Matthew Le God

PSG do not operate under Premier League financial fair play rules.

Gustav Lillienberg returns to IFK Gothenburg on a 1 year contract

That doesn't really hold up as he was at his best when working with Pochettino, who expects all of those things.

It is not even remotely close to being equal.

"We shall fight on the beaches" - Churchill "The lady's not for turning" - Thatcher "I was ambushed by a cake!" - Johnson

I did answer the question. You can't grasp the answer was in that post. The question was flawed, I used an example to highlight the flaw in the question.

@stknowle asking someone 'why?' is not pedantic. Pointing out that you don't understand what pedantic means is pedantic. 😉😇

I didn't. Read the rest of the post you quoted.

I did answer the question through my example of why your question is fundamentally flawed. Plus I didn't say what you think I said. I said they are affected by money placed. Other factors also influence them, but due to money altering the odds they can't reflect liklihood as they can be distorted by a factors that has no connection to liklihood of the event occurring and thus are not a reliable source of liklihood.

If I were to place a £1k bet on the 25/1 team the odds would shorten. The shortening would not be due to the liklihood of the event occurring... it would be due to money placed.

Are you suggesting what I said isn't true?

Betting transfer odds do not reflect the liklihood of an event happening. They reflect the amount of money placed by punters reading rumours and bookies trying to make as much money as possible.

Odds reflect punters reading rumours and placing bets... then the odds shorten. It doesn't mean the bookies know anything about the deal, they are reflecting the actions of punters. It also snowballs as other people see odds shortening and place bets. Plus news outlets run stories based on shortening odds and people place bets based on that. None of that reflects the bookies knowing anything about any possible deal.

Odds reflect punters reading rumours and placing bets... then the odds shorten. It doesn't mean Betfair know anything about the deal, they are reflecting the actions of punters. It also snowballs as other people see odds shortening and place bets. Plus news outlets run stories based on shortening odds. None of that reflects the bookies knowing anything about any possible deal.

Yes, it is a no because your suggestion was ridiculous. Are you aware all I did on a forum that is used for discussion was ask 'Why?' in order to better understand what he was saying. I did not say he was wrong to say it was implausible, I passed no comment in that regard. I simply asked for his thoughts.

How would we know his point unless we ask for it? This is a forum... forums are for discussion not a list of statements. All I did was ask a question.

He said 'implausible'... meaning 'not seeming reasonable or probable'. Reason and probability isn't merely a feeling that doesn't have a justification behind it. It is not unreasonable to ask why someone thinks something is implausible. This is a forum... forums are for discussion not a list of statements.

Why?

Would you go as far as calling it an 'insane' signing?

Dilly Ding Dilly Gone!

Endless regression!

Why be bothered by rumours?

The source is in the Tweet, it is from a Daily Telegraph journalist.