Jump to content

Redslo Southampton FC blog

Redslo

By Redslo
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
Redslo

Redslo

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I just posted "Greg Dyke and His Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Ideas (Part Four)." Warning--it is kind of long.

Dangermouth

Dangermouth

Posted
Posted

Good read about the Greg Dyke fantasy: let's hope he gets a job elsewhere as soon as.

 

On an aside, it's fascinating to see how quickly (and well) you've anglicised yourself Mr Redslo.

 

I assume it's now so natural others haven't noticed.

Redslo

Redslo

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Good read about the Greg Dyke fantasy: let's hope he gets a job elsewhere as soon as.

 

On an aside, it's fascinating to see how quickly (and well) you've anglicised yourself Mr Redslo.

 

I assume it's now so natural others haven't noticed.

 

I no longer type soccer by mistake. I sometimes confuse my American friends when I refer to football. I try to remember use club to refer to the club as a whole and team to refer to the people selected to play on a give day. I am not entirely sure that is a thing, but it seems to be. I do not fully understand when a group of people are singular or plural ,however.

 

Also, thank you.

Coxford_lou

Coxford_lou

Posted
Posted
I no longer type soccer by mistake. I sometimes confuse my American friends when I refer to football. I try to remember use club to refer to the club as a whole and team to refer to the people selected to play on a give day.

 

I am not entirely sure that is a thing, but it seems to be. I do not fully understand when a group of people are singular or plural ,however.

 

Also, thank you.

 

Good observation. That would make sense, though I think team could be used wider than just the specific team selected on the day.

 

But I suspect none of us are sure when singular or plural either ;)

Graffito

Graffito

Posted
Posted
Good observation. That would make sense, though I think team could be used wider than just the specific team selected on the day.

 

But I suspect none of us are sure when singular or plural either ;)

 

Well illustrated. It feels right to say "none are" because its common usage from the BBC down but as "none" is an abbreviation of not one, its singular and should be "none is". Likewise with team and club. Routinely we refer to them in the plural. Redslo probably has it right in making them singular. Sorry. Yawn. Roll on Saturday.

Coxford_lou

Coxford_lou

Posted
Posted
[/b]

Well illustrated. It feels right to say "none are" because its common usage from the BBC down but as "none" is an abbreviation of not one, its singular and should be "none is". Likewise with team and club. Routinely we refer to them in the plural. Redslo probably has it right in making them singular. Sorry. Yawn. Roll on Saturday.

 

Interesting. So are you saying I should have said: none of us is sure...?

 

If so, first time that's been explained in that way to me.

Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
[/b]

Well illustrated. It feels right to say "none are" because its common usage from the BBC down but as "none" is an abbreviation of not one, its singular and should be "none is". Likewise with team and club. Routinely we refer to them in the plural. Redslo probably has it right in making them singular. Sorry. Yawn. Roll on Saturday.

 

Either is ok. With words such a 'Manchester United' or 'the government' then either the plural or the singular is used. Common usage is what counts here, I prefer using what sounds right.

 

'Manchester United is the biggest club in the world.'

'Manchester United are about to sign...'

 

Etcetera.

Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
Interesting. So are you saying I should have said: none of us is sure...?

 

If so, first time that's been explained in that way to me.

 

You can use whatever sounds the more natural. None may originally have been an abbreviation of no-one but it is a separate word in its own right.

Redslo

Redslo

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Either is ok. With words such a 'Manchester United' or 'the government' then either the plural or the singular is used. Common usage is what counts here, I prefer using what sounds right.

 

'Manchester United is the biggest club in the world.'

'Manchester United are about to sign...'

 

Etcetera.

 

To the American ear, the plural always sounds right in this context--Manchester United are the best club in the world. No wait. That doesn't sound right either. Never mind.

 

But I will stop worrying about the plural singular question in my blog writing and focus on eliminating every last reference to soccer--unless I am writing about Major League Soccer, of course.

Redslo

Redslo

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I have gone off topic and posted "I Discuss the Recent Election." I promise not to do this very often. In any case, it will be less controversial than saying something good about Portsmouth.

Verbal

Verbal

Posted
Posted
You can use whatever sounds the more natural. None may originally have been an abbreviation of no-one but it is a separate word in its own right.

 

Pedant's corner: It's a contraction (not an abbreviation) of 'not one', and it's followed by the singular. Just as 'either' or 'neither' is, because they're contractions of 'either one', etc.

 

And back to the thread...

david in sweden

david in sweden

Posted
Posted
I no longer type soccer by mistake. I sometimes confuse my American friends when I refer to football. I try to remember use club to refer to the club as a whole and team to refer to the people selected to play on a give day. I am not entirely sure that is a thing, but it seems to be. I do not fully understand when a group of people are singular or plural ,however.

 

Also, thank you.

 

...your contributions are very interesting but getting the jargon correct can be difficult, as with our Chairman Ralph K. who, on the players award night referred to :

 

...." centre field ".....and " the locker room " ....still got hockey on his mind-you see.

The9

The9

Posted
Posted
...your contributions are very interesting but getting the jargon correct can be difficult, as with our Chairman Ralph K. who, on the players award night referred to :

 

...." centre field ".....and " the locker room " ....still got hockey on his mind-you see.

