Toonpack

It doesn't bother me in the slightest, but it is interesting/fun to poke the zealots. Regarding the betting, you must be well up I assume.

Oh aye, that's a wide

If mention is banned, of course I will. I will simply find an alternative avenue with which to pursue the board Sheldons. I would add, that in the unlikely event we do lose, blame will lie solely with the negative Nellies who have invested that thread.

Even if a ban is initiated, after I have delivered another point (at least) at the weekend with my match thread, I reserve the right to mention the nonsense statistical reference in the subsequent match thread titles as you are swept along on Toonpack's "match threads of glory" odyssey.

Talk to someone Craig, a professional. Sadly I know all too well what can happen when someone doesn't talk, so please do.

I don't doubt it but I (and the members of this board) are not professional coaches and analysts. I am a spectator, end of. I don't bet - mugs game. (and if I did, I certainly wouldn't bet using a formula which has a 40% chance of being wrong)

And none of it matters except the final score. p.s. why would anyone give a flying fuck who had the better chances in a game of zero interest to me other than what the FINAL score may mean in relation to NUFC

And then the game happens in front of your eyes and all the variables kick in and hey presto, it means fuck all.

Au contraire, Gloom mentioned it and I simply made an observation, you challenged there was no evidence to support aforesaid observation, I produced evidence (copious amounts) and you flounced.

and that matters to NUFC (or you for that matter) why exactly ??

Is that goals or xG ? p.s. we're away so our score should come second, that's how actual goals are usually noted or is this some new "trendy" way to show the score I may have missed out on.

Nowt, I didn't watch them so other than the score, what do I care. other than was it a better result for us Y/N ?

Hmmmm does it mean Brighton and West Ham won ???.

Point #1 - Re Leeds, yes I saw all that watching it with my eyes without the need for any numbers. Point #2 - I don't, but you and Gemmill don't half jump about.

No, for you ??

So what is it's purpose then ?? What's does it bring to the understanding/enjoyment of the game.

Tell you what, I reckon 100% of 220 prem league games this so far this season went the way of actual goals scored (as seen by the crowd with their eyes). What else is there to get, some stat that can indicate to me the result 62% of the time, well fuck me, that's astonishing. It's worthless man !!

FFS, I never said it did. It is however, when compared to visual evidence, utterly unnecessary and adds nothing to the enjoyment of the game.

So because of the many variables, easily viewed through one's own eyes. it's often incorrect - yes ?? (i.e. useless)

No, that wasn't the question, why does it seem a team with better xG lose/draw a game an inordinate amount of times. What does it add to anything that can't be understood/observed already by watching the game. "We were all over them, but we could have played until midnight and not scored" you can see it and giving it a number serves no purpose. It's assigning a statistical probability to something which is way too variable. I can see some value assigning it to players as a measure of how clinical in front of goal they are, even then though you've got "he scores that 9 times out of 10" or "he couldn't hit a barn door" which you can see for yourself.

Explain the evidence which you suggested didn't exist. Why does it happen ?? go on, educate a non-believer.

Erm

Seems to me that an inordinate amount of the time the team with the higher xG doesn't actually win tight-ish games i.e. a game that isn't a hammering. So it reflects the opposite of what actually happened.