Scow Posted 24 March 2005 Share Posted 24 March 2005 http://www.thebluearmy.co.uk/details.asp?b...6269754|p|536|0 Bookies Manny Bernstein and Mark Jarvis have City at 16-1 to get relegated. Worth a punt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverFox Posted 24 March 2005 Share Posted 24 March 2005 Might be a good one because the stupid buggers were wrong about us being promotion favourates! At least you can make a few quid out of your misery Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C-man Posted 25 March 2005 Share Posted 25 March 2005 Same odds as Liverpool winning the champions league, we're safe then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler Posted 25 March 2005 Share Posted 25 March 2005 Might be a good one because the stupid buggers were wrong about us being promotion favourates!At least you can make a few quid out of your misery 82552[/snapback] Wrong again Silver Fox. The odds shortened on us because of demand. It's the punters and expectation of their demand that makes a team a favourite or a long shot. So I wonder why everyone thought we were certs for promotion then? And why the odds have narrowed on our relegation from 150/1 to 16/1? WARNING - Note there is no abuse in this post. Anyone who abuses me on this or any other thread will be grassed up (as I can no longer invite you to your own thrashing). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Posted 25 March 2005 Share Posted 25 March 2005 Might be a good one because the stupid buggers were wrong about us being promotion favourates!At least you can make a few quid out of your misery 82552[/snapback] And why the odds have narrowed on our relegation from 150/1 to 16/1? 83172[/snapback] With qualities like that you should be writing speeches for politicians. Simply the numbers are different because the number of teams involved is smaller now than at the time the 150/1 was quoted. The 16/1 or 150/1 do not however necessarily reflect the absolute probability of our relegation, more the chances when compared to a particular group of teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler Posted 25 March 2005 Share Posted 25 March 2005 Might be a good one because the stupid buggers were wrong about us being promotion favourates!At least you can make a few quid out of your misery 82552[/snapback] And why the odds have narrowed on our relegation from 150/1 to 16/1? 83172[/snapback] With qualities like that you should be writing speeches for politicians. Simply the numbers are different because the number of teams involved is smaller now than at the time the 150/1 was quoted. The 16/1 or 150/1 do not however necessarily reflect the absolute probability of our relegation, more the chances when compared to a particular group of teams. 83190[/snapback] It was a rhetorical statement. The odds have narrowed because we are near the bottom. This was not supposed to happen. This was not supposed to happen. I say this twice because the punters said it was not supposed to happen. And then the slavish supporters of Levein said it was not suppsed to happen. But it's happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stez Posted 25 March 2005 Share Posted 25 March 2005 Might be a good one because the stupid buggers were wrong about us being promotion favourates!At least you can make a few quid out of your misery 82552[/snapback] And why the odds have narrowed on our relegation from 150/1 to 16/1? 83172[/snapback] With qualities like that you should be writing speeches for politicians. Simply the numbers are different because the number of teams involved is smaller now than at the time the 150/1 was quoted. The 16/1 or 150/1 do not however necessarily reflect the absolute probability of our relegation, more the chances when compared to a particular group of teams. 83190[/snapback] It was a rhetorical statement. The odds have narrowed because we are near the bottom. This was not supposed to happen. This was not supposed to happen. I say this twice because the punters said it was not supposed to happen. And then the slavish supporters of Levein said it was not suppsed to happen. But it's happening. 83217[/snapback] who bought 80% of the squad? i'm no lavine cock sucker i'll wait until the team is HIS team, like i did with adams, until i properly judge his work Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chandler Posted 26 March 2005 Share Posted 26 March 2005 Fair enough Stez. But 100% of Adams' squad was 11th in the table when he left, got 11 points from its last 6 games under him and was two wins off a play off spot. All this when for a third of the games we only had ten men on the pitch In case you have forgotten, Levein was brought in to get us that play off spot. For a club of our stature in this very mediocre league it should have been a piece of piss. Instead we're lurking near the brown stuff at the bottom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Who ate all the pies? Posted 26 March 2005 Share Posted 26 March 2005 But 100% of Adams' squad was 11th in the table when he left, got 11 points from its last 6 games under him and was two wins off a play off spot. All this when for a third of the games we only had ten men on the pitch 11th and falling! plus Adams wouldn't have had a clue what to do when we started to slip even closer to the the relegation zone! I mean at Cov he's still signing players that aren't up for the job, Pressman, Benji and Goater. Stop slgging Levein, Adams would have done No better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anish Posted 26 March 2005 Share Posted 26 March 2005 But 100% of Adams' squad was 11th in the table when he left, got 11 points from its last 6 games under him and was two wins off a play off spot. All this when for a third of the games we only had ten men on the pitch 83347[/snapback] Surely Adams must take some responsibility for our disgraceful disciplinary record. Throughout his tenure here we had a problem keeping 11 men on the pitch and were charged by the FA for our disciplinary problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 26 March 2005 Share Posted 26 March 2005 Fair enough Stez.But 100% of Adams' squad was 11th in the table when he left, got 11 points from its last 6 games under him and was two wins off a play off spot. All this when for a third of the games we only had ten men on the pitch In case you have forgotten, Levein was brought in to get us that play off spot. For a club of our stature in this very mediocre league it should have been a piece of piss. Instead we're lurking near the brown stuff at the bottom. 83347[/snapback] We looked like we deserved to win those games, there was no good fortune about those results...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fox123 Posted 8 January 2006 Share Posted 8 January 2006 http://www.thebluearmy.co.uk/details.asp?b...6269754|p|536|0 Bookies Manny Bernstein and Mark Jarvis have City at 16-1 to get relegated. Worth a punt? That was me who quoted City's 16/1 for relegation back then......anyone have a few quid onnit....i hope u didnt with us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thracian Posted 8 January 2006 Share Posted 8 January 2006 Wrong again Silver Fox. The odds shortened on us because of demand. It's the punters and expectation of their demand that makes a team a favourite or a long shot. So I wonder why everyone thought we were certs for promotion then? And why the odds have narrowed on our relegation from 150/1 to 16/1? WARNING - Note there is no abuse in this post. Anyone who abuses me on this or any other thread will be grassed up (as I can no longer invite you to your own thrashing). Manners maketh man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.