rn9013 Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 I just hope whatever team Puel puts out, we just go for the win. If we go for it and end up being well beaten, so be it-that's cup football and it's not often we have the chance to get into the semi finals of any cup. 2
HighPeakFox Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 I don't really understand anyone alleging a bent draw, it's just noisy anger dressed up as an argument.
James. Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 6 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said: I don't really understand anyone alleging a bent draw, it's just noisy anger dressed up as an argument. I don't think anyone is angry specifically about Leicester being drawn against Man City. Rather the fact that the "big four" teams all avoided each other. I mean, it looks unbelievably dodgy right. Particularly when the draw itself was an utter shambles with delays and "technical" difficulties, i.e. it took them about 30 go's before the draw they actually wanted came out. 2
foxfanazer Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 8 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said: I don't really understand anyone alleging a bent draw, it's just noisy anger dressed up as an argument. Whether it was a bent draw or not it was a complete cock up and opens them up to such accusations 1
HighPeakFox Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 6 minutes ago, James. said: I don't think anyone is angry specifically about Leicester being drawn against Man City. Rather the fact that the "big four" teams all avoided each other. I mean, it looks unbelievably dodgy right. Particularly when the draw itself was an utter shambles with delays and "technical" difficulties, i.e. it took them about 30 go's before the draw they actually wanted came out. The section in bold - you just do not know that, it's pure speculation.
Ian Nacho Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 Is N'Didi banned for tonight meaning he's available for Saturday?
urban.spaceman Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 3 minutes ago, Ian Nacho said: Is N'Didi banned for tonight meaning he's available for Saturday? Yes.
420Hashish Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 2 hours ago, weller54 said: 1-4... They're just too good. No Wilf.. he's a massive miss! Back to Andy King starting.... For that reason.. We're out! Last time King started against City he scored and we won 4-2. 2
kingfox Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 We best play Big Dan Amartey if not they'll be no party. 2
Bob Weasel Fox Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 13 hours ago, Col city fan said: I reckon we'll win this one. Hows that for positivity. 3-2 us Fingers crossed Col up the Foxes.
Detroit Blues Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 50 minutes ago, Ian Nacho said: Is N'Didi banned for tonight meaning he's available for Saturday? That's actually not bad. With as many games as we have in the next two weeks, he could probably use the rest.
Popular Post ealingfox Posted 19 December 2017 Popular Post Posted 19 December 2017 1 hour ago, HighPeakFox said: The section in bold - you just do not know that, it's pure speculation. I'm guessing then that you were present when the draw was made? And can confirm without speculating that the draw was carried out according to all the correct protocol and governance procedures with appropriate adjudicators present? Even if you don't want to conclude for yourself that it was fixed, can you understand why people might, given the circumstances? Rather than smugly dismissing it as 'noisy anger' and assuming there's no logic behind it? A Far Eastern commercial company takes sponsorship of the competition. Draws for the previous round have been error-strewn and conducted in unorthodox fashion (this suggests to me that there isn't much in the way of guidance or supervision from the relevant authorities). There's no reason why the sponsor should be conducting the draws themselves in the first place. Football fans in that part of the world, being removed from any geographical or cultural attachment to the game in this country, tend to base their support on quite superficial lines - recent sustained success. This is reflected in commercial figures and popularity polls. Man United, Man City, Chelsea and Arsenal have far more exposure and support there than Bournemouth, Bristol City, West Ham and us. That's not speculation. It's not much of a stretch to say that the continued participation of the most popular clubs in the region is beneficial for interest levels, exposure and viewing figures of the competition in the region, which is in the interests of its sponsor. It's in the sponsors interests for the most commercially successful clubs in Asia to be in the competition. The draw itself, is scheduled for live streaming so everybody can watch. It's delayed for nearly 2 hours before suddenly the live streaming is cancelled, it's proclaimed the draw has already been done, and afterwards pre-recorded footage is released that pairs the 4 'bigger' teams against the 4 'smaller' teams. One team is significantly 'bigger' than the others and is duly paired with the 'smallest'. I could not blame anybody for thinking it was rigged. In recent years we have had half of FIFA arrested for corrupt activity, various matchfixing incidents and most recently a top referee openly admitting to unduly influencing a match for his perceived personal benefit. The game is a multi-multi-billion pound industry now, there's too much money in the game for the money trail to not have a large influence on things now. Of course it's speculation to say it's fixed, nobody's denying that. But I think it's pretty bloody dodgy and am cynical enough to suspect there is a lot of corruption in football. And this is something that would be pretty easy to get away with. 11
HighPeakFox Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 10 minutes ago, ealingfox said: I'm guessing then that you were present when the draw was made? And can confirm without speculating that the draw was carried out according to all the correct protocol and governance procedures with appropriate adjudicators present? Of course it's speculation to say it's fixed, nobody's denying that. But I think it's pretty bloody dodgy and am cynical enough to suspect there is a lot of corruption in football. And this is something that would be pretty easy to get away with. Funnily, I agree/sympathise with (just about) everything you just said. But none of it is evidence, and none of it conclusively proves the draw WAS fixed. No, I wasn't at the draw, but then, nor was any of us. Thus, concluding fix is even more absurd than my 'smug' dismissal, since the people that actually did the drawing of the balls (or whatever they used) confirmed no foul play. I concede, it may have been fixed, but I really hope it wasn't, and I think it is wiser to work on the premise of 'innocent until shown to be guilty' for now. After all, if they wanted to rig the draw, don't you think it might have been done rather more smoothly than it was? I edited your post only to contrast your first and last paragraphs - you've conceded it's speculation, which was my original premise. And I think plenty of people are denying it, even if you aren't.
