Jump to content

EPL 2018-19

Goo Punch

By Goo Punch
in Other Sports

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Jograves
Jograves

You're a frontrunner. That's why you 'support' that team. 

Firemans4Horn
Firemans4Horn

There’s still time to choose a different team. 

mdmost
mdmost

He gets in fist fights with his family just like you!

Goo Punch

Goo Punch 4275

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Not EPL related, but it turns out Arda Turan is crazy:

http://www.sportbible.com/football/news-arda-turan-facing-up-to-12-and-a-half-years-in-prison-20190130.amp.html

cliff notes: he hit on the wife of some Turkish singer at a club, then broke the guy's nose, then went to the hospital to apologize, brought a gun with him, told the guy he hit to shoot him, and then himself shot one round into the ground when the guy refused. So, yeah. He's nuts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Goo Punch

Goo Punch 4275

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
On 1/30/2019 at 4:24 PM, Bone3421 said:

City have arsenal everton and chelsea next 3 all in a weeks time..lets hope for some dropped pts

Liverpool has westham and bournemouth

City is going to murderlize us. Our defense is wrecked, we aren't that great to begin with, Auba might be the league's best goal scorer this year but is currently being played out of position where he's invisible, and City is gonna be our for blood after losing. 4-1 City. Maybe 5-1. 

Edited by Goo Punch
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Surly Bevo

Surly Bevo 25089

Posted
Posted
On 2/1/2019 at 8:57 AM, Goo Punch said:

City is going to murderlize us. Our defense is wrecked, we aren't that great to begin with, Auba might be the league's best goal scorer this year but is currently being played out of position where he's invisible, and City is gonna be our for blood after losing. 4-1 City. Maybe 5-1. 

Too optimistic...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ztejas

ztejas 43524

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

I've never understood why with scheduling differences due to cups, etc. that soccer leagues never figured out that they should sort the teams by points per match.

image.png

Because that wouldn't be an accurate reflection of the standings? You don't get any points until you've played the game. What you're suggesting would only swap two teams on the list with each other, anyways. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Huckleberry

Huckleberry 33045

Posted
Posted
Because that wouldn't be an accurate reflection of the standings? You don't get any points until you've played the game. What you're suggesting would only swap two teams on the list with each other, anyways. 
It would be much more accurate than total points. Are you familiar with baseball standings and why they're sorted by games back instead of wins?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ztejas

ztejas 43524

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:
49 minutes ago, ztejas said:
Because that wouldn't be an accurate reflection of the standings? You don't get any points until you've played the game. What you're suggesting would only swap two teams on the list with each other, anyways. 

It would be much more accurate than total points. Are you familiar with baseball standings and why they're sorted by games back instead of wins?

What do you mean accurate? If a team has more points because they've played more games, they've also won more games, right? Or lost fewer. If you rank teams by points per match you are ranking them based on assumption - not what has actually occurred. 

It makes more sense in a sport like baseball or the NBA where you are playing 80-160 games and teams will have played 7-8 more than others due to scheduling. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
WBT

WBT 20643

Posted
Posted
On 2/6/2019 at 3:59 PM, Huckleberry said:

I've never understood why with scheduling differences due to cups, etc. that soccer leagues never figured out that they should sort the teams by points per match.

image.png

 

On 2/6/2019 at 4:44 PM, ztejas said:

Because that wouldn't be an accurate reflection of the standings? You don't get any points until you've played the game. What you're suggesting would only swap two teams on the list with each other, anyways. 

Huck's way would be the best, but for those afraid of division I think ranking by fewest points lost rather than most points gained would give a better picture as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
IPoopOnWhoop

IPoopOnWhoop 104

Posted
Posted
9 hours ago, Bone3421 said:

Is it...is it fun
I want my 7pt lead back lol

It’s just a different than the past few years.

17/18 We ran away with it.

16/17 Chelsea ran away with it

15/16 Leicester city ran away with it (although this was pretty fun for other reasons)

14/15 Chelsea ran away with it

So 13-14 is really the last time we got to have a title race come down to the last couple of matches...that one was pretty cool too!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...