Quoteyesterday I think.Originally Posted by paul_oshea
The funny thing is he'll probably still lose out to Zabaleta for team of the season.
yesterday I think.
Surely not. It's even been fairly well documented that Zabaleta has been a bit below his usual high standards this season. Never know though.
Perfectly placed header into the bottom corner by Coleman gives the keeper no chance and makes it 2-0.
Only problem is that it was an own goal.
Seemingly luke shaw caused seamus alot of problems
Coleman caused Shaw little trouble anyway it must be said. He was unlucky for the og. It really looked like Stones was going to header it clear but seemed to halt his desire at the last second, too late for Coleman to react after that I think. Everton weren't at it collectively today. Mirallas a big miss for them on top of the two Centre backs. McGeady did well enough when introduced again.
lol that's a shocker!!!
Looks like he forgot which box he was in.
Remarkably both goals were own goals!
Long just got in on the act!!!
He's a liability.
DID YOU NOTICE A SIGN OUTSIDE MY HOUSE...?
I refuse to believe he had a bad game until I see a Paul O'Shea post from six months ago predicting he would have a bad game
Certainly no peace of mind, not it's not paranoia, I was right Liverpool did slip up
"Even now with Liverpool 6-1 on I can see them slipping up".
I think it is me though, I watched the match and when ever I do that everything seems to
go wrong for some reason. Been watching Man City too and they are winning.
Maybe is if I stop watching Palace will make a comeback?!
So you're a "cooler"?
No Somos muchos pero estamos locos.
Coleman got on the PFA team of the season :
Cech, COLEMAN, Cahill, Kompany, Shaw, Hazard, Gerrard, Toure, Lallana, Suarez, Sturridge.
Also James McCarthy made the 'subs' bench
"We lost because we didn't win"- Ronaldo
Possibly depending on what it means.
I am a little cooler now it looks like I may well lose my bet,
will have to rely on Everton stopping Man City and I am not too
confident of that. Could try a cover bet not to cut my loses.
Such illustrious company on that side. Speaks volumes about the progress this man has made and the level that he has been at all season. Such a level that he has been duly named the best Premier League right-back for 2013/2014.
Seamie, take a bow.
Without meaning to burst your bubble, the odds were highly stacked towards Liverpool having a slip up. The 1/6 was a measure of their chances of winning the league, not Liverpool winning the rest of their games. I heard a stat that no team in any of Europe's top leagues have ever won fourteen games on the spin in a single season, something Liverpool would have to have done. Open to correction though, I thought the likes of Real Madrid or Bayern Munich would surely have done it. Arsenal did win fourteen in a row, but it was over two seasons.
City are well capable of blowing it at Everton but they are playing them at a good time. Everton are likely to be without Distin and Jagielka still, as well as Mirallas, Barry and possibly even Baines. Heavy absentee list considering they are already without the likes of Pienaar, Gibson, Kone and Oviedo. City could have Silva back and with Aguero and Toure now having games under their belt they would be at more or less full strength for once, with the possible exception of Nastasic.
How did Kompany get on the team of the season? That's a real 'living off reputation' selection. I remember hearing another stat around Christmas that City had a better defensive record without him. Off the top of my head too he had some real howlers... his sliced o.g. at Fulham, red card at Hull and potentially fatal assist for Coutinho at Anfield. Even against Barcelona, it was Kompany's failure to keep the offside line that got Demichelis into trouble when he was sent off for bringing down Messi. It's more fashionable to make Demichelis the fall guy though.
I'd have had Azpilicueta over Shaw and Marshall or De Gea over Cech also.
Last edited by DeLorean; 28/04/2014 at 11:33 AM.
I don't think there was much of a bubble to burst, Liverpool winning the league and
they winning their remaining gains pretty much amounted to the same thing,
well almost. I was pretty much assuming Man City would win all theirs.
Of course that might not happen either, but I just thought the 6-1 on or whatever
made it look like too much of a formality.
When a team has a winning run they can often look invincible at least until they get
beat that is, when they look suddenly look very fallible.
The return of Toure is what worries me most but I not really an expert on the Man City
team, or indeed any team lol.
Any how a few thing in my favour, City may see the winning post and get hit by nerves.
Also I assume McCarthy is playing, he was absent when Everton lost to Palace.
Also a draw is enough for to scupper Man City.
Will just have to wait and see, I want to watch the match but I usually bring bad luck to
the team I want to win!
There's a massive difference. Liverpool were 1/6 to win the league, but were only something like 7/10 to beat Chelsea. They'll probably be something like 2/5 to beat Palace and 1/4 to beat Newcastle, depending on the circumstances. Therefore if you backed Liverpool to win those three games I think it works out at about 2/1... which is obviously seen as far less of a formality than the 1/6 you were offered for Liverpool winning the title. Added to the fact thay they had already won eleven on the spin and were aiming to do what was never done before, well it just made it seem all the more unlikely. Despite that, they could still very easily win the league, hence Paddy Power and co playing it safe with their stingy odds of 1/6 before the Chelsea game.
Last edited by DeLorean; 28/04/2014 at 10:19 PM.
OK I take you point about there being a difference between winning all three game and winning the league.
However... you seem to have made the case for me!!
If there were 2-1 to win all those 3 games then they should have been about 2-1 to win the league because the two amount to
the very same thing.
OK maybe I am getting rather confused with all the odds, but what I am saying is I would never have put £5 on Liverpool to
win the league in order to get just £1 back That seemed a very poor return, putting £2 on to get £1 back or even £3 to get £1
back seemed more realistic, but £5? That seemed ridiculous.
I think what happened is a lot of people thought they were unbeatable and just piled the money on pushing the odds to
a ridiculous level. I agree with you about hem having won eleven on the spin being nearly a record, which was likely to end
however unfortunately some people don't see it like that, they just see the 11 wins and think it will go on forever.
The warning signs were in the Norwich? match, I think they won 2-3 hardly an entirely convincing scoreline,
hence I was worried and rightly so.
Had I not already backed Liverpool I would have been tempted to back Man City at that point, I think they were 3-1
which I thought was good value.
I always like backing long shots rather than 'dead certs' because I know from experience that what is
billed as a dead cert before a horse-race for example, often turns out to a dead loss once the race starts!!!
Gamblers tend to have a herd mentality, they see everyone is backing a horse and think it is a sure thing
and everyone piles in making it look even more of a certainty, at least until the race starts that is, and that
sickly looking animal plodding along at the back looks anything like a winner.
Anyway we will find out soon enough who wins the title, hopefully Coleman, McCarthy and McGeady
can do me a favour and scupper City's title hopes.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks