Spot on. Bookmakers are trying to get the best odds not what team they believe are better, but what the betting folks do. Most people betting in the UK are heavily influenced by what they see in the PL and what they are getting told how European clubs are performing (Look at this thread title, Zidane's sack watch FFS, mostly stemming from the perceived mismanagement of Bale which is widely amplified by the British media). Although City could advance, I would favor Madrid to go through against a team that has been very underwhelming under a coach who also has been very underwhelming in the CL for almost a decade now.
Zidane sack watch - 19/20
- Thread starter JoaquinJoaquin
- Start date
That's such an outlandish claim.
What is interesting though is they often do ban people that wins too much if you make big bids and beat them.
So rather than getting better odds they just remove the people being better than the bookies if you beat them a lot.
I do think they use advanced stats, but most of the times have not watched the teams that much. I think most of us here know more about how we play and performs
than many of the bookies since they do not watch all our games. Although we are not really consistent under Ole. The fact we struggle against defensive teams that play deep doesn't effect the odds that much from what I have seen. It is of course not easy to create odds using parameters like confidence/momentum, fatigue, style of play/tactics etc. Easier to use chances created statistic, conversion rates, Possession stats, chances allowed, xG,xA etc. How far back you should go is also hard. Things change with time and the odds might not always reflect that. I am sure us being great under SAF still effects our odds. It did under Moyes. You could make millions betting against us then probably.
Do they analyzse which players start and the odds for them starting and things like that?
Like Hazard being back how does that effect the odds for Real Madrid? Laporte for City etc. Barca is very high even without Suarez to win the CL.
Rating the impact of someone like Hazard is hard since he has never played in the CL knockout rounds for Real. Thus no stat can really predict if he will raise his game or not and can't predict the role he will get against City.
Last edited:
Bookies (365, hills, Betfred etc) do not have any influence on the prices they offer on these games. They don't price them up themselves, they just follow Asian Bookmakers (Pinnacle, Singbet, IBC, ISN etc). These asian bookmakers allow huge sums to be placed on games and the prices react to the amount of money staked on each side (like a set of scales). The people staking on these sites use 10000x more analysis than any person you or anyone on here knows. They know what players are carrying knocks, how teams match up against others stylistically. Smartodds and StarLizard are the two biggest syndicates. They have 1000s of people employed watching basically every game across every top tier in the world and compiling stats and huge analysis for each game. They have absolutely huge data on every single player. Trust me, they analyse absolutely everything possible there is. The detail they go into is incredible.
Prices react to team news every time also. If Hazard is missing, people will bet the other team in asia which will cause the odds to drop for that team. Then Bet365 will follow their odds. The bookies do not react to team news at all manually, they just follow the Asian money every time on mainstream football. Bookies literally do nothing these days, they just follow the Exchange and Asia.
I feel quite confident.
They are not only defending well, it is the best defensive record in the history of la liga at this stage of competition (22 games-13 goals). There are also several players in a very good form.
I could name Casemiro,Courtois,Valverde,Mendy or Kroos,but actually everyone is playing good minutes when they have a chance.
Besides the midfielders have increased their offensive contribution a bit and Hazard will be back the next week,with plenty of time to be fit.
The fact that it is the only competition they have left may be an advantage or disadvantage.
We will see how they handle the competitive level. Madrid always move well in these scenarios, we will see how they do it.
They are not only defending well, it is the best defensive record in the history of la liga at this stage of competition (22 games-13 goals). There are also several players in a very good form.
I could name Casemiro,Courtois,Valverde,Mendy or Kroos,but actually everyone is playing good minutes when they have a chance.
Besides the midfielders have increased their offensive contribution a bit and Hazard will be back the next week,with plenty of time to be fit.
The fact that it is the only competition they have left may be an advantage or disadvantage.
We will see how they handle the competitive level. Madrid always move well in these scenarios, we will see how they do it.
