BarberSaint

Very thin skin and quick and frequent and blunt criticism. Wonder how that'll go. 3 games is what he has before they turn? Their forums already show they don't like pass it around at the back and do nothing football and guess what ...

Statistically, if you're talking real statistics as a subset of mathematics, not any old crap that is put under the label of "Statistics, if I use the word it makes me look clever", you have to account for variables, variance, ensure that your statistical sampling methods and methodology are valid and unbiased and relevant. As Haaland =/= Long just as Haaland =/= Yoshida =/= Ramsdale and bar the first two they are sufficiently different to argue that you are not comparing bananas but cars and penguins then you've not really put yourself in a position to prove anything meaningful other than how you've decided to measure what you've decided to measure and how you've chosen to present it shows you're an idiot. You could state that you've measured a number of footballers, ignoring specialism which in this sample is based very much on natural aptitude, and can see which one is better and to what degree in what way but you can't say that the chance presented taking into account (how many variables, in which way are they measured, how are they weighted, what do you do when you have differing variables and so you can't measure exactly like for like, etc) the variables has a weight of 'x' which is what they're trying to show. The methodology is far too simplistic and the reality far too complicated e.g. one factor might be that SL was pissed off because someone farted in the dressing room, this affected his mental state somewhat and so he swung his foot too quickly at a ball he would have swung his foot at quickly had it been Tuesday. Mental state is a very big factor in sport and that can change throughout a game and directly affects performance. So either you measure to the nth degree or you just state in very general terms 'that was a good chance and anyone but Che Evans would have buried that open goal'. As a matter of interest, how many of the sample sizes of exactly that chance do the 'statisticians' have and how many of them have a forward managing to get their hand in the way of their head? You show me how it's measured and accounted for and at the precise moment that the chance presented itself and how that is replicable in order to then be able to be reproduced and then counted and in proper statistical terms (not counting, which a lot of people seem to think is statistics) made of relevance. You could do that to an extent with one person as they're the constant and you remove a lot of the variation but if you do it one day and it's windier than the last when you took your previous sample unless you account for the wind when taking into account accuracy of heading from crosses you've not measured the same thing. Not ignoring that the sun got in their eyes, or ..., or ...

Apart from the fact that there are too many variables to take into account and that ultimately they have one variable they can't really do anything with. The same chance presented to Shane Long 100 times in the same way wouldn't give the same outcomes as if it was given to Haaland, all other factors somehow being recognised and controlled so that all you would measure would be the taking of the chance. When actually, what you're doing is measuring the footballer so they haven't even measured the right thing. It has no validity, is subjective at best and has no more merit than Lord D saying 'He has crisp packet wrists'. Plainly he doesn't - they're cheese strings.

So there'll only be one club in Sheffield soon, then.

Isn't that that lot down the road?

Goal difference of minus 250?

Are you trying to be clever? Taking a quote doesn't mean anything, but here's what he said after his team's play-off win: “We’ve given it to a club that was going backwards and we had to arrest that before we could take it forward. “It’s not just the results that have got us to the Championship, it’s the way we’ve done it. How we built and galvanised the football club and got everyone back to believing that Charlton can be a great club again. Because it is a great club with great people throughout. ... “Great club. I came here wanting to build something. I took a gamble. I dropped two divisions, my last job was in the Premier League. “But I knew I could build something. This is the first step. Now, we kick on. “It’s outstanding. We put the work in. The staff put the work in. Players buy into gameplans and sacrifice everything. “Families, everyone makes sacrifices; this is the reward.”

From which idiot? He's just got promoted and vindicated himself. Unless he gets the boot, he'll be at Charlton.

Watched the game. No. That's for Quarshie, btw (edit).

You have no idea about Spors. So that's a stupid assumption. Seems pointless to me to speculate. Wait and see what happens on the pitch.

Except we know he means it like he does and not how you do, so it's a very valid stick. I really do think he's made for Leicester. If he takes them up he's a miracle worker. If he doesn't, he was hamstrung by circumstances and they were doomed to failure. Even with a depleted squad ( and JV ) they'll do well.

Unlike Martin, I see no snake oil on him. He is beardless, appears to not vape and does look (as someone said elsewhere) like Tintin.

I think Leicester should look at it this way: Points deduction, fine, transfer embargo - no hope of going up, possibly down; who's the most deserving 'manager' you can think of to oversee that?

Where's the story of where he learned to tackle?

Gotta love a bone of Small. Which bone, I don't know, but I don't think it makes any difference either.

His decision-making is non-existent. As in, he doesn't know what to do with it.

YAY. (Because it's not with us). But congratulations to him, too.

I'm sure you know a lot of Southampton fans blame him for injuring Van Dijk which then equates to us having a poorer defence in the League Cup/whatever it was called that year and losing to Manchester Utd when we think we otherwise would have won. So he's definitely persona non grata in this neck of the woods. A few other places too: who likes a striker who scores goals against your team often?

I love people who say in the face of a myriad of articles and a fuckton of evidence that RM will never change that they'd be interested to see how he'd change. What's life like under Everest?

He's a West Ham fan which is why he'd like to manage them one day.

Actually. If you listen to his interviews, in one of them he had a difficult situation. The manager had left. He was put in place and had to get the team going again or they were relegated. They stayed up. His approach was to be pragmatic and work with what he had. It is out there, that information.

What's our record this season?

Expect that's a few more euros for Valenciennes then. Was nice to see Welington giving Ashley Young some gip. Was good to see Stewart get in front of his man and not get his header on target. He might be ok in the league below but I can't see him being a top level striker. Robinson looked to have a little about him. Liked Archer's defending and even a bit of something when he's given space (again, in a competitive PL game, I don't think he'll cut it. Looking forward to breaking more records in our last home game and the (I really, really hope) mass clear out. I'd say of the dross but that's rather a large proportion of what we've got. Let's hope Vardy gets his 200th goal and that's all that's talked about this season, while we go under the radar.

So, in other words - he's shit. Yep, I agree.

I can't run. Maybe I should ask for a trial?