 

People use different terms in different countries. I think people generally are over it.

Redslo

Redslo

Posted
  • Author
Posted
...your contributions are very interesting but getting the jargon correct can be difficult, as with our Chairman Ralph K. who, on the players award night referred to :

 

...." centre field ".....and " the locker room " ....still got hockey on his mind-you see.

 

People use different terms in different countries. I think people generally are over it.

 

Center field is a baseball term, not a hockey one. Is Centre field also a cricket term? I really have no idea. Generally I try to avoid terms that might qualify as being misused which is kind of strange since I can enjoy debating the subject.

 

On an unrelated subject, but related to my blog, I have been out of town since Monday with no ability to post here or blog there so I missed my opportunity to jump right on the FIFA indictment story. However, as an American criminal lawyer who blogs about football this subject should be right in my wheelhouse (in the baseball, not the sailing, sense). Does anyone have any particular requests or suggestions as to what aspect of the issue I should focus on in my blog? To the extent I can, I would be happy to address the issue in a way that people who read my blog would prefer.

Mystic Force

Mystic Force

Posted
Posted

I am lookimg foward to your insightful contribution on this front. An explanation of how and what US laws apply would obviously be useful. I was wondering if there was something unique to US law giving it jurisdiction, or wether you think other more football focused countries are worried about rocking the boat so to speak.

 

I for one am glad that they are being examined.

The9

The9

Posted
Posted

It's the US choosing to regulate anything remotely impacting on its shores - whether that's use of a US ISP or dollar currency. There are also few other single-state organisations with the funding and political will to be able to conduct such an in-depth and ongoing investigation.

 

Oh, and they of course lost the 2018/2022 bid due to alleged corruption, which I'm sure doesn't hurt. :D

Deano6

Deano6

Posted
Posted

(a) you ruined my great joke :(

 

(b) I've now wasted 2 of my 3 posts today on this thread :(:(

 

© that article what you writ on the UEFA coefficients is super! :thumbup:

Redslo

Redslo

Posted
  • Author
Posted
(a) you ruined my great joke :(

 

(b) I've now wasted 2 of my 3 posts today on this thread :(:(

 

© that article what you writ on the UEFA coefficients is super! :thumbup:

 

1) Sorry.

 

2) Sorry. Feel free not to respond to this.

 

3) Thank you.

Lallana's Left Peg

Lallana's Left Peg

Posted
Posted
http://redsloscf.blogspot.com/

 

http://redsloscf.blogspot.co.uk/

 

I just posted "My Summer 2015 Scouting Report (Striker Edition—Juanmi Update).'

 

One thing to note (you may even already know it) - the star rating system in FM is relative to the existing ability of your squad. Thus the rating that Juanmi would have got is in comparison to the existing strikers that Man Utd have - not that he is only a 1.5-2 star rating player.

Redslo

Redslo

Posted
  • Author
Posted
One thing to note (you may even already know it) - the star rating system in FM is relative to the existing ability of your squad. Thus the rating that Juanmi would have got is in comparison to the existing strikers that Man Utd have - not that he is only a 1.5-2 star rating player.

 

That is a good point to make clear. That is why, when using Manchester United's Scouts, I would accept 2 star players. If I were using Southampton's scouts I probably would require three star players. As a practical matter, according to FM Southampton does not have good enough scouts or enough of them for my system to work using Southampton.

  • 2 weeks later...
mcbendy

mcbendy

Posted
Posted

Really interesting reading your post on FM 2015 salaries for the Prem. I hope you don't mind, but I have taken this information and done some further work:

 

I was interested to see what we could learn from looking at how average salary (of top 20 earners) compares with league position. Does money always buy you success? Obviously this is simplistic for a number of reasons - 'big' clubs will tend to have bigger squads, for one thing. However, the average salary of the top 20 earners is probably a pretty good indicator of the overall wage bill.

 

So, what I have done is use the 'average salary' to rank the clubs ('salary rank'), then compare the 'salary rank' with the finishing league position to create a 'value index'. A club which finishes in a league position equal to its 'salary rank' would have a 'value index' of zero and could be considered to have invested its wage bill averagely well. A club which had over-performed relative to its 'salary rank' would have a positive 'value index' score and a club which had spent loads of salary and finished low down the table would have a negative 'value index'. Here are the results:

 

salary_rank.jpg

 

Saints come out reasonably favourably based on this analysis. The top four are Stoke, Crystal Palace, Swansea and Leicester. Bottom of the pile are Man U, Everton, Sunderland and - rock bottom - QPR

 

There are obviously many more ways in you could (should?) go about measuring how successfully/effectively a club is being run, but I have found this to be an interesting exercise.

 

I'm happy for you to publish this if you want, or to extend the analysis further - I can send you the spreadsheet if you want

Redslo

Redslo

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Really interesting reading your post on FM 2015 salaries for the Prem. I hope you don't mind, but I have taken this information and done some further work:

 

I was interested to see what we could learn from looking at how average salary (of top 20 earners) compares with league position. Does money always buy you success? Obviously this is simplistic for a number of reasons - 'big' clubs will tend to have bigger squads, for one thing. However, the average salary of the top 20 earners is probably a pretty good indicator of the overall wage bill.