This is just false. Prices have to as accurate as possible. Balancing the book may have been the mantra 100 years ago but this is not how bookmakers operate today. The reason City are favourites is because they are rated the better side. Another example: When the draw was made, there were many outlandish claims on here that Spurs would thrash Leipzig. In reality the German side are favourites because, again, they are the better team. This also goes against your theory of the UK betting public's bias setting the prices. This has no relevance. And when City host Liverpool in a few weeks, you will see they will be priced sub 2.20 which means they are the better team before home advantage.
Edit: I see Spiersey has explained that all already.
Last edited:
Seems like there is a lot they are not looking at too. I don't know enough about other leagues. Although regarding the PL odds they have has been strange at times. There is insane depth you can go into, but somethings can be simple and missed anyway.
I think the mental effects from management/momentum seems to be the biggest underestimated factor when I look at the odds.
Smart squad management and being able to tactically nullify threats also underestimated, but harder to call.
We see that happens in CL far more than in league games since the teams are better.
Klopp and Zidane does both these things very well. I think that is why the odds underestimate them even though they have won it the last 4 times.
Barca and Pep has been crap here and got knocked out early the last few years, but people still have full faith in them.
The positive feelings in Liverpool from getting all those wins and the momentum they show has not showed in the odds. I bet on them to beat Leicester when they won 4-0 and got great odds. Having won the club world cup and had a great run I expected them to win that game. Got around 2 for them. So around 50% for Pool to win when they had won all games, but one so around 95% win rate. What makes them give so good odds on Pool? City favorites against them at Anfield too. They have great odds against Everton even though we know Everton has been terrible at Anfield. I wish the odds was right about Pool, but they are missing something for sure.
Stats can be great, but there is so much they can't tell. Every game is really different and brings a new challenges. Comparing to similar games makes sense, but you have so few. CL games you get 6-7 at best for the best sides after the group. Even if you analyse all the stats for those games it will not be a large enough sample for most players. Think with Messi and Ronaldo we know what we expect from them in that tournament. With Hazard for Real we do not have a clue how he will react. We could expect him to be like his Chelsea, Belgium big game days and play his normal game, but Zidane might try something different. We also know City tends to be mentally weak in these games, but the odds do not reflect that.
These are not advanced things, but the odds doesn't seem to look at the bigger picture things that fans does. Has too much details with xG, xA, poseesion stats, individual skills blinded them for other qualities?
Last edited:
It's a big difference actually. You have to factor in home advantage (which is bigger in European games). City are rated the better side by roughly 0.5 goals, i.e. if they met on a neutral pitch tomorrow, City would be expected to score half a goal more on average. This is massive and can also be seen in the fact that City are as low as 1.50 to progress.
This view of being a better side is a problem. They have never played each other and play in different leagues. Thus it makes it hard to really compare them.
Going just by stats might not work since the teams will adapt the way they play and it will be a bigger challenge mentally for both sides.
You could try to compare the different styles they got and look at the players individually against each other, but the managers can do the same and change things around to suit themselfes.
I would probably hold leipzig as the favorites given how much Spurs have struggled, but at the moment it feels closer than it did at the start.
Neither side in amazing form, but Spurs seems to have improved a lot. Last year Spurs had it easy vs Dortmund though so might be the same with another german side.
Although they got smashed by Bayern this season, but group stage is a different thing.
Really? I thought bookmaking is a lot like making a market in any other good or contract. The bookmaker tries to make money by matching buyers and sellers, charging a vig, and taking on as little personal risk as possible.
These are the odds for RM - City first game
RM 8/5
Draw 11/4
City 7/5
Converting into decimals, it's 2.6, 3.75 and 2.4 and implied probs are 38.5%, 26.7% and 41.7% respectively.
