Black Cat Bone

How on earth can you draw France, Germany and Portugal in one and the same group?

The football gods must be smiling on Brexitania who all of a sudden seem to be (US) bookie favourites to take the title....

never/ever wrote:How on earth can you draw France, Germany and Portugal in one and the same group?

The football gods must be smiling on Brexitania who all of a sudden seem to be (US) bookie favourites to take the title....

Probably money down the drain as Engerland will almost certainly have to meet one of those three teams in the last 16

Bump. Anyone, erm, getting excited?

I don't quite understand on what basis England are favourites (given France are world champions and Belgium apparently the No 1 side if nothing else) but for the first time that I can remember i might actually agree with it.

Latest Euro 2020 winner odds
England are 4/1 favourites to win Euro 2020 while France, winners of the 2018 World Cup, are second favourites. Belgium, the No 1 side in the Fifa world rankings, are third favourites. Odds provided by Paddy Power, correct at the time of publication and subject to change.

England – 4/1
France – 5/1
Belgium – 13/2
Spain – 7/1
Italy – 8/1
Germany – 8/1
Portugal – 10/1
Holland – 12/1
Denmark – 25/1
Croatia – 30/1

I am astonished England are favorites. I've clearly not been paying attention to Intetnational football lately

trans-chigley express wrote:I am astonished England are favorites. I've clearly not been paying attention to Intetnational football lately

I quite like their team, it seems quite nicely balanced, and I do fancy their chances. And it just seems fcking typical that in the year of Brexit they would get this. But there's really very little to my mind that makes them demonstrable "favourites".

I like Southgate but he isn’t the man to win a major tournament. He will go conservative when the going gets tough, and quite possibly before that.

What really pisses me off is that just about every major tournament in the last 20 years has seen us select at least one “top” player carrying or just returning from an injury - it NEVER works.

This time we’ve got 2 - Henderson and Maguire. Even though they shouldn’t even be there, Southgate will almost certainly try to get them involved as early as possible.

I also have a fear he will start with Rashford and Sterling just because a year or 2 ago they were decent which would make it very hard to play Foden and Grealish who, together with Kane and Mount, should be the 1st names on the team sheet.

I am not a great fan of Pickford the goalkeeper but Pickford the playmaker is astonishing. We should devise a plan to get the most out of that ability; play on the break and as soon as it touches his hands sprint forward creating targets for him to aim at. Playing out from the back is what will undo us.

Whatever, 4/1 is ridiculous imo.

Don't necessarily agree with your last point, England have to get more comfortable in possession in all areas of the pitch, if they are to develop into serious contenders, but take your points on Southgate.

I think England have a chance, if only because there's no outstanding team. If they can build momentum and confidence, who knows? If I was laying money I'd go Portugal.

Geezee wrote:

trans-chigley express wrote:I am astonished England are favorites. I've clearly not been paying attention to Intetnational football lately

I quite like their team, it seems quite nicely balanced, and I do fancy their chances. And it just seems fcking typical that in the year of Brexit they would get this. But there's really very little to my mind that makes them demonstrable "favourites".

Bookies' odds are based on how much money has been placed by punters, rather than a considered assessment by anyone with pretensions to expertise. It's probably down to nothing more than Engerland fans being perhaps more inclined to gamble and more jingoistic than those in other nations

Rayge wrote: It's probably down to nothing more than Engerland fans being perhaps more inclined to gamble and more jingoistic than those in other nations

I don't have any data to back this up but I'm not convinced that the England fans are particularly more jingoistic about football or anything else. Attitudes here in Spain seem to be pretty similar, just a bit less drunken.
On the other hand, the British have a much greater tradition of betting on sports than they do here. Betting shops have been a significant part of British life for a looooong time whereas they don't exist in Spain. Here, the big thing has always been the lottery (of which there are many), for which there are lottery shops everywhere, and even cabins in the street dedicated to one specific lottery. There is also the Quiniela, which is a bit like the Pools, in that you predict the results of a string of top football matches (home win, away win or draw) and get points for how accurate your predictions are. Getting them all correct will normally win you a hefty jackpot, but there's nothing more ad hoc than that.
I have a feeling that widespread betting on sports other than horse racing in the UK only became big in the 70s but it's still far more ingrained than it is here.

Rorschach wrote:I have a feeling that widespread betting on sports other than horse racing in the UK only became big in the 70s but it's still far more ingrained than it is here.

That's right, although there was a lot of off-course betting on dogs. Variable (as opposed to fixed) odds betting on football only really took off in the 1980s. In the 21st century you can bet on scorers, time of the first corner, first yellow cards and all kinds of other ephemeral moments with the odds changing all the time when the game is actually on.

Rayge wrote:

Rorschach wrote:I have a feeling that widespread betting on sports other than horse racing in the UK only became big in the 70s but it's still far more ingrained than it is here.

