Hokie

I would certainly say it does. It's a very intelligent way of aggregating his predictions in a meaningful sense. Being done on a week to week basis, I would actually expect it to be more accurate than the beginning of the season one as you have knowledge of form, injuries, suspensions, players bought and sold in January, etc, minus your point about expecting a team to "bounce back" after a loss. (Which if it truly is a real effect, if you are aware of previous performance would improve your prediction. Your case simply begs the question.) Anyhow, the criticism over the years is that Lawro has favours the top teams. I ran this season's predictions (aggregated in table form) against actual points. The dashed line is perfection (y = x). Any team with higher predictions than actual performances lies below that line. Any team performing better than predictions is above it. https://postimg.org/image/vrhcinto5/ FWIW, the slope of the predictive model from a regression I ran is 0.573 (rather than 1) with standard error of 0.092, which means its more than 4.5 standard deviations from a slope of 1. I can say with 99.999% confidence that the predictions are biased towards teams towards the top. [Note: Anyhow, my I don't have a Ph.D. in stats, and likely have been picking up more lately at work than I am actually in full command of, so if anyone wants to critique the analysis, have at it.]

Not Saints related, but he seems to generally believe safety is easier than it is. He has teams in 17th predicted, by year, as achieving 30, 36, 32, 34, and 20 points. For this year he predicted 9th place would be on 38 points! Is he still on 2 pts for a win?

A bad moment was the first season back in the Premier League, second game (?) against Wigan(?) Fonte receives a back pass and rather than playing a safe ball back to the keeper, tries a clever turn on the opposing striker, is tackled cleanly, and the opposing striker pulls away with pace and scores. I recall thinking, "Welcome to the Premier League." To be fair, he soon learned what he could and could not do.

Really? Reads like crap science, published by a crap publisher, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_Research_Publishing), by a crank http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Persinger

Interesting formation. Watching online while distracted, but to me it plays like 5-3-2 or 3-5-2 with Bertrand-VD-Fonte across the center 3, Cedric and Targett as wings/wing-backs, and Long and Mane up top. Bertrand role seems odd, but can't argue with the end product.

Clearly, its not an assist if the pass wasn't that difficult or was far away from goal, the same way that PKs and tap-ins are not real goals. Can I also mention that ice hockey records two assists on each goal (if no defender touches in between) in an effort to troll a Ralf dig? (I suspect that second assists may well be the key ingredient in the Southampton Black Box.)

They are just waiting for all the players to come back from international duty to sign the shirt.

Assuming Clasie comes back, Romeu for Wanyama for the next few weeks, then rotate them according to card accumulations/suspensions. Against weaker sides, I'd like to see more of JWP as CM. Bit depressing for Reed, though. I would not be surprised to see Yoshida playing right back for Cedric on occasion, especially when playing against strong sides away from home.

Are we talking Subbuteo? 1.69 cm is far too short. The player is likely to be killed when trod on during a match. Of course, my sources (Wikipedia, if you must) claim Clasie is actually 1.69 m, or 163 cm.

No one is asking the bakers to enter into a gay marriage, or engage in homosexuality. (Which I would be against. I'd be the first with the sign at the protest saying, "No forced buggery against Christian bakers.") Does their religion prohibit homosexuality for those in the faith, or homosexuality for everyone? I have no problem with people practicing their faith. I have a problem with people who expect me to practice their faith. (No, I am not gay, but I do a number of things that would bother priest and mullah alike.) Without researching this case, I believe the baker is not, in fact, an individual baker, but in fact some form of legal entity recognized by the government. Beyond the question of whether or not a corporate entity can be "Christian", (was it baptized?) I do expect that such an entity not discriminate in exchange for the legal protections that forming such an entity provides. An individual has the right, in my mind to discriminate on the basis of religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, etc. A corporation does not. The bottom line to me is that the refusal was clearly discriminatory against a group of people who have suffered from their identity. (Such discrimination including loss of employment, physical assault--including death, and not too far past, incarceration.) I think I could be persuaded otherwise if the baker, in court, produced evidence of refusing business related to a wide variety of behavior/messages regarding things that their faith proscribes. This to me, on its face, seems politically discriminatory rather than religious.

Play JWP the second half?

I draw a line between "going over easy" and "diving." A dive for me is when a player goes down with no contact. If the player is fouled, and can struggle to keep his feet but in doing so loses a step, giving the defence an opportunity to recover, then going down ensures the ref does not play the advantage. As far as Mane, from what I see, he is flopping from light contact. It is a little embarrassing, but when I take into account his pace and body shape and the fact that he draws so many fouls, I am more forgiving. In many ways, I would like to see more cautions from referees on the cynical fouls that are used to stop him 30 and 40 yards from goal. That said, if he played for another team, I might be more critical. Just out of curiosity has he been carded for a dive this season?

Crap! Have we drawn Sunderland in the cup again?

Story line of the match? Bony and our central defence received 4 yellow cards in the first 40 minutes and we came out on top. Perhaps a bit lucky events happened the way they did. I remember thinking at 20 minutes, this match is not going to end with 22 players on the pitch. Was surprised how physical the match was, early going. Didn't really feel anything was dirty or cheap, just hard. Credit to Fonte for playing for that long with the yellow, but he seems quite good at that. (Does anyone keep a stat on minutes played with a yellow without being sent off?) Wanyama, Gardos, and Davis all looked very good coming on, especially the first two. Very strong in possession, although likely the events of the game (i.e. Swansea paying very high tempo for the first 40 minutes, then a man down the rest of the way) flattered them. Nice to see yet another goal from a central midfielder. Pelle looks like a load up front. A bit unlucky not to score before 80 minutes, then the last 15 seemed knackered and was terribly wasteful. MOTM for us, as EOA said was Bony. No choice for him in the poll, so I went with Bertrand (enjoyed his battle with Dyer, who I rate) although no one player for me stood out. Perhaps Fonte as well.

Just checking in on this thread again, and I am confused. Are we testing for wealth, brains, or being free from all government support before licensing parents? Or do we reckon it's all the same thing? I get that unlicensed breeders will be aborted, sterilized, and/or have children taken away from them. That's a nice touch. I often think that the only thing wrong with government is its limited authority over family decisions.