egg

It looks like a cheap Turkish knock off.

Yep - the simple explanation is that xG is bollox.

It suggests to me that the xG is unreliable guesswork. People/teams don't "overperform" or "underperform" against their xG, it's just that some statto guessed wrong, and that on the pitch, football doesn't go the way that it does on a spreadsheet.

I'd not heard that, but there was a recent directive that female judges are no longer to be called madam or ma'am, and males no longer called sir. A nice gender neutral "judge" instead.

Test

I haven't commented on the stuff you post about each other. I've commented that it's weird that you apparently block the bloke, and then reply to him. If I want to ignore someone, I would actually do that. I wouldn't get chippy with them and whinge about them all over the place.

Football was available to my girls when they were kids, but they were hardly welcomed. They didn't see Beckham as a role model in the way that they would have seen Jill Scott as one. My granddaughter wants to play football "like the ladies on TV" and "win trophies like them". That's because her mother has an interest in seeing women play football so they watch it together. I don't enjoy women's football personally, but I respect the positive influence it has on girls that mens football doesn't have.

Not sure you've read the room on that one Duckie. Nowt wrong with Jill Scott wanting girls to be as keen on football as boys.

Soda

The water thing is crazy. I've been told to go 12 miles away to Winchester for bottled water. Not much good when I need to flush the loo and wash my hands. Not sure those without transport are supposed to get on - no offer to deliver.

Jesus wept. I couldn't give a monkeys what you and Turkish say about each other. If you want to tangle with him, crack on, but perhaps stop whining about it.

It's variable. I haven't seen number for the total cost but it'll be vast. On a linked ish theme, when discussing public sector pay rises, people never consider the consequential pension cost linked to that pay, especially in schemes that will revert to final salary post McCloud.

Defined benefits are where the pension benefits are defined. That could be linked to final salary, or something else, ie a career average salary. The NHS 1995 scheme was final. The later schemes aren't. I've touched upon values in my previous post. Yes the cev is arbitrary, but that's not the true value, or the cost to the public purse. What happens in the private sector isn't really relevant to the discussion and very few private employers have pensions that match the state schemes. ExxonMobil, BAT, NATS, the uni scheme, and a few others, are superb though.

When I talk about values, I refer to the actuarial fav not the artificially low cev issued by the prpa. it's the fav that more accurately represents the cost of that pension to the taxpayer, or what it cost to buy a replacement or equivalent. The fav (and to a lesser extent the cev) of a huge number of public sector schemes is north of a million. I've got PODE reports sat on my desk for a variety of public sector schemes at that level (service personnel, doctors, police officers) and lots for more junior employees (nurses, pc's, lower level service personnel) at £650k or more.

Reservoir

Bazunu in goal for me, and Salisu rather than ABK who looked unfit last night. Otherwise your team. Although there's a case for Edozie over Aribo, I'd have him off the bench.

As I said, I'm not convinced that Tella offers enough. I think he offers more than Armstrong though and if I had to have one, it'd be Tella.

Any worse than Armstrong? For me Tella offers more. Probably not enough, but more.

Humphrey

No, I ventured outside. I saw a man climbing a ladder, another jogging on a wet pavement, and even saw someone ride a bike. I've never seen such risky behaviour in my life.

All schemes are different, but the values are huge. The 1995 NHS scheme falls in at age 60 with no deferment incentive. For someone retiring then on say £30k pension, that scheme has a value of north of a million. Not shabby. The police schemes fall in earlier (ditto firemen and forces) so have a much higher value as they're secure for a longer period. The McCloud decision, essentially, will restore people shifted from final salary to lesser defined benefit schemes to where they were. The total cost will be eye watering.

Leave that with me tomorrow Whelk and I'll give you actual figures for that sort of scenario. I'll also give you the fair actuarial value, ie what it would cost someone in the private sector to buy the equivalent. Armed forces and police similar. Pension values of 7 figures are very common.

Sounds ideal! But underestimate SoG at your peril I reckon.

There is no irony on the pension point. I deal with public sector pensions daily. The cost to the public is eye watering, and will only increase after the McCloud judgement. Those complaining often overlook the significant value of their pensions.

That presupposes that people are interested in your response to Turkish's posts about you. I doubt anyone is and I get that you can see his posts, but you ain't gotta reply. I support nobody. Seems to me that your choice is to either fight with the bloke and stop moaning about it, or actually ignore him. Seems simple enough.