Canaries north

My watford friend is adamant Everton were caught tapping up Silver their manager at the time and things were found on company electronics. Suddenly it all went quiet when everton paid compensation to watford and they brought some young players who didn't really have enough international games to get a work permit but the Premier league helped them.

It is a mad figure but it's a mad world. He is a very good player and has a long contract I believe. He has been looked at by a number of premier league teams and had an offer from villa. I would agree Rowe should be around the same price but you need clubs bidding against each other to reach it. Let's hope that happens, in the summer.

This game shows how average this league is apart from a few clubs. What I can't get is the commentary love in for Armstrong. He reminds me of a certain Cuban. Head down running and very direct but very limited.

I can accept that we might not be able to get the manager we want at this moment in time, but even though this season is as good as over, we can't just drift like we are. Things are getting toxic and even a holding manager until the end of the season would be better. Could that be someone already at the club or a manager at the end of their career just to see us over. It could even be a manager out of work looking to get back in who would take half a season with us to show people what he can do. I'm sure there are plenty of managers out there who would take a job until the end of the season knowing that we have someone already lined up.

Agree with the sentiment completely. We have a poor manager and a poor squad. I can understand why the manager decided to park the bus as he is not tactically good enough and doesn't have the players to do anything different against a promotion chasing side. Of the people I spoke to after the game half were happy. How can anyone be happy with that? we were not playing Man City. We are not going to get relegated so let's at least try to play football.

The first half we were cut open far too often. We created some good chances but also gave away far too many. Against a better team we could have been punished for our wastefulness. Still not sure how the third went in but I will take it. Saturday will be a different test and I still have a funny feeling ip**** will bottle it. Let's hope so anyway.

With ability

What is Bannan still doing at Wednesday? I would take him at norwich in a heartbeat.

How did the ball end up in the back of the net. Looked strange ?

I will go back to my original point. Why the hell are footballers being made out to be the arbiters of social ideals. A football player is paid to kick or head a ball. They are not paid for their IQ and for some of them that's a blessing. I'm on here because obviously I like football. I will never say a football player is my hero let alone my role model.

It definitely wasn't Bragg. If it was I would have walked out before he opened his mouth. Presonal preference and all that.

Didn't even get the name. Wish I had so I can avoid them myself 🙄

It seems mad to me that people put footballers up as influeners in this modern world. I'm not going to get involved in the rights and wrongs of putting on the armband or not. Just that if someone wanted advice on political, moral or social issues, why would anyone choose a footballer to listen to. The man is a sportman not a social arbiter. Teach kids to look up to their sporting heroes for their ability in sport and not their political and social choices. The same with musicians. I went to a gig the other day and the support act spent more time talking politics than playing.

As you say "You could certainly tailor a programme strictly for yourself, harvesting only certain kinds of data that you feel apply to you and get a a very different outcome from a wider, shared programme that you later filter" The thing I don't understand is if this is able to be done on a reasonable budget, why are the big football data companies not offering this. Im sure most clubs would want the data to be personalised to their needs. These companies are specialists in the field. They must know what clubs are looking for and be able to scale it to sell for a cheaper price than individual clubs going it on their own. Are we going to collection all our own data? With so many game every week in world football this can't lbe realistic. it also worries me that since the spurs game when relegated we have been told we are data driven. We have set up a data team. Our signings since have been very poor. Do you trust the club to use data well as even with the Americans help it hasn't done us much good in the last few years. The more data driven we have apparently become the worse the signings have been.

You obviously know a lot more about this and a lot more than me, to be honest that wouldn't take a huge amount. What I take from what you are saying when you say one size fits all data will be defunct. Surely a business that only does football data will know this and will be able to provide all the data clubs need with the ability to search for the fine details individual clubs want. Are we still going to get the raw data from one of the main providers and then use our own systems to fine tune the results? If not then I don't see how we will collate all the information needed without a huge budget. I just struggle to believe that we, with the budget we will be able to invest in this, will be able to outsmart companies that have been doing this for years and provide a better product for us, it's their only job. When you say questions and prompts Surely the data companies would be able to set this up for every clubs needs and end up doing it a lot cheaper. I am not doubting anything you are saying it just looks like something these companies would either already offer or be able to offer cheaper than doing it ourselves.

