Kaizero

Don't understand this tbh, I never watch the CL because it's boring as fuck. The EL and Conference League always entertain. That said, I'd much prefer NUFC in the CL, of course It'd be different if we were in it, but all matches not involving us would be just as boring as they always have been.

Petition to change the thread title to “Hatem Ben Arfa (Now a World Class Padel Player)” guy won 70 tournaments last year and is ranked as one of the best pro Padel players in the world

That model is the gift that keeps on giving

Also, given it's football related there might be better luck finding competitors by airing this in the football section

Could perhaps even do it as a semi-fundraiser for the forum; £10 buy-in, £7.50 go to the winner takes all pot and £2.50 go to the running of the forum.

In. Should run one for money and one for honor at the same time IMO. Meaning the ones that want to waste their money can do so and the ones that are clever and don't waste money can do so as well, yet both can compete together at the same time. The £ winner is the last man standing of the ones that put £ on, but the "true" victor is the last man standing even if they didn't put any money on.

Last bit was my confusion, the CL/EL/CFL winners no longer take a spot from their respective leagues if the winners don't re-qualify through them

How?

I'll never understand anyone not swapping Same goes for anyone not breaking out of the Sunken Cost Fallacy once they've been made aware they're in one.

How good are your memories, people?! I can barely remember yesterday

The odds of winning these nine fixtures were 1 in 136 before the first one, I'd not have put money on those odds. The odds of us winning the next four fixtures are 1 in 7.40, I'd put money on those odds. tl;dr we won't win nine in a row because I'll now have money on us winning the next four

#trustthefinns

That's not my perception of events, as I understand it he's arguing for it being less likely that we win our next four fixtures because we've won five in a row. Not that the concept of winning nine in a row is an unlikely feat in general, which is something I agree with.

Bookies has us winning the next four with a probability of 1 in 7.40 Us winning the four matches before those were given a probability of 1 in 14.69 Us winning the past five was 1 in 18.37 Tell me how "winning nine in a row is an unlikely feat" means it's less likely we win our next four fixtures when all matches start 0-0?

It just doesn't, though You're arguing on behalf of a logical fallacy

The argument "9 wins in a row is unlikely" is only applicable to a situation before any of said 9 matches have been played. Once the first of nine have been played, that standard of probability "measurement" is void.

But it's not less likely because a 9 game win streak is an unlikely feat to pull off. That 9 game streak has nothing to do with how likely/unlikely it is for us to win the next four fixtures, it has no impact on anything in the world as it's an artificial measure we've made up and applied to the current fixture list. The next four matches exist completely outside of any measurable force applied to them by "9 wins in a row is unlikely".

It's all about the phrasing I reckon. "A club winning 9 in a row is a very rare achievement and therefore us managing to do that isn't very probable" vs "Winning the next four is unlikely because we've already won five in a row"

Genuine question, but isn't there a form of inherent dislike of England in general from people having grown up in Northumberland and adjacent areas? As in "England = London/The South = England not caring about the North East"? Might just be me having misunderstood the political climate of England the time I've semi-followed it, but just never been amazed when North Eastern Englishmen say they don't support the national team

Why on earth would our five previous matches have any impact on how well we'll do in our next four?

It's not "none up front", man Howe wanted to shore down things defensively and not let Spurs back in the game, Willock provides counter-attacking abilities whilst at the same time being used to battling in midfield.

When you're shoring up a win away from home, it's not very common tactically to put on a striker. I think the reasoning for that is the fact that it'd increase the probability of you conceding instead of seeing out the match to secure three points from a winning position. So, you have the following two scenarios: 1: Sub on a striker and increase the likelihood of conceding a goal in the final minutes of a match you are winning. 2: Sub on a midfielder to tighten things up defensively, whilst still being a player that can be very useful in the event of a breakaway opportunity for the team to score a third goal. One of the scenarios is way more likely than the other to end in disaster. I'll leave it there.