Kid Icarus

Looks simple but not many players try that pass by KDB I reckon

I like that he said it's likely to be a tactical game. That says to me we're not going to give it our usual 10 nowt that would play into Brighton's hands.

"We're not being hunted, it's us against ourselves" ?

I look forward to receiving it in October

Murphy being out is as big a blow imo (cannot believe I'm typing that out, but here we are ) he was our main out ball last year against them. He kept burning Cucurella for pace on the break.

I'll buy them off you if you decide on the CL final like.

I'm doing a lot of hoping, but I also hope Ashworth gives us a bit of insight as well

Never expected them to make the play offs when they were promoted so they've done better than I thought like. I'm of the Keegan mindset of wishing we all paid them no mind, so quite happy they haven't come up and hopefully look forward to our B team smashing them in the cup some day.

I know it's crunch time, but for me I think this is a bit of a litmus test at a new level for Howe at Newcastle. Our main style of playing plays right into Brighton's hands and it's probably better if we sit back and hit them on the break (like we did at home last season) We have a much more ingrained pressing style now though, so I hope we're able to do it. Howe has almost never been naive imo, but Spurs away last season sticks in my mind as suicidal. Spurs were really good at that time, at letting teams press them, then fucking them up on the break, even beating Man City in that way. So when we went and did the same thing Man City did and got smashed 5-1, it was truly bizarre. It's been a while since we've sat back and played on the break, the best example of it working probably being Man City at home, so we know Howe and we have it in our locker, and Howe's record against Brighton is very good (played 18, won 10, drawn 5, lost 3) Our crowd will also be urging us forward, so I also hope we have some patience and understand that possession or pressing isn't the be-all-and-end-all.

The Milan Inter match is so boring that I've opted to watch Sunderland ffs

Literally happens every week doesn't it? Followed by them ending up winning

Yet another unbelievable red flag where Liverpool are concerned

Update on this: The time traveller comes back to you at the start of the season and they tell you: - It's May, we're 3rd and have been for most of the season. We're ahead of Man United on goal difference and 1 point ahead of Liverpool with a game in hand. There are 3 games left, we need 2 wins to guarantee Champions League football - we've only lost 5 times in the league, a club record. - We're on 66 points. Our rolling 38 game total is 72, our second highest ever total in a 38 game season. - We're -1 on our best ever goal difference - We've been to a cup final - This has all been done with a team and squad that predominantly features Bruce-era misfits who've been rejuvenated under Eddie Howe - Sean Longstaff is almost universally viewed as a player pivotal to the team's success, but at times or throughout the season this has also applied to Miggy Almiron, Joe Willock, Fabian Schär, and Jacob Murphy I can't quite step back and enjoy the ride during high pressure times like this, but whatever happens the majority of this season has been borderline fan fiction and I've enjoyed it so much. It's been an unforgettable season.

I'd actually really love to get a replica of the barcode kit with the star on it like. I have the sponsorless cheese and onion square one from 90-91 and absolutely love it like.

Agree tbh, both 95-96 kits, 96-97 away, 98-99 away, 99-00 home are all amazing and then after that they were all pretty crap imo.

Quick show of hands, what's the best home kit we've had post-adidas? Personally I think 17-18. The first Fun88 one that I associate with Mikel Merino. Awful sponsor, but an absolutely lush (if a bit too tight) kit imo. The quintessential Newcastle kit imo, perfect amount of black and white and the return of the red numbers.

Anyone just having constant heart palpitations?

5:30 in February so aye probably

No, that's obviously a strawman. Saying that a probability is flawed or really exaggerated isn't at all saying it's impossible.

Sorry, so you're now trying to say that, actually, the people you've been calling thick in all of this - for saying that these probability models are flawed - it's them calling the bookies and models thick? Nice try, but obviously no. No idea why you keep bringing up bookies odds either like. As I say, I don't really gamble, especially at the moment, and Ponsaelius has been and has made a fortune, so what's your point? Even then, bookies odds also take non-probability based factors into account. This isn't anyone thinking they know better than the rest of the world, it's pointing out that the rest of the world (at least within statistics and data analysis) already knows about the limitations and disadvantages of the multiplication rule - none of this is controversial.

I thought I had been pretty clear tbh, but obviously not. So just to clarify, yes, I understand probability and the multiplication rule, I and others are saying that using that is flawed for the reasons I've gone through. This isn’t anything really controversial, they’re known, obvious limitations. If you were just explaining the basics of probability to me because, as you've made pretty clear, you think we're all thick, fair enough, but you've clearly missed the point being made while you were fixating on having such a low opinion of everyone. Probability being subjective is an obvious disadvantage for a start, but the multiplication rule is also only really useful for predicting simple outcomes based on known probabilities and values. It’s not really useful for predicting things like winning runs or finishing positions in football because of the contextual factors that have been mentioned time and again. You can’t just reduce it to a calculation based on known values because not only do we not know and the probabilities they're based on aren't reliable, but you also need to take into account a wide range of factors like each team’s history, form, fixtures, injuries, luck, psychology etc. Yes, it's partly a case of looking at those probability tables and making a judgement call based on experience of previous situations in the Premier League and with certain teams in particular, but all of the factors that have been listed numerous times do matter as part of complex statistical models too. If they didn’t matter, statistics and data analytics wouldn’t exist as an industry. Liverpool have had 9 game winning sequences 14 times in the last 3 seasons and have a wealth of experience in these situations. That along with other factors demonstrably matter. Bear in mind though, what’s being overlooked here is that Liverpool reaching the CL wasn’t even dependent upon them winning 9 games in a row, that was just something that some people thought had a good chance of happening. The fundamental problem raised about these probability tables like FiveThirtyEight’s weren’t because a 12% chance of Liverpool winning 9 games was ridiculous, it’s that a 12% chance of them making the Champions League was ridiculous and a 95% chance of us making the CL was ridiculous. Maybe you were just using the multiplication rule as a basic way of explaining and I’m sure FiveThirtyEight and others adjust or factor these variables in to their models, but the point is that the outcome probabilities looked so obviously wrong that it suggests they haven't been factored in enough or at all. A 95% and 12% chance of Newcastle and Liverpool making the CL was even on the surface and with 'football is chaos' in mind, then and now, clearly flawed in a fundamental way.

There are a couple of questions waiting for you in the kit thread mate

I think you're mistaking a rejection of your premise -at the time and now - for a basic misunderstanding of probability tbh. This Liverpool team has won 9 games in a row countless times in the last few seasons, they've been in these high pressure clutch situations loads, did this 2 years ago, have had over 90+ points a few times, winning titles and trophies. Then there's the favourable fixtures and players returning from injury. The idea all of that and other factors can be reduced to a 5-10% probability or similar solely because of their poorer form earlier this season is your or whoever else's call to make, but telling people that have pretty clearly explained why they think it's a very obviously bad call that it's just that they don't understand basic probability, as if the figures are indisputable, or that it's illogical and based on fear is a bit nauseating like.

Can only speak for myself but there's no fucking way I'd be saying I told you so with 2 games left for Liverpool to play, especially when my overriding belief is that football is chaos.