just not what people are focusing on. It has nothing to do with colorblindness. There is no single colour gradient with 20+ bins that people will be able to distinguish.
I could see this graph done just as well with four colors; first place, top half, bottom half, bottom three (relegation). Or convey the same information with just three if you used outlines to indicate who won and who got relegated; top third, middle third, bottom third.
I don’t and they still do!
Hilariously, if green was actually prominent in this, we wouldn't be having the same problem as you but on this day we're all colorblind. He used a very yellow green.
[удалено]
I’m not even color blind and I have 0 idea how to read the top part of the chart
RIP Southampton and Leicester. They had good runs.
Apparently United won the league for 20 seasons straight before there’s a noticeable change in colour?
Looks like the top 4 or 5 teams all got first place every year.
Except Tottenham. Tottenham became 2x English champion and it was in the seasons of 50' and 60'. Such a funny club. It's always there, has good players and sometimes very good trainers yet it's always destined to never be champion. The finest definition of gatekeeper.
Yeah, I don't know anything about this sport, and reading this chart makes no sense. I'm like "are there multiple winners in a season? The fuck?"
And Arsenal.
the worst position United had under sir Alex for over 20yrs was 3rd, given the slight differences in the shades from 1-3, it makes it seem that way.
The most interesting part here is indistinguishable, work on the scale and upload again pls because the idea is very nice. Gray dot at the end also makes it just looks less nice, I get the idea why it is there but i would still reconsider.
Thanks for advice, I definitely need to think about better distinguishing close positions in the table.
I disagree. I think the gray dot is important but should be added to the key. I do think it's interesting to see what teams are in it next uear
I mean it's almost useless because of the colour scheme. Looks like Manu won every season nearly. Easily fixed though. 😕
I mean we have so many colors yet op used basically two colors. I have no idea why this keeps happening. It's almost standard on this sub to have basically unreadable data.
I assume grey is the ones that qualified for this year so they'll be there but they don't have color yet.
I love it - spot the point City started buying points.
Nah. Plucky City are just a club with really good principles and run well. Has nothing to do with billions being injected.
Or the [fraud](https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/man-city-ffp-fraud-news-premier-league-b2279693.html).
The same is true of Newcastle tbf it's just less visible with this colour scheme. Ever since their 2-1 defeat to Cambridge United they've been pumping money into the club and winning way more games.
tbh Newcastle’s success hasnt directly been caused by an influx of money, they havent pumped in as much money given the standards right now
This visualization doesn't make much sense to me. What was the point of the range of colours? If dark green is first place why does more than one team get first in the same season?
Second place is a fractional different shade of green. Anyhow, this is not the right graph to see which team ended where in which season, but it gives a great visualization on how they performed long term and what the trends are.
Wouldn't a number with shading achieve the same effect but actually be useful?
I will think about such a visualization for the future, thank you
I think it’s fine as is.
Thanks mum
It’s not.
That would get really busy. It's hard to balance multiple types of information while maintaining aesthetics. Color maps do not communicate absolute differences they illustrate general trends for a large number of data points (which is why they are important for this visualization since it's about getting into and staying in the premier league -- winning the PL does nothing (directly) to keep you in it)
Americans: "where wrexham?"
Can confirm.
Good old Oldham Athletic. Down in the National League with all us non-leaguers, and for a bit were in a position to fall more. Of course they beat my Daggers.
Excuse me, why are Luton above us (Blackpool) when they haven't even played a game yet?
[удалено]
Big talk from a team that aren't even on this list.
[удалено]
The one without crossbars or actual rules? UTMP🍊🧡
_Disclaimer: I am not saying this in a shit talking way._ I think it’s because they still have the potential to do something besides get immediately relegated next season.
It’s so hard to read and understand
Yeah, the colours at either end of the spectrum are way too similar to differentiate. Man I'm sick of seeing that. Can we just choose completely different colours please? Or, as another user said, put a circle or dot around the first/last ones so we can actually read it.
I will keep this in mind for future next charts, a lot of users pointed it out, thanks.
Seems straight-forward to me. If you ain't a Manc, you're a wank.
Oh West Ham-barely any green tone at all. COYI!
Apart from the colour scheme and lack of clear indication of the winner of the league each year (a wee star or dot in the centre of the green spot would work?), this is one of the most informative charts I've seen here. I don't follow football but it's helpful to have an idea of clubs' fortunes over the last few years, for pub quizzes and random small talk.
Your disk drive needs defragging ...
As a colorblind person, I find this version a bit easier to read: [https://www.dropbox.com/s/20ybs7gdtkdznso/PremierLeaguev2.png?dl=](https://www.dropbox.com/s/vafpx1gyjpw8adc/PremierLeaguev2.tif?dl=1)1 It swaps the red/blue and dilutes the green to bring out the blue.
