Gemmill

At least the Ukrainian people will get to see who he really is now. They were on about naming things after him a couple of years ago, when all he was doing was using them to run away from domestic issues and cosplay as Churchill.

Reckons he was wearing a black t shirt with the word KILLER in big white font on it.

My dad bumped in to CT again, and he reckons all CT wanted to talk about was that he was "crushing his 2025 crypto goals".

And I told you. For about the 7th time. You're welcome.

If you'd asked a different question, I'd have answered that, aye.

I didn't do that. You asked me (AGAIN) for an explanation. I gave it to you and in response I got a fucking critique of my explanation. Try fucking remember it this time, CUNTFACE!

Well I've explained the cunt to you multiple times, and you can never remember, so I doubt it.

Nice that I went to the trouble of explaining it to you fucking neckends though, eh. Despite knowing it would be too much for you.

It's just the thing that Matthew Benham and Tony Bloom have made their fortunes from, and the basis upon which major decisions are made at successful football clubs. Nothing for you plebs to worry about. Continue with your "if there'd been another five minutes OMG" disaster scenarios. I'll stick with the stats that don't trouble themselves with minutes that weren't played.

For probably the 7th time.... Take each shot or header with an XG value for both teams. Each shot/header is considered standalone, so a 0.10xg shot, would result in a goal in 10% if the simulations. Run that through a model 10,000 times. Each time you do it, that simulation has a specific match result. Then you multiply out the percentages of the results. So if Newcastle win 60%, draw 30%, and lose 10%, it's: 60% x 3 points = 1.80 30% x 1 point = 0.30 10% x 0 points = 0.00 Total xP = 2.10 It's a good system cos it takes into account quality of chances. If you have a team that has 10 shots on target, all with 0.10xG, you'd expect no goal from those 90% of the time (for each shot). So running that through the model vs a team that had 4 shots each with 0.25xG. Total xG for each team is 1xG. But the model will spit out different results because it considers the probabilities on a chance by chance basis, rather than just adding them up.

3.46 v 2.39 xG.

Expected POINTS.

2.11 v 0.69 expected points from this one. Forest got what they deserved from the game, despite what happened in the second half.

Weren't Jones and Slot both sent off the other day? Do their suspensions come later or has it been overturned because Liverpool.

Too easy this. Need Man City to start kicking lumps out of them.

Makes no difference to the next match COS IT DIDN'T FUCKING HAPPEN. Christ.

He's good at handballs, I'll give him that.

So I was right then, thank you.

We're overwhelmingly likely to get turned over at Anfield anyway. They're nearly 20 points ahead of us because they're a lot better than us. How the second half played out today will have ZIP bearing on it. Are you telling me that if we'd kept the score at 4-1, we'd have a better chance at Anfield? Horseshit.

Not the first time I've had you patronise me with a lecture about my naivety, you terminally argumentative cunt. Water off a duck's back.

They get to lick fannies while we're kissing badges? This needs a rewrite.

They can win as long as Salah's hamstring snaps in two at some point during the 90.

A draw or a Liverpool win, I reckon.

Second half is irrelevant man. Three points, and we're only 3 off third now. That's all that matters. Wednesday is another game. How we finished this one will have no bearing.

Is his surname Yates?