I will happily admit I don't have an idea how much this will all cost. I also don't know how much of an advantage it will give us for that outlay. I do know that there are companies that specialise in football data and I will guess spend a lot more than we will on collecting and analysing the data. Yes, this will mean we are getting the same data as everyone else. But if that data is better than what we can with our finances put together on the same player then what advantage it gives us I am not sure. Outsourcing might not get you a bespoke product but it's normally more cost effective.

I do believe data does have a part to play going forward but here comes the but. Didn't we start looking and using data a lot more after relegation when the Americans started to get involved with them also helping us in this regard. If this is the case can someone please explain to me our recruitment from the old people's home. Information is only as good as the people reading it. At the moment we have not used the data well and this was supposed to be with the Americans help. I can also understand why a baseball team would find it very useful. Just like cricket, it's an individual sport played in a team game. Football has so many moving parts. It will help but for me it's not as easy as baseball to make work. Can it give you an edge, yes, has the edge already passed us by, probably. For any edge you have to either be the first or have more money to put into it than anyone else. My friend is a Watford fan, I know, the poor guy. He has looked into the pozo teams and they were one of the first to have a large scouting network in South America. This helped udinese pick up good and cheap players that they would play and then sell at a huge profit. The main problem was the big teams caught on and did the same. Now all their teams are struggling. Yes I think we should use data to a certain extent but we are not the first and do we really think on our budget we can do it that much better? From what i have heard we are not doing anything radical but just tweaking the way we collect the data. Is this really going to give us as big an advantage to make the outlay worth while ? I guess time will tell.

The Birmingham manager was doing well until he was removed for a vanity manager. I believe they were top 6 when sacked with a weaker squad than us.

I think you have summed up livermore tuesday night. Breaking things up, playing simple passes to more skillful players and out fighting Barnes. Also he would fit in well as he is the same age as most of our players 🤣

I'm a bit of a luddite so dont know how these figures are put together, but despite the 2 assists from Sara how did he get a better score than Livermore. He held the midfield and broke up play so well. Neat and tidy with the ball as well. The eye test for me does not agree with the scores.

I also think your reading a lot into that 😀 The comment was a reply to another comment saying if it was a Rugby Post the person in question would not have bothered reading. To my mind the moment you post WSL wages most people who are just into WSL or just men's football or love both would look as it's fair to say it will come back to how much the men are paid at some point. Strangely that is how it turned out.

Bu But if the title was why aren't Rugby players paid the same as footballers then I think you would look. The moment it says WSL wages you know it will be about the comparison to men's football. The answer by the way to why aren't Rugby players paid the same is revenue. Pure and simple. The same also applies to the WSL at this moment in time. It might not in the future but that is where it is.

The 3 times I believe is because a number of games are on free view via the BBC. The championship is only on sky? You might also have more up to date figures than me but from what I have seen WSL gets an average of 125k on all channels and championship games only on sky get 200k. If the figures I have seen are correct and they might not be as some were taken from a debate on how much sky pays the SPL, but that wouldn't be a fair comparison. If the championship was on the BBC I still believed more people would watch the championship. This might change but at the moment that is my belief.

At the time I hated it, now I love it. Its a retro classic.

In my mind the women's game has been asked to run before it could walk. The money put in by Sky and the BBC probably breaks even on the cost to produce with all that goes into covering a game compared with the viewing figures. The problem is the average gates mean at the moment most clubs are having to be funded by the men's teams. Also one of the reason the Premier league makes so much money is international tv rights. I would love to see the day when the women's game is bringing in as much money as the men's but unless people start attending and paying the silly money we pay to see the men's game how can they pay more money. I believe 400k is the most a female footballer has been sold for. That is less than the record in the men's game in 1968.