(1/2.6)+(1/3.75) + (1/2.4) = 1.06794872 thus 6.794872% is the vig
"Real" odds of the event are:
RM 2.6 * (1 + 0.06794872) = 2.77666667 (implied probability 36%)
Draw 3.75 * (1 + 0.06794872) = 4.00480769 (implied prob 25%)
City 2.4 * (1 + 0.06794872) = 2.56307692 (implied prob 39%)
That's part A.
Part B, is how they came up with the odds/probabilities in the first place. @Spiersey is saying they came up with those numbers through statistical analyses, which they won’t disclose to the general public (because, you know, trade secrets). I disagree with those odds. I think you and I had this discussion in December when the draw was made and I've noticed the odds have definitely moved (City are still favorites, but not as much as a month and a half ago). Anyways, we'll see.
That does not matter, though. Neither does whether I agree or disagree. The betting markets predict the outcomes of matches perfectly, i.e. there is 1:1 correlation between closing odds and results. This is what matters. See here:
And here you can see that betting against closing prices yields no profit. So if 2.00 are offered but you think 1.80 is the true price, then you are wrong, not the market:
(based on a database of >100,000 games since 2007)
Bookmakers just cannot afford to offer lines that are off or they would get hammered. The closing price predicts the outcome better than any model there is, whether it's expected goals or just simply historical results. But the best gamblers and syndicates in the world have the most advanced metrics and models to shape that price.
Whether the public in the UK overrates English teams is totally irrelavant. That doesn't even cause a blip on the market radar. The UK bookies' turnover is tiny and dwarfed by what is traded in Asia
Are the lines always correct in every single instance? No (would be impossible to prove too). And if you are an expert on some obscure league such as Estonian 2nd division, they might be wrong quite often initially. But not in highly efficient, liquid markets like the Champions League. City are such overwhelming favourites that there is virtually no chance they are underdogs in reality. That just does not happen.
Last edited:
It's true that Real Madrid is defending really well (Mendy and Varane really stepped up for a couple of months, Valverde helps with the balance) but those records are always hard to interprete since i don't think i've seen such a lack in offensive talent/creativity in Liga in decades.
How do they determine that they predict the matches perfectly? All games and events are different.That does not matter, though. Neither does whether I agree or disagree. The betting markets predict the outcomes of matches perfectly, i.e. there is 1:1 correlation between closing odds and results. This is what matters. See here:
And here you can see that betting against closing prices yields no profit. So if 2.00 are offered but you think 1.80 is the true price, then you are wrong, not the market:
(based on a database of >100,000 games since 2007)
Bookmakers just cannot afford to offer lines that are off or they would get hammered. The closing price predicts the outcome better than any model there is, whether it's expected goals or just simply historical results. But the best gamblers and syndicates in the world have the most advanced metrics and models to shape that price.
Whether the public in the UK overrates English teams is totally irrelavant. That doesn't even cause a blip on the market radar. The UK bookies' turnover is tiny and dwarfed by what is traded in Asia
Are the lines always correct in every single instance? No (would be impossible to prove too). And if you are an expert on some obscure league such as Estonian 2nd division, they might be wrong quite often initially. But not in highly efficient, liquid markets like the Champions League. City are such overwhelming favourites that there is virtually no chance they are underdogs in reality. That just does not happen.
They might average odds that are close to reality over time, but still have odds not shaped by the reality of the situation.
if they underrate and overrate equally well then they can still get a similar average.
I would not stand a chance to beat the odds if they gave me 100 random games from leagues and teams I have no clue about.
Although there can be momets and situations where you can beat them.
There are many patterns and runs of results that are not shaped by the odds.
Liverpool are playing way above the odds this season and last season too. No prediction from the odds about that.
If you took a punt on Pool to win 90% of the games this season you would be rich by now. Certainly people have made lots of money on them.
Leicester another extreme example too. Real 3 CL wins in a row too. You can claim it is fluke and so on, but these things still happens.
Oles run too was not odds predicted. It didn't last that long though and now we can barely get any wins.
Confidence, momentum etc is key here and the odds do not respond quickly enough to that.