That's right, although there was a lot of off-course betting on dogs. Variable (as opposed to fixed) odds betting on football only really took off in the 1980s. In the 21st century you can bet on scorers, time of the first corner, first yellow cards and all kinds of other ephemeral moments with the odds changing all the time when the game is actually on.

I worked as a board marked for Ladbrooks two summers in the mid 70s and it was all about horses, but at least one greyhound meet a week, usually on a Saturday, if I'm remembering correctly.
You could bet on football matches and even cricket matches before the event and I think that even expanded between the two summers I was there. I think it was only in the second year that you could suddenly bet on the final score. But, as you say, nothing like it is now.

Rorschach wrote:

Rayge wrote:

Rorschach wrote:I have a feeling that widespread betting on sports other than horse racing in the UK only became big in the 70s but it's still far more ingrained than it is here.

That's right, although there was a lot of off-course betting on dogs. Variable (as opposed to fixed) odds betting on football only really took off in the 1980s. In the 21st century you can bet on scorers, time of the first corner, first yellow cards and all kinds of other ephemeral moments with the odds changing all the time when the game is actually on.

I worked as a board marked for Ladbrooks two summers in the mid 70s and it was all about horses, but at least one greyhound meet a week, usually on a Saturday, if I'm remembering correctly.
You could bet on football matches and even cricket matches before the event and I think that even expanded between the two summers I was there. I think it was only in the second year that you could suddenly bet on the final score. But, as you say, nothing like it is now.

In the late 70s early 80s I was a betting shop manager (Corals and then an independent) and bets on football were extremely limited - it's a bit vague in the memory but IIRC you couldn't do single bets on 99%+ of games. Maybe the FA Cup Final but that was about it. Absolutely no correct score betting or anything else.

Corals produced a printed sheet with selected games but only for Saturdays and no singles, only multiples with a very over-round book stacked in the bookies favour.

When I was involved, yes, there was morning dog racing on Saturday mornings broadcast over the tannoy, and also filled in on light horse racing days - a Godsend when the horses were cancelled due to weather.

Are they still doing bets on 1st corner / throw in etc.? At one point I believe that was all stopped because it was such an easy thing to fix.What odds for a throw in in the 1st 5 seconds of the game? Oh, 20/1... Ok then thanks.... and the team kicking off just punted it straight into touch!

Eriksen collapses on pitch! I hope he pulls through.

Rayge wrote:Bookies' odds are based on how much money has been placed by punters, rather than a considered assessment by anyone with pretensions to expertise.

Close but no cigar.

It's actually based on what the bookie stands to lose, not how much has been placed on the bets.

A perfect 'book' for a bookie is one in which, no matter the result, they win. They do this by shortening/lengthening the odds and/or by 'laying off' bets that threaten to unbalance their book, by placing bets with - you've guessed it- other bookies, on the outcomes that unbalance their own book.

That is how the term 'bookmaker' came about - it is literally one that makes a book of bets, that they hope mean they cannot lose from.

And, re your view that making a book has nothing to do with expertise...someone has to make the 'first 'book' and offer odds. If they get THAT wrong, they can get stung badly and in a position whereby they really do struggle to make a profit, no matter what they do to recover.

Good stuff from England today. But have you seen Austria’s first two goals? Brilliant passes.

Diamond Dog wrote:

Rayge wrote:Bookies' odds are based on how much money has been placed by punters, rather than a considered assessment by anyone with pretensions to expertise.

And, re your view that making a book has nothing to do with expertise...someone has to make the 'first 'book' and offer odds. If they get THAT wrong, they can get stung badly and in a position whereby they really do struggle to make a profit, no matter what they do to recover.

I was simplifying things for Rorschach, DD. I know that the way you describe it is the way it works - I spent enough time in bookes in the the 1970s. Of course the person who opens the book has a clue, as does anyone who sets fixed odds - I was referring to the way the odds shorten or lengthen once the book has opened.

Incidentally and apropos of nothing in particular, I learned this morning that Peter Harris, a friend from university day with whom I was still vaguely in touch, died last week of cancer.

Positive Passion wrote:Good stuff from England today. But have you seen Austria’s first two goals? Brilliant passes.

Indeed, and particularly the pass for the first Austrian goal was sublime. Also, what exactly was wrong with Marko Arnautovic after he'd scored, he looked demented?

Watching Modric play, even at 34/35, and how he knits the midfield together always reminds me how much I wanted United to sign him years ago, I believe Fergie tried to no avail. A class act.

I love Wales's Australia kit!

This is the tournament of magnificent assists. Bale's ball to Ramsey was sensational.

Skin of their teeth stuff from Wales and rode their luck in places but still an impressive team/performance. Italy looking so good.