chinapig

I imagine he told Arsene Wenger the same at some point.

Surely you would be more likely to try to influence the ref if you had played professionally, having had lots of practice?

On the grounds that Cowley is a better manager than him presumably. How very dare he?!

Yes but, you know, possession and stuff.?

It's the clean sheet that matters.?

I suspect we may be hoping that the EFL will treat both clubs generously. Weren't we partners in crime in claiming lost transfer revenue and asking for changes in the P&S regs?

Colby Bishop, who I liked the look of at Accrington, has started well for Pompey. 4 goals in 4 games I think.

You mean he commented on what Nigel actually said and on the facts? He may struggle for more gigs with Sky then.

He is effectively their Director of Football and there is a financial connection between Wolves' owners and his agency. But it's just a coincidence that his clients often sign for them. The Premier League investigated and found it was all hunky dory. Of course they did, just like they found there was no connection between Newcastle's owners and the Saudi state. Thank heavens our game is squeaky clean unlike those shady foreigners eh?

That is precisely what Nigel is saying despite attempts in some quarters to distort his words. I'm sure other managers feel the same, they're just happy for Nigel to take the heat. It's also why a change is pending at the top of the PGOML because Premier League clubs feel the same. There is a downward trend in standards that needs to be addressed. That's not a question of punishing a referee for having a bad game but improving the performance of those who regularly fall below the required standard.

First of all an impressive piece of work by @Pezza. The problem is we can only look for statistical patterns as we can't really come up with a hypothesis to test, this not being science. So as you suggest we just end up confirming that we get an unusually low number of penalties and not establishing any cause. Let's say my hypothesis is that referees are conspiring against us*. A statistical analysis neither confirms nor disproves that claim so we are no further forward. I see Nigel says he has spoken to the people he needs to and hopes they will do their own analysis. Watch this space then. *They aren't.

The law allows for a defence that the claim is true though. I'd save on lawyer's fees if I were you!?

Pardon?

I fear Prime Minister Truss regards regulation of any kind as, to use her favourite term, un-Conservative. Let's see if the White Paper appears or withers on the vine.

Plus of course they will be protected by parachute payments. Practically an incentive to overspend

And yet we have had a letter confirming that it was not a penalty. That presumably rests in part on the guidance given to referees that contact does not necessarily mean a foul and that there must be genuine consequences. Guidance the match referee presumably hadn't read or chose to ignore.

Me!

Blimey, as I recall 5 Sigma (roughly 1 in 3.5m) was sufficient to verify the existence of the Higgs Boson! I thought the maximum possible value was 6 Sigma, which is close to perfection. But I am a bit rusty on probability statistics.

"Greatest ever coo". Is that pidgin English?

Not when somebody makes a claim that is factually incorrect as @Sheltons Armyhas pointed out. Unless we're in the realm of 'alternative facts'.?

"I'd limp a million miles for one of your goals..." ?

5 of them were loans. Which means you can get promoted when half the team aren't your players.

You may be right. Certainly saw him in a plaster cast though.

A link that shows what Dave?

A pretty routine process these days. Nevertheless even the odious Nathan Jones described Freeman as petulant and stupid. Not petulant and stupid enough for a red card according to the referee though.