Football 2015/16

[eFestivals]

11 hours ago, comfortablynumb1910 said:

While not disagreeing with this Neil, for the same reasons ( bigger fan base more bets as you say ) I would add that at times a bookie will go out to " get " your bigger clubs fans when they ( the bookies ) don`t fancy their chances of winning.

So.....as well as offering lower odds to reduce potential losses, you could see someone like Paddy Power sticking Man Utd for the league out to 25/1 to entice the bigger fan base and their cash / loyalty.

Oh, absolutely - the amount of money placed on other options sets the price for an individual option.

But as a general rule, the size of a fanbase will warp the odds to make the offered odds on 'popular' clubs worse than  their real chances of winning. The bookies job is balance the bets so the bookie makes a profit, and so the odds offered are not a prediction of the chances of winning, they're an attempt for the bookie to make a profit.

Nicked from something I read this morning about something else: "the odds reflect the actions of the betting market and shift to ensure a win for the house, irrespective of the actual outcome".

[ThomThomDrum]

14 hours ago, pink_triangle said:

 

I personally can only see 2 sides winning the league, but think the top 5 should all believe they can take the title. People often moan that managers/ players are bland/sit on the fence, but when one sticks his neck out, people want more wishy washy instead.

I think fans would want a bit more direct honesty instead of the bland shit. 

LvG coming out and saying something like "we are currently not good enough to win this league but i'm working hard with my players to turn that around" would be a refreshing thing to hear and see. Blind optimism is just folly

[pink_triangle]

27 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

 

Nicked from something I read this morning about something else: "the odds reflect the actions of the betting market and shift to ensure a win for the house, irrespective of the actual outcome".

As someone who does matched betting to earn a little extra money, I know this is generally true.  For example when something is called even money it doesnt have a 50% chance of happening or there would be no money in it for the bookies.  In the premiership odds Im not convinced that there is much influence from Man Utd fans changing the odds, as previously said I think their odds are in line with Spurs who have a significantly lower fanbase.

[pink_triangle]

42 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

there's a story in one of the papers today, that Everton have told Man Utd £65M for Lukaku.

I think they've made a terrible error, cos compared to LvG's signings it's a bargain price.

I remember when he signed people saying Everton had overpayed for the player, but they look in line for a big profit now.

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I remember when he signed people saying Everton had overpayed for the player, but they look in line for a big profit now.

I think I was one of those, but there's no doubt he's got a whole lot better than when they signed him.

 

[pink_triangle]

4 minutes ago, ThomThomDrum said:

I think fans would want a bit more direct honesty instead of the bland shit. 

LvG coming out and saying something like "we are currently not good enough to win this league but i'm working hard with my players to turn that around" would be a refreshing thing to hear and see. Blind optimism is just folly

Football is a game where you dont necessarily need to be good to get 3 points.  As they showed in the last game you only need one shot on goal to win a game, hell if your lucky you can do it with 0 if the opponents are kind enough to put the ball into the net.  Performance is a factor, but the main factor to me is the amount of games left and whether its realistic to make the points up.  At the moment (and with other teams current form) its certainly possible, but there isnt much room for error.  I think Pocchetino and Ranieri have a similarly low chance of lifting the premiership this season, but support both in having the belief they can do it.

[pink_triangle]

4 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I think I was one of those, but there's no doubt he's got a whole lot better than when they signed him.

 

Although from memory this season has been a big step up. I cant remember how many he socred last season, but cant rememeber him being much better than average.

[TheGayTent]

9 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

I remember when he signed people saying Everton had overpayed for the player, but they look in line for a big profit now.

I think he's probably the best player in the top flight that doesn't play for one of the 'top 4' clubs. 

Call me crazy, but I genuinely believe if West Ham had had him this season we'd finish in the top 4. 

[eFestivals]

10 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

Call me crazy, but I genuinely believe if West Ham had had him this season we'd finish in the top 4. 

which has just reminded me that there's a story today of WHU in for Sturridge at £18M

I guess you might get more playing time from him than from your last big payout to LFC ... and for a much MUCH better player too.

I can't make up my mind if Liverpool would be mad to sell him or not. While he's been sicknote for what seems forever, he also managed an almost-full season a few years ago when he was on fire.

And with the way luck rolls, whoever might buy him might find him fit for the rest of career.

 

[zahidf]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

which has just reminded me that there's a story today of WHU in for Sturridge at £18M

I guess you might get more playing time from him than from your last big payout to LFC ... and for a much MUCH better player too.

I can't make up my mind if Liverpool would be mad to sell him or not. While he's been sicknote for what seems forever, he also managed an almost-full season a few years ago when he was on fire.