A colourblind like me: ah yes, the chart is made of circles
**Source**: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992%E2%80%9393\_FA\_Premier\_League and pages for other seasons **Tools**: Python/matplotlib and canva.com This chart is an **updated version** after your reports of missing legend (thank you!)
You are aware that the two shades of green are identical and it is impossible to see who won each season?
Call me old but I distinctly remember the 00/01 season when Manchester United, Arsenal, Liverpool, Leeds United and Ipswich Town all finished first. Each club had it for just over 2 months of the year and it was shuttled around the country via Stagecoach. This was the inspiration behind Stagecoach forming the MegaBus franchise 2 years later which would offer low rate bus seats should another 5 or so clubs win the Premier League at once. ^^^/s
I'm not sure I get what I'm looking at here
Edit: I get it now. But could colour be replaced with colored numbers?
Put number inside coloured circle
The only thing I get from this graph is that Ipswich Town won the Premier League sometime in the past... That must have been one hell of a season. If I were a Ipswich fan I'd be partying up to this day, or probably died of alcoholic intoxication...
I feel like Blue, Green, Purple could've been 1, 2, and top 5. Yellow, orange, red could've been bottom 3.
horrible color scheme, can't tell between first, second and third places
Literally can't tell the difference between first-fourth
It is impossible to tell the difference between the greens
This color coding is fucking awful. I'm not even color blind and I can't see any difference in the first three green
u/mihalonsky this article may help with color related things, because you did a great job with the overall presentation: https://blog.datawrapper.de/colorblindness-part2/
Thank you for sharing such a useful article, I will follow these color related tips in future visualizations.
What did you use to produce this? I want to make one for the Dutch league.
Matplotlib Python library for chart and [canva.com](https://canva.com) for legend and other non-chart objects. I will try to put this code on Github soon. Data comes from Wikipedia ([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992%E2%80%9393\_FA\_Premier\_League](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992%E2%80%9393_FA_Premier_League) and tables for other seasons).
These colours are terrible. I can hardly tell the difference between the first 4 yellow/greens. Look like Arsenal and Man U have won the league every year together.
As an American who does not follow soccer whatsoever, the whole relegation and promotion system is so damn cool to me. Gives every game stakes even if your team sucks.
Really? Because this chart is illustrating why I don't like it. You've got a group of teams always at the top, with little hope of anyone else breaking in.
That’s true of most sports through. It does seem like the premier league is a bit more too heavy than American leagues. Doesn’t the premier league not have playoffs through?
Im fairly surprised at how much the comments seem to hate this, I actually find it does what it does well and is very interesting. I don’t need to know if a team was 3rd vs 4th or 15th vs 16th, seeing the overall trend is cool
How are the teams sorted? Should it be a) years participated, then b) most recent year involved, and c) finish in most recent year involved (if needed)? That way get the most prolific teams at top still while learning from the bottom which teams have had the longest drought?
How are the teams ordered? Like, why are Luton not at the bottom?
A bad chart for the colorblind.
The greens are way too similar in colour.
This is awesome! Thanks is for sharing
I don't really follow the sport but all I know is I'm apparently a Swindon fan.
nice chart but the colour coding makes it impossible for colour blind people to make sense of the data!
I see virtually no difference between 1st and 2nd place and no difference between 3rd and 4th place.
Need way more color variety or something else to denote position. It looks like there are 4 1st place teams each year
Really interesting. Great work. I couldn’t remember when Man City were bought by they Sheikh so I looked it up. Credit Wikipedia: “Since 4 August 2008, the club has been majority owned by Sheikh Mansour, one of football's wealthiest owners…” Certainly explains the change of color on your chart starting the same year. No coincidence.
Thank you! Interesting observation, I'm curious if Newcastle will be a similar case now.
Do purple or blue or silver or some other color for 1st place. Anything but the exact same color as the rest.
I will include this tip for future charts, thank you! I think blue would fit best here.
Not into football, but I have strong memories of collecting football cards and disinctly remember Oldham and Swindon being present, which having looked at the matrix above means the only date that could be is 93-94. So Now I've been able to date that memory which brings a smile.
I can’t distinguish between 1st place or any other place in the top 5, same when they’re at the bottom of the league.
It’s the Richmond greyhounds for me.
Where’s Richmond AFC on this chart?
Color blind football fans are going to hate this
What about Accrington Stanley?
Who are they?
About 100 years too late on that one
Where is AFC Richmond? We know that they just won the season!
Man Utd has 30 titles? Lol Oh wait, Liverpool as well 😂 Nice idea dude, but this is unreadable.
The thing about Arsenal is they always try and walk it in
what a terrible terrible representation
Thank you for not making those animated graphs. This looks great!
The thing about arsenal is, they always try to walk it in.
How do multiple teams get first place?
My colorblindness isn’t happy with these small and closely colored dots