Let me break it down.
We’ve got 12 games left. If both sides simply carry on at their current points-per-game (0.88ppg versus 1ppg) over last 12 games onto the next 12, we would finish with around 39-40 points and West Ham would be on 36.
And that already assumes we don’t improve at all while West Ham, carry on in the form they’re in. Football rarely follows neat paper predictions looking at specific games. If our fixtures aren’t guaranteed, neither are theirs. You can’t hand one side assumed wins and deny the same logic to the other.
The real measure here is PPG, not raw win totals. For West Ham to genuinely overhaul us, they’d need roughly a 40% jump in performance, while we simultaneously stay awful with zero improvement. That’s the scenario you’re relying on.
As for the manager point, Tudor has a clear pattern. He gets quick results in the short term, even if it doesn’t always sustain over longer periods. But that’s irrelevant to the brief. He hasn’t been brought in for a three-year rebuild, he is here just to deliver a lift across the next 12 matches. Replicate that short-term impact and the job’s basically done. And even if the bounce is only slight rather than dramatic, a small uptick from our current level is likely enough to keep us safe anyway.
Yes, the season’s been poor. Nobody sensible is denying that. But the leap from “bad season”to “they’re definitely catching us” doesn’t come from the maths. It only works if West Ham improve sharply and we don’t improve at all, and that avoids also the other teams in the mix like Forest, Leeds, Palace and Brighton.
So instead of listing past results like they predict the future, look at the trajectory and the PPG. Once you do, the doom narrative looks a lot less convincing.