And with the way luck rolls, whoever might buy him might find him fit for the rest of career.

 

i think klopp isnt a fan, and with the style of high pressing he prefers, he probably doesnt trust someone as injury prone as sturridge. liverpool def cant rely on him as main striker if they want top 4 again imo. 18 million for someone who will be on the bench more often than not is a bargain.

 

65 million for lukaku??? if jose does go utd, i doubt that will happen...

[eFestivals]

Just now, zahidf said:

i think klopp isnt a fan, and with the style of high pressing he prefers, he probably doesnt trust someone as injury prone as sturridge. liverpool def cant rely on him as main striker if they want top 4 again imo. 18 million for someone who will be on the bench more often than not is a bargain.

the style is little different to how Liverpool played with Suarez and Sturridge a few years ago. Sturridge is - or at least was - capable of playing that way and staying fit enough to perform.

But yeah, it seems pretty clear that Klopp isn't too impressed with his attitude towards niggles.

And while I get what you mean about how Liverpool can't rely on him if they want to make top 4 again, it's also the case that it's hard to see them making top 4 without a player of that quality - so he's both their hope and non-hope of top 4.

And again, just because he's been injured a lot in the last couple of years it doesn't mean it will continue like that. There's as many players who stop being injured after being regularly injured as there are players who go permanent sicknote.

[TheGayTent]

The Sturridge story is bollocks !

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

The Sturridge story is bollocks !

I don't know either way, but any reason why you're so certain?

[mrtourette]

Of course it is, just like the Lukaku story is bollocks, and all of the stories brought here from the shitty rags they appear in. There's no more truth in them than the stories Roald Dahl wrote.

Edited January 20, 2016 by mrtourette

[eFestivals]

Just now, mrtourette said:

Of course it is, just like the Lukaku story is bollocks, and all of the stories brought here from the shitty rags they appear in. There's no more truth in them than the stories Roald Dahl wrote.

you don't think Everton wouldn't put a price of £65M on Lukaku?

He's a player any club would want. The way to lessen the chances of clubs wanting him is to give a high price.

[TheGayTent]

16 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I don't know either way, but any reason why you're so certain?

It's just not in G&S' MO. They don't spend big (for West Ham) in January. January is stop gaps to plug injuries or take on potentials with a view to a permanent. 

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, TheGayTent said:

It's just not in G&S' MO. They don't spend big (for West Ham) in January. January is stop gaps to plug injuries or take on potentials with a view to a permanent. 

but it could be a push for top 4, or Europa, no?

Surely those opportunities would impact into their thinking, even if they might not follow thru on their thoughts.

 

[TheGayTent]

20 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

but it could be a push for top 4, or Europa, no?

Surely those opportunities would impact into their thinking, even if they might not follow thru on their thoughts.

 

No, they have a way of working. That tried and tested formula works (in terms of making them money).

That won't change unless they manage to secure outside investment whilst retaining majority shareholding.

Edited January 20, 2016 by TheGayTent

[eFestivals]

2 minutes ago, TheGayTent said:

No, they have a way of working. That tried and tested formula works (in terms of making them money).

That won't change unless they manage to secure outside investment whilst retaining majority shareholding.

I've little idea on income (TV & more) for europe games, but couldn't the extra income from that possibly cover off the cost of someone like Sturridge?

I realise they're in it to make money, but there's a chance of bigger money via Europe, and they must be smart enough to know that they're unlikely to have many opportunities to get there, but that this year there is the opportunity.

After all, they've certainly shown in the past (with Brum) that investing can bring greater rewards, tho of course there's no guarantee of success via that.

In the scheme of things, a punt of £18M on someone who is undoubtedly one of the better strikers around (when fit of course) is very small beer for making that step up for big rewards if it works out. Just look at how much Utd have spent to fail.

[TheGayTent]

Investing? They don't invest anything, ever, other than business profit. There isn't the funds to make any big purchases in January - not without outside investment or putting their hands in their pockets.*

Their MO is to cut running costs and increasing revenue. They don't invest anything. 

You make (relatively) fuck all out of the Europa League. Of course you can make money from the Champions League but Sturridge isn't going to guarantee that and G&S don't do gambles. Not expensive gambles anyway. 

*Unless they make a similar sized deal in terms of a player going out. 

Edited January 20, 2016 by TheGayTent

[mrtourette]

1 hour ago, eFestivals said:

you don't think Everton wouldn't put a price of £65M on Lukaku?

He's a player any club would want. The way to lessen the chances of clubs wanting him is to give a high price.

But that's not the story is it - the story as you quote it was 'Everton have told Man Utd £65mil for Lukaku'. I don't doubt they've put an extra large price on is head, but no I do not trust the story that states that i) Man Utd have contacted them about purchasing him, ii) Everton responded with a price, iii) that price was £65mil and most importantly iv) this story is based on a significant update or new information since the last 'pick a number out of your arsehole' story.

Why would I? Essentially you have a source that has been proven to be repeatedly unreliable and untrustworthy basing a 'news story' around a blindingly obvious premise (top club with lots of money is interested in signing very good player - no shit) and peppering it with 'facts' that have in no way been verified or proven.

As with the endless nonsense about Bale, the Lukaku situation is increasingly becoming a 'throw enough shit at a wall and some if it may eventually prove to be true' approach in a desperate attempt to sell papers or get online clicks.

I don't doubt Lukaku going to Man Utd is a pretty likely outcome, but is this specific story (or the many others like it) a reliable source of when it might happen and for how much? Hell no.

Edited January 20, 2016 by mrtourette

[pink_triangle]

52 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

 

In the scheme of things, a punt of £18M on someone who is undoubtedly one of the better strikers around (when fit of course) is very small beer for making that step up for big rewards if it works out. Just look at how much Utd have spent to fail.

It isnt just 18 million though, its the wages and also the impact of other high earners then wanting extra pay.  I think you have to take a leicester approach (admittedly they are in a much better starting postion) and not budget for top 4, but take it as a bonus if it does happen. Even if it does happen its hard from those outside the mega rich to stay in as both liverpool and spurs have found out.  You are always relying on one of the worlds richest to mess up.  Its happened this year with chelsea, but may not next. 

[eFestivals]

12 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:

It isnt just 18 million though, its the wages and also the impact of other high earners then wanting extra pay.

I'm well aware, tho there's the wage of another player to subtract against that if everything is equal.

The point still stands, that it's dirt cheap (if he stays fit, of course). If you want to make that step up you'll need to invest, and in normal circumstances the investment would be waaaaay more that Sturridge would require.

It's also worth noting that the current players will be queuing up for pay rises at the end of the season (if not before) if WHU finish somewhere around their current position, and (in the main) are likely to get them or be sold on and get them elsewhere - because other better-paying clubs will be wanting them after they've performed at the high end.

So if WHU want to stay at around the same level as they are now beyond this year, their wage bill is going to take a big hit anyway, and so the 'extra' cost of Sturridge isn't as big as it first might appear.

It might all be paper-talk of course, but if there's anything to it I don't think the financial hit onto WHU is as big as you've suggested when all aspects are taken into account.

[zahidf]

8 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I'm well aware, tho there's the wage of another player to subtract against that if everything is equal.

The point still stands, that it's dirt cheap (if he stays fit, of course). If you want to make that step up you'll need to invest, and in normal circumstances the investment would be waaaaay more that Sturridge would require.

It's also worth noting that the current players will be queuing up for pay rises at the end of the season (if not before) if WHU finish somewhere around their current position, and (in the main) are likely to get them or be sold on and get them elsewhere - because other better-paying clubs will be wanting them after they've performed at the high end.

So if WHU want to stay at around the same level as they are now beyond this year, their wage bill is going to take a big hit anyway, and so the 'extra' cost of Sturridge isn't as big as it first might appear.

It might all be paper-talk of course, but if there's anything to it I don't think the financial hit onto WHU is as big as you've suggested when all aspects are taken into account.

the big IF is fitness. if he was fit, liverpool wouldnt sell. 18 million for sturridge if fit is a bargain. 18 million for company for andy carroll on the physhio bench is less so. at the moment, they will have to see how crocked he is! a jan sale when he injured would make less sense for WH

Edited January 20, 2016 by zahidf

[eFestivals]

5 minutes ago, zahidf said:

the big IF is fitness. if he was fit, liverpool wouldnt sell. 18 million for sturridge if fit is a bargain. 18 million for company for andy carroll on the physhio bench is less so. at the moment, they will have to see how crocked he is! a jan sale when he injured would make less sense for WH

It's a gamble, I agree - but only the same gamble Liverpool would be making by keeping him.

It's a gamble with a decent chance of high rewards. Whether it's worth it or not depends how much of a gambler you are. Liverpool shouldn't really have to make gambles, but for a team such as WHU it's probably their best route to possible high success.

I concede to TGT's point that the dildo twins aren't generally gamblers, tho it's probably also the case that they'd have never expected to be flying high as they currently are either.

Edited January 20, 2016 by eFestivals