I'd like to know what kind of information they're using then, Liverpool was much better in the CL for the past 2 years+is currently much better in the League yet City has better odds than them?
Don't get me started about City having better odds than Real Madrid as early as in 2016/17, Pep's first season where he led the league for the first few gamedays and quickly fell far behind Conte's Chelsea.
The only season where you could have legitimately called Pep's City the biggest favorite was 17/18.
They use xG and similar stats would be my guess. Lots of possesion based stats too which Pep sides loves to see
. City creates more chances and score more goals against the weaker sides.
Although not sure how they bring that into CL stats. Do they use group stage stats against Zagreb and Atalanta then to show that they are great in CL?
Pool lost against Napoli so that brings them down in the ranking too? They have pretty low odds on Bayern too so maybe it is based on CL group stage stats a lot.
Madrid did poorly in the group too.
Although from the past we know that Liverpool and Real seems to raise themselfes past the group. With City we have seen the opposite.
They're most likely comparing betting odds and real results. Betting odds = probabilities of expected outcome. Over a large sample size (like 10,000 + games) I would expect odds and outcomes to correlate pretty closely. So if 33 out 100 teams priced at 3.0 win, then the odds are pretty efficient. That part I have no problem with.
Being right over a large sample size however, doesn't mean the bookies are right over every single one - which was my point all along, the odds for this game seem off - not Spurs, not Bayern, not Liverpool, not Juve, not Barca... City.
@Pagh Wraith
It'd be interesting to compare opening odds vs closing odds for this matchup. My belief is that the odds for Madrid would shorten sufficiently from mid Dec to mid Feb.
Regardless of how this will sound, City still play arguably the best football in Europe. Compared to Liverpool, they concede about as much chances, and create significantly more. Where Liverpool are obviously better than them is finishing. In any normal circumstances these teams would be close on the table. This season is not normal, as Liverpool have literally everything going their way (opposition missing open goals, getting every imaginable break, favourable calls, etc.), while for the City it's exactly the opposite.
The recent Spurs-Liverpool-City matrix is a case study for this phenomenon. City playing Spurs off the park and getting nothing for it, Spurs pulling wonderstrikes and getting goals from zero chances. Liverpool on the other hand getting free gifts and having Spurs missing great chances. And it's not just Spurs, other teams do the same pattern, Wolves for example. They're missing open goals vs Liverpool and have close to 100% conversion rate vs City, often pulling wonderstrikes.
This actually hasn't that much to do with the quality of defending. They concede about the same in regards to quality of chances. A bit of discrepancy is fine, as football is a volatile game, and also one with lots of psychological factors at play. Let's say there's a factor of teams being scared by Liverpool's confidence and intensity, and on the other hand encouraged by City's complacency. So teams tend to score easier vs City. But discrepancy so huge as the one that emerged this season has no logical explanation, except some kind of sorcery. It is bizarre indeed.
As pointed out by other users in this thread, people who make odds know all of this, and some more. They know infinitely more than average fan for whom Liverpool are the best because they always win. Football is a strange game in which bizarre patterns emerge from time to time, but bookmakers can't be reactionary about it like an average fan. And in the long run they will have it right.
The recent Spurs-Liverpool-City matrix is a case study for this phenomenon. City playing Spurs off the park and getting nothing for it, Spurs pulling wonderstrikes and getting goals from zero chances. Liverpool on the other hand getting free gifts and having Spurs missing great chances. And it's not just Spurs, other teams do the same pattern, Wolves for example. They're missing open goals vs Liverpool and have close to 100% conversion rate vs City, often pulling wonderstrikes.
This actually hasn't that much to do with the quality of defending. They concede about the same in regards to quality of chances. A bit of discrepancy is fine, as football is a volatile game, and also one with lots of psychological factors at play. Let's say there's a factor of teams being scared by Liverpool's confidence and intensity, and on the other hand encouraged by City's complacency. So teams tend to score easier vs City. But discrepancy so huge as the one that emerged this season has no logical explanation, except some kind of sorcery. It is bizarre indeed.
As pointed out by other users in this thread, people who make odds know all of this, and some more. They know infinitely more than average fan for whom Liverpool are the best because they always win. Football is a strange game in which bizarre patterns emerge from time to time, but bookmakers can't be reactionary about it like an average fan. And in the long run they will have it right.
Last edited:
You're only addressing league form. City has been horrendous in the CL for years and have gotten knocked out by weaker teams than them for 3 consecutive years.
Yeah that was what I thought. Would be interesting for them to do it with teams and leagues too (maybe they do). Granted the sample would be too small then particular if you just look at CL games. The feeling is that Bundesliga, La liga and Serie A are much more predictable than the PL sides based on tactical predictions, xG and stuff like that.Not seen a Leicester in those leagues and it is the same team that wins it every season dominating equally much. Real or Barca in Spain apart from the Atletico win season.
Also a team imploding like Mourinhos sides has twice is not that common. Took Chelsea to almost relegation first and us far down too.
Klopp did a bit with that in Germany although not as bad.
Then you get a bounce back from that with better results and so on. I know the odds failed at predicting that. Could make money to follow those Mourinho trends potentially. Now at Spurs he is not doing good enough though for the potential negative bounce to be profitable enough.
It's the same team. Cup competitions are pinnacle of football in media and fans mythology, but they actually give a very limited sample of games.
Last year City were a better team, but went out on away goals, in bizarre way. Year before Liverpool overwhelmed them with every strike going into the net, including offside goal. City had couple of goals disallowed if I remember correctly. That same year City outperformed Liverpool in the league by every possible measure (points, advanced stats), so it's fair to say they were the better team that year, but knockout competitions are what they are. Year before that they went out on away goals vs Monaco. They were still work in progress then, and retrospectively that Monaco team looks as good as City's back then. It simply hasn't clicked for them in Europe.
It is still relevant. League and cups are different. We have seen the same problems even for City in the league this season.
I don't think it is a fluke that get knocked out by 1 goal and small margins a lot.
They got some bad luck against Spurs, but also created the situation themselfes. Conceded 3 goals at home.
Crazy game and fun for everyone watching.
I do not see signs of more defensive stability in City. Laporte could make the difference, but not sure he will be fully up for the first game against Madrid.
Pep might go with a more defensive formation and play without forwards with Sterling and De Bruyne very advanced. Could be a good tactic in Madrid with Fernandinho and Rodri both playing in the midfield. City need one away goal though, but they will still create like they always do.
Last edited:
It's the same team, it's not the same competiton. Maybe it's Guardiola's fault, maybe it's the players, maybe both but there's clearly something wrong with City in CL. Being a PSG fan, i know what i'm talking about. They just look uninspired and unbalanced, it's not only about "clicking". Barcelona win leagues, Real Madrid win CL, mostly because one team is consistent and the other has more guts (at least they did with Ronaldo). And now, City isn't even consistent anymore.
One thing I like about Zidane is as clearly experienced from his playing career he has the mindset of a winner. Unlike the relative uselessness of our manager, Zidane has transitioned that formula into his management journey. I know people will point to the all the quality players Madrid have but in the last 10 years what manager has made a massive success of Madrid in recent times ?
I like the way City make use of possession but something tells me there's something missing with them in Europe. Could be stage fright or a lack of adaptation to the indifferences of the league, but they struggle on European nights where Madrid seem to thrive on such occasions. Going for Madrid to get the win.
I like the way City make use of possession but something tells me there's something missing with them in Europe. Could be stage fright or a lack of adaptation to the indifferences of the league, but they struggle on European nights where Madrid seem to thrive on such occasions. Going for Madrid to get the win.
It is a mental factor involved for sure. People underestimate these things. City got the same players and the same manager. Nothing indicate the mental factors will be different this year. They are missing penalties for fun this season too.
If they get a break with some early goals they could potentially gain momentum and confidence, but that will be hard against Real.
I am expecting Zidane to load up with midfielders and make it a hard game to dominate. Thus it should be close if City plays the cards right and my bet would be for Real to win it then. Ramos/Varane late header or something like that.
They need a better Sterling or Sane too if they want to really hurt Real big time and gain 2-3 goals up on them. Jesus on the wing and Mahrez is probably not enough at this level to do that. Aguero is amazing in front of goal, but has got older and can't dominate his defenders physically the same way he could in the past with his pace.
Thus if they stop the service to him he will not do much on his own.
Pep in pk shoutouts got a pretty good record to be honest. I wonder how given how poor they have been from the spot recently though.
Although he must be doing something right there. Maybe training it before and helping the keeper a lot?
Although it rarely comes to that in CL with away goals.
Last edited:
There you have it. They have won all of their penalty shootouts in cup competitions in recent years, if I remember correctly. Let's not forget how they won the title last year. They also win English cup trophies for fun. Aren't that hallmarks of a mentally strong team?
There are pychological factors and mental blocks at play in football, but arguably even more it's sheer randomness. People love simple explanations and disregard the latter. If there is something to various sorts of patterns, it's not that simple like in popular narratives. Also, these things aren't set in stone. People who make odds know that, and that's why they largely disregard popular narratives.
Last edited:
It's not a huge difference indeed. Madrid could win this one and it could be argued the chances for that to happen were high enough to predict it.
I think too much attention is being paid to the "favorites" tag. Why not just saying it's a pretty balanced one and both teams have enough weapons to go through?
Different competitions can effect them differently. CL is bigger than the other competitions they play in. We know they want to win that one desperatly. Same with PSG and probably Juventus too. Real and Pool has won so many so can be a bit more relaxed about it.
Atletico has often looked mentally strong, but not when they play against Real Madrid in the cups and they are desperate to win CL too.
A pk shoutout would be very fun here. We know City got a poor record this season from the spot. Real already beat Atletico to win the cup.
Less pressure in that one though.
Although Pep has historically been good although not in CL. Maybe he/coaching staff just analyse the opponents well before the possible events and helps his players a lot. In league games they might not really do it that much. Although Aguero had a crap record against lloris and didn't take the last pen for them
I would put my money on Real to win that one, but would not be shocked to see City win. Still I would not wish for Sterling to take one if I was a City fan.
This part is incorrect. City concede significantly better chances than Liverpool do. They concede fewer shots, which is why their xGA is so similar. They are unquestionably worse at limiting chances.
You're right that the difference shouldn't be that big, that's down to variance - players shooting better against city. But it's likely that the higher quality of shots they give up plays its part in that
By xG they're not
As to the tie itself, as always, fitness will be the most important factor, followed by variance
I think we match up well against them, particularly if sterling were to miss it due to injury as they'd have nobody who'd scare me in duels and that's our main defensive weakness. They'll likely dominate the ball and the play, but we're comfortable with that and technically have the skill and pace to hurt them. Tie will be decided in the boxes
Just had a look for this season. xG and xPTS does seem closer for the La liga teams. Valencia seems to be great at getting wins in close games going by the stats. Have not watched them so can't tell. Atletico seems to fail to find winners and goals in games which is no suprise. They are just not very good up front nor are they clinical.
Then the teams near the bottom have not scored enough and conceded too many goals when they should have avoided them.
In the PL things are much more crazy. Pool 20 points less by xG. That is based on how they play and being great at getting winners in close games.
Watching them you can see why they beat the stats. Then VAR and other stuff has helped gain extra points too when they deserved to drop them.
City wasting far too many chances and conceding easy goals.
Newcastle playing boring crappy football with set piece goals that have low xG and just defend for most of the games. The xG stats are crazy for them, but they are good at dealing with pressure and have a way to grind out wins even when they play like crap.
