[Albion] Three from five for the drop (and world-beating Huddersfield now relegation favourites)

[Easy 10]

We had a stroke of luck at Watford but didn't capitalise on it.

We had no luck at Watford. Woodwork was their MOTM.

 

[Langley]

Bournemouth because a club with ridiculously small stadium capacity should not be anywhere near the Premier League.

Size does not matter, it is what you do with it. And Bournemouth have earned that.

 

[Dick Head]

We had no luck at Watford. Woodwork was their MOTM.

I was thinking of the fact that we were playing two thirds of the match against ten men.

 

[Bozza]

That's a awful thing to say !!

I can understand why Palace would want Bournemouth to extend their Premier League dream, because as long as you keep managing to stay up you'll know there'a a noddier club with a shitter ground than your own.

They are few and far between.

 

[Easy 10]

I was thinking of the fact that we were playing two thirds of the match against ten men.

True, but Watford are still a decent outfit. CH was never going to go all-out attack away from home against them even when they went down to 10. They still have dangerous individuals with pace who can hurt you. We were a lick of paint (twice) from taking the lead, which was unfortunate.

 

[loz]

I can understand why Palace would want Bournemouth to extend their Premier League dream, because as long as you keep managing to stay up you'll know there'a a noddier club with a shitter ground than your own.

They are few and far between.

Very good, but I don't really care about ground sizes.

What I care about is the fact that clubs like Bournemouth, Palace and in days gone by Carlisle, Northampton, Wimbledon's Crazy gang, Notts county, Swindon and even Brighton can get to play with the big boys , it wasn't too long ago you played in a "small" ground in the Championship, so if Brighton had managed to get promoted while at the Withdean would you would have been OK if the Premier league had said "No your grounds too small / old / not good enough ?

Anyway going back to me original question...Do they look at teams played ??

 

[Dick Head]

True, but Watford are still a decent outfit. CH was never going to go all-out attack away from home against them even when they went down to 10. They still have dangerous individuals with pace who can hurt you. We were a lick of paint (twice) from taking the lead, which was unfortunate.

Oh well, a point's a point I suppose.

 

[Se20]

I can understand why Palace would want Bournemouth to extend their Premier League dream, because as long as you keep managing to stay up you'll know there'a a noddier club with a shitter ground than your own.

They are few and far between.

Of course Bozza, on the money YET again .
Everyone's knows the better the ground, the better the chance of staying up.

 

[Bozza]

Of course Bozza, on the money YET again .
Everyone's knows the better the ground, the better the chance of staying up.

Where did I say that?

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

.. so if Brighton had managed to get promoted while at the Withdean

There's hypotheticals, and there's THAT ! [emoji38]ol:

 

[Easy 10]

Very good, but I don't really care about ground sizes.

What I care about is the fact that clubs like Bournemouth, Palace and in days gone by Carlisle, Northampton, Wimbledon's Crazy gang, Notts county, Swindon and even Brighton can get to play with the big boys , it wasn't too long ago you played in a "small" ground in the Championship, so if Brighton had managed to get promoted while at the Withdean would you would have been OK if the Premier league had said "No your grounds too small / old / not good enough ?

What about if a club bypasses its structural limitations and cheats its way to promotion at the expense of other clubs who played by the rules ?

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Newcastle is up for sale so will Benitez stay?

https://twitter.com/SkySportsNews/status/919957222616195072

[tweet]919957222616195072[/tweet]

 

[crookie]

Newcastle is up for sale so will Benitez stay?

https://twitter.com/SkySportsNews/status/919957222616195072

[tweet]919957222616195072[/tweet]

Shame, I know he a t**t and pretty loathed by the fans, but no doubt it will be sold to foreigners, the fact that the 3 promoted clubs were all British owned helped slightly to redress the balance of Premier League ownership, which is a good thing IMHO

 

[Weststander]

I don’t view 15 clubs as probably safe from the drop at this stage. For example, in recent seasons we’ve seen (entitled fanbases and allegedly colossal) Villa, Sunderland and Newcastle drop.

Outside the top 6, this season I envisage Stains, Everton (possibly with a better manager), Watford and Newcastle safe. WBA probably too as Pulis knows how to get PL results.

Everyone else has a chance of being sucked in.

 

[HastingsSeagull]

If Tammy Abraham had joined us instead of Swansea I think we'd be 9th/10th and palarse wouldn't be bottom.

Bournemouth (who beat us away twice) and Huddersfield likely to be down there I reckon and think will be between us, and all the S teams (Southampton, Stoke n Swansea) to see which of us joins them. Our home form will be solid but I just don't see us currently picking up as much away as the other lower sides.

My dream selection to go down would be the 'Muff, palarse n West Ham though for sure.

 

[Mtoto]

Very good, but I don't really care about ground sizes.

What I care about is the fact that clubs like Bournemouth, Palace and in days gone by Carlisle, Northampton, Wimbledon's Crazy gang, Notts county, Swindon and even Brighton can get to play with the big boys , it wasn't too long ago you played in a "small" ground in the Championship, so if Brighton had managed to get promoted while at the Withdean would you would have been OK if the Premier league had said "No your grounds too small / old / not good enough ?

Anyway going back to me original question...Do they look at teams played ??

Should think that the bigger firms (the ones that still have specialist compilers) would, to the extent that whoever is trading that market would compile their own ratings for each team, which would reflect the quality of opposition they've faced.

Oddschecker isn't very good at real-time updates tho. Right now, their table on relegation prices shows Huddersfield still available at 2.38 with Stan James, but when you click through, they're 1.72. That's why it's betting to 275pc and not 300pc plus (as three go down).

 

[pauli cee]

Where are Southampton on the list? Only one point ahead of us and have played some of their easiest fixtures. Only played Man United out of the 'big teams' as well.

cheeky tenner just placed on saints to go down

 

[stss30]

cheeky tenner just placed on saints to go down

I think the odds are crazy, guess the bookies thinking is they can change manager if things get worse or sell Van Dijk and heavily invest in January, but neither of those things guarantee success.

 

[pauli cee]

I think the odds are crazy, guess the bookies thinking is they can change manager if things get worse or sell Van Dijk and heavily invest in January, but neither of those things guarantee success.

Has seemed like a disaster waiting to happen for a while now, continual loss of their best players and changing of managers, lets just hope it's this season and i'm £200 better off

 

[looney]

Where are Southampton on the list? Only one point ahead of us and have played some of their easiest fixtures. Only played Man United out of the 'big teams' as well.

Shit never seems to stick to them, the plus is there are usually betting margins worth taking them on.