 

So, what I have done is use the 'average salary' to rank the clubs ('salary rank'), then compare the 'salary rank' with the finishing league position to create a 'value index'. A club which finishes in a league position equal to its 'salary rank' would have a 'value index' of zero and could be considered to have invested its wage bill averagely well. A club which had over-performed relative to its 'salary rank' would have a positive 'value index' score and a club which had spent loads of salary and finished low down the table would have a negative 'value index'. Here are the results:

 

[ATTACH=CONFIG]1728[/ATTACH]

 

Saints come out reasonably favourably based on this analysis. The top four are Stoke, Crystal Palace, Swansea and Leicester. Bottom of the pile are Man U, Everton, Sunderland and - rock bottom - QPR

 

There are obviously many more ways in you could (should?) go about measuring how successfully/effectively a club is being run, but I have found this to be an interesting exercise.

 

I'm happy for you to publish this if you want, or to extend the analysis further - I can send you the spreadsheet if you want

 

It is an interesting approach. I remember reading somewhere--it might have been in the book Soccernomics--that someone had done a study like this and found that salary paid corresponded to performance, but transfer fees paid did not. Here is a link to the book.

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Soccernomics-England-Australia---Iraq--Are-Destined/dp/1568584814/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1435919888&sr=8-2&keywords=soccernomics

 

When checking for this link, I just noticed that the author has published a new Soccernomics book. My reading material for the weekend has been selected.

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Money-Football-Soccernomics-Stefan-Szymanski/dp/1568585268/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1435919888&sr=8-1&keywords=soccernomics

 

I have to say that QPR's position on the bottom of your list has to be the least surprising news ever.

The9

The9

Posted
Posted (edited)
It is an interesting approach. I remember reading somewhere--it might have been in the book Soccernomics--that someone had done a study like this and found that salary paid corresponded to performance, but transfer fees paid did not. Here is a link to the book.

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Soccernomics-England-Australia---Iraq--Are-Destined/dp/1568584814/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1435919888&sr=8-2&keywords=soccernomics

 

When checking for this link, I just noticed that the author has published a new Soccernomics book. My reading material for the weekend has been selected.

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Money-Football-Soccernomics-Stefan-Szymanski/dp/1568585268/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1435919888&sr=8-1&keywords=soccernomics

 

I have to say that QPR's position on the bottom of your list has to be the least surprising news ever.

 

It is Soccernomics (aka "Why England Loses" over here), I've also read it and it basically says that if you want to know who's going to win the league, just look at the wage bill.

 

This of course is completely in line with football being a meritocracy, and a near as dammit free market in which wages reflect ability.

 

The ability to get the most out of lower wages by identifying which skills are undervalued is of course a different book on a different sport, but we've mentioned it enough times recently for me to actually start considering researching what kind of statistical analysis of football actually takes place... and how Saints are bucking the trend - if indeed we are.

Edited by The9
Redslo

Redslo

Posted
  • Author
Posted

 

I think it is the same book I linked second. The American edition is "Money and Soccer"

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Money-Soccer-Soccernomics-Unterhaching-S****horpe/dp/1568584768/ref=sr_1_10?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1435972134&sr=1-10&keywords=football+analysis

 

http://smile.amazon.com/Money-Soccer-Soccernomics-Unterhaching-S****horpe/dp/1568584768/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1435979917&sr=8-1&keywords=money+and+soccer

 

The English version is Money and Football

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Money-Football-Soccernomics-Unterhaching-S****horpe-ebook/dp/B00TT1VP50/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=8-1&qid=1435919888

 

http://smile.amazon.com/Money-Football-Soccernomics-Stefan-Szymanski/dp/1568585268/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1435979955&sr=8-2&keywords=money+and+football

 

I just realized I linked to the amazon smile url rather than the general American amazon url. On the other hand, everyone should be using amazon smile whenever possible anyway. In any case, I have already started to read it.

The9

The9

Posted
Posted
I think it is the same book I linked second. The American edition is "Money and Soccer"

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Money-Soccer-Soccernomics-Unterhaching-S****horpe/dp/1568584768/ref=sr_1_10?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1435972134&sr=1-10&keywords=football+analysis

 

http://smile.amazon.com/Money-Soccer-Soccernomics-Unterhaching-S****horpe/dp/1568584768/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1435979917&sr=8-1&keywords=money+and+soccer

 

The English version is Money and Football

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Money-Football-Soccernomics-Unterhaching-S****horpe-ebook/dp/B00TT1VP50/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&sr=8-1&qid=1435919888

 

http://smile.amazon.com/Money-Football-Soccernomics-Stefan-Szymanski/dp/1568585268/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1435979955&sr=8-2&keywords=money+and+football

 

I just realized I linked to the amazon smile url rather than the general American amazon url. On the other hand, everyone should be using amazon smile whenever possible anyway. In any case, I have already started to read it.

 

You're right, I scanned your original text and then found the same thing!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...