Us well we are terrible at defending set pieces. De Gea has been poor. Missed 4 penalties and been terrible to turn games around. Also conceding easy late goals in games early on in the season.
Nothing crazy beyond that.
The comparison with PSG is actually even more relevant with national cups. We had the record streak of cup games victories (i think in the world) with over 50 in a row. Which is totally insane because lets face it, at one point you let your guard down and loose to some random club that had the night of their lives (it's not even about this farmer league or not argument, top club can literraly loose to anyone in cups). Meaning that we were incredibily consistent in domestic cups but... still manage to choke in CL. So yeah, CL is something else, totally different. It's not about xG, chances created or god knows what, it takes a little something extra (and a bit of luck). Yeah you can loose early once because of a bad setup, maybe twice, but 3 times in a row means you don't have what it takes yet. It can change though, and sometimes it only takes one huge win to have the right mindset but as of right now, nor PSG or City have it.
Last year against us was insane. I thought we had a chance knowing your record and also with the momentum we had then at the time. No Neymar too.
Lukaku with some form too with 4 goals in 2 games. Said for fun we would win 3-1 with a Lukaku hattrick to my mates. Close there.
Although the gifts you gave us was just crazy. We didn't even attack well. Created nothing, but got 3 goals.
Do you think it might change with Neymar in form and Navas in goal? We know Navas and Neymar are CL winners and that could give a boost.
A performing keeper can make a big difference for holding it together in close games.
With City I see little that might change. Rodri might shield the defense better, but we have not seen that so far.
I don't think any player has won it before that they got. Pep has of course, but that was a long time ago.
United fans have a zidane sack watch?
You really cant make this up
You really cant make this up
Most "sack watch" threads are made in an ironic manner, after the manager in question loses a single game. Or sometimes the moment they're appointed.
Nah, many were derisive and thought Zidane would do poorly with this Real side with little investment and with very old players.
Surprise surprise, the man is a great manager and is inspiring a Kroos revival.
Just like any other set of supporters, it's tribal and we have our share of.. special.. supporters.
Not really. We're serious about our sack watch thread. Just look at page 1
I want to say it would have changed everything because Neymar doesn't seem to be affected by high pressure and even thrives on it (his game with barcelona against us was mindblowing, he was the only one in his team to believe they could do it) and Navas has focus abilities beyond anything i've seen but.... who knows. I mean Buffon wasn't supposed to be affected by pressure and he gave an easy goal to Lukaku. A couple of our players have yet to show there ability to slow down or control the game under pressure (Thiago Silva, Verratti), some others can have amazing or terrible nights (Di Maria). It's very hard to predict what would have happenned, but in my mind if Neymar in his current shape had been on the pitch last year in the 2nd game, it would have been a completely different story. Still though, we shouldn't have needed Neymar to finish the job, as you pointed out Man Utd didn't create a whole lot, but we just lacked the guts in order to put the final nail in the coffin (which is ridiculous when you see how much players like Verratti totally bullied your entire midfield in the 1st game).
And this year, like every year, everyone in Paris pray that we'll finally see this winning mindset that eludes us for the past decade or so. We only saw it once against Chelsea when we one after playing most of the came 10v11.
Sure some people did - I don't think most of the 19 pages here are actually about Zidane being sacked though. It's more of a general Zidane discussion thread.
One thing about the xG and Liverpool, am I right in thinking they have greatly outperformed it last season and this. If this is the case then we are talking about over 60 league games now, surely this is too long of a streak to be a statistical outlier and there must be something the xG is missing.
I believe what you are describing as luck is founded in nerves. Liverpool are seen as this unbeatable team right now so players nerves get the better of them when playing against them. City are beatable so players have a bit more composure playing them
Liverpool are proving that XG is a bag of shite. Never liked XG. Just use your damn eyes to see which teams and players are good