Buce Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 2 hours ago, James. said: I don't think anyone is angry specifically about Leicester being drawn against Man City. Rather the fact that the "big four" teams all avoided each other. I mean, it looks unbelievably dodgy right. Particularly when the draw itself was an utter shambles with delays and "technical" difficulties, i.e. it took them about 30 go's before the draw they actually wanted came out. 2 hours ago, HighPeakFox said: The section in bold - you just do not know that, it's pure speculation. My math isn't up to it, but would be interesting to see the odds of this particular line-up occurring naturally.
HighPeakFox Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 3 minutes ago, Buce said: My math isn't up to it, but would be interesting to see the odds of this particular line-up occurring naturally. Agreed. But it's the same odds as any other line-up occurring naturally!!!! 1
CosbehFox Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 1 hour ago, DrezZone said: Last time King started against City he scored and we won 4-2. We actually lost 2-1 in May.
Buce Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 4 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said: Agreed. But it's the same odds as any other line-up occurring naturally!!!! Only if you're talking about a specific other line-up; if you're talking about any line-up but this one, it is odds-on.
HighPeakFox Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 2 minutes ago, Buce said: Only if you're talking about a specific other line-up; if you're talking about any line-up but this one, it is odds-on. That's also true, but that remains true for any given outcome. In other words, this specific outcome is as likely / unlikely as any other given outcome.
ealingfox Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 3 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said: Funnily, I agree/sympathise with (just about) everything you just said. But none of it is evidence, and none of it conclusively proves the draw WAS fixed. No, I wasn't at the draw, but then, nor was any of us. Thus, concluding fix is even more absurd than my 'smug' dismissal, since the people that actually did the drawing of the balls (or whatever they used) confirmed no foul play. I concede, it may have been fixed, but I really hope it wasn't, and I think it is wiser to work on the premise of 'innocent until shown to be guilty' for now. After all, if they wanted to rig the draw, don't you think it might have been done rather more smoothly than it was? I edited your post only to contrast your first and last paragraphs - you've conceded it's speculation, which was my original premise. And I think plenty of people are denying it, even if you aren't. I've concluded that I believe the draw was fixed, not that the draw was fixed. There's a difference and it's not absurd at all. I'm not Robert Mueller, why do I need tangible evidence? I've told you what I think and I've explained why. I don't see the contrast between the paragraphs, I never claimed to have conclusive proof. It should go without saying that it's speculation, it did for me. And why would the people who did the draw lie? ? You're talking about people that managed to draw the same team twice in an earlier round (I don't see how the 'same strict conditions' the EFL assured us the quarter final draw took place under could allow this). God knows what they were doing. Nobody does, because they did it in secret.
HighPeakFox Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 1 minute ago, ealingfox said: I've concluded that I believe the draw was fixed, not that the draw was fixed. There's a difference and it's not absurd at all. I'm not Robert Mueller, why do I need tangible evidence? I've told you what I think and I've explained why. I don't see the contrast between the paragraphs, I never claimed to have conclusive proof. It should go without saying that it's speculation, it did for me. And why would the people who did the draw lie? ? You're talking about people that managed to draw the same team twice in an earlier round (I don't see how the 'same strict conditions' the EFL assured us the quarter final draw took place under could allow this). God knows what they were doing. Nobody does, because they did it in secret. I'm not attacking you, I respect your point of view. I'm not going to argue semantics further. I hope to goodness your belief is unfounded.
Countryfox Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 18 minutes ago, Buce said: Only if you're talking about a specific other line-up; if you're talking about any line-up but this one, it is odds-on. 14 minutes ago, HighPeakFox said: That's also true, but that remains true for any given outcome. In other words, this specific outcome is as likely / unlikely as any other given outcome. But if you are specifically talking about a specific unspecific line up naturally not occurring unnaturally, then surely it will naturally be unspecifically specific ... unless its a Tuesday of course ... 1
ealingfox Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 (edited) 35 minutes ago, Buce said: My math isn't up to it, but would be interesting to see the odds of this particular line-up occurring naturally. I saw that the odds of the 4 teams avoiding each other was just over 20%. Unlikely but not incredibly unlikely. I don't know what happens if you factor in MU only getting Bristol City. Edited 19 December 2017 by ealingfox
HighPeakFox Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Countryfox said: But if you are specifically talking about a specific unspecific line up naturally not occurring unnaturally, then surely it will naturally be unspecifically specific ... unless its a Tuesday of course ... Point is, this draw was possible. I think more useful is to know how likely the big 4 avoiding each other was. See above - @ealingfox has helped me out. Edited 19 December 2017 by HighPeakFox
lifted*fox Posted 19 December 2017 Posted 19 December 2017 I hope we sit back and defend for 90 minutes and go out to a scrappy goal where our defense has totally switched off because they're all too busy thinking about presents and santa and shit like that. I hope FT goes into it's usual meltdown so we can all moan and bitch at each other for the next week. Because I love that shit.
Recommended Posts