Heroes & Villains, the Aston Villa fanzine
Heroes & Villains => Heroes Discussion => Topic started by: paulcomben on May 23, 2013, 04:44:02 PM
-
Across the season, Mark Lawrenson's negative score predictions for Villa would have seen us relegated on 27 points. The miserable, dreary, useless prat.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22596125
-
Don't sweat it, he had QPR, Newcastle and Sunderland 8,9 and 10....
-
He did predict relegation for Villa even after we beat Reading and QPR as I remember, and even Robbie Savage was saying we'd probably be OK at that point!
-
Move along nothing to see here, this is about Mark Lawrenson.
-
QPR he had down for 56 points lol!
Arsenal 91 points...
Swansea 30 points....
Brilliant.
-
He got 1 one of the 20 clubs in their correct final position. Now I can see why he earns the big money as a football expert, the man is a genius.
-
I can't believe the BBC still pay him.
Do they think there is anyone anywhere in the country who actually appreciates his "insight"?
-
I've never understood the obsession on this site over him. Who cares what he thinks? I certainly don't
-
It's the equivalent of going to the races and backing all the favourites, a dull, colourless approach that should come as no surprise originating, as it does, from a man who possesses all the charisma of an old sofa dumped on waste ground that has been relentlessly rained upon for months.
-
Saw that yesterday, thought that bottom seven or so would never win away.
-
I've never understood the obsession on this site over him. Who cares what he thinks? I certainly don't
Because at times like this it's fun to laugh at how crap he is!
-
Predicting that Southampton would lose every game in 2013 but when they were safe saying "I always knew they would stay up" is priceless.
Also surprised to read that Everton's away record was so bad. We won more than them and should have added another at Goodison.
-
The predictions for QPR just shows the absurd hype surrounding Harry Redknapp
-
Not such a big deal to me, I over rate Villa and think we can draw or sneak a win every game.
I'm certain that if any of the other "experts" had all their score predictions put into a league table
they'd get lots of things wrong too.
Fair play to Lawrenson he's the only one who does something like this, and he (seemingly) gets stick all season for it.
Its meant to be a bit of fun, and I think it is.
His opponent last week was a puppet from Cbbc, that tells me its probably not meant to be taken seriously!
-
Bland, no insight into the reasoning behind his opinions apart from stating the obvious, for example 'The two Manchester clubs and Chelsea all have a chance of winning the title' and 'You have to fear for the promoted sides'. Points out that sides letting in a lot of goals and losing a lot of games and are near the bottom are letting in a lot of goals and losing a lot of games and are in danger of going down. Money for old rope. I would love to tell him face to face that Gary Neville is a thousand times better and also has a lot more medals.
-
He's an absolute moron. I can't stand him. And his 'punditry' is utter bollocks.
-
What is the point of Mark Lawrenson.
-
I like the way that when he does co-commentary on the radio he'll make a "joke", and there's always a prolonged silence after it because it's never funny.
But apart from that, yeah he is just a dreary bellend.
-
Not such a big deal to me, I over rate Villa and think we can draw or sneak a win every game.
I'm certain that if any of the other "experts" had all their score predictions put into a league table
they'd get lots of things wrong too.
Fair play to Lawrenson he's the only one who does something like this, and he (seemingly) gets stick all season for it.
Its meant to be a bit of fun, and I think it is.
His opponent last week was a puppet from Cbbc, that tells me its probably not meant to be taken seriously!
But he sucks all the fun out of it by being so conservative to the point that there is no point. And while I'm at it, "fair play" my arse, he gets paid.
-
What is the point of Mark Lawrenson.
To make Alan Shearer look less bad.
-
What is the point of Mark Lawrenson.
To make Alan Shearer look less bad.
Is the right answer.
-
What is the point of Mark Lawrenson.
To make Alan Shearer look less bad.
It is quite an achievement to be the worst of the bunch on MOTD, along with being the worst manager in the history of both Oxford and Peterborough.
-
I always remember that World Cup match where Togo were playing and John Motson started his commentary by reeling off information about Togo's form and key players, then handed over to co-commentor Lawrenson for his opinion. "No idea" was his expert reply.
-
Really couldn't give a shit. He's still not even a tenth as irritating as Tyldesley.
-
He's an absolute moron. I can't stand him. And his 'punditry' is utter bollocks.
This.
-
He is in his mid 50s now.
Lawrenson is why I have no problem with alleged BBC ageism, it just needs to be less gender specific.
-
Really couldn't give a shit. He's still not even a tenth as irritating as Tyldesley.
Totally agree. But him and Savage were actually nearly right!!
-
The biggest problem I have with him, and with everyone who is paid in the media to predict results, is that there is an industry built around predicting results, which has a hell of a lot of experts who are far better at it but because they've never played professionally their opinions are considered pointless. Get some bookies making the predictions along with a decent justification for their choices and I'd be a lot happier.
-
The BBC can't really promote bookmakers on their website. Advertising, innit?
-
Don't need to promote bookmakers, just find one of the best odds setters at one of the big bookies and offer him a job for the money they pay Lawro they'd get someone.
-
The article suggests he's better at predicting than the bookies. Had you bet on the outcome he predicted in each game you'd have made a profit.
I remember Sky interviewing a bookmaker who said he thought "bet of the week" was Villa to win away. This was in anticipation of the Stamford Bridge game.
-
How about the BBC clear them all out ?
Next seasons MOTD presented by Fergie, predictions and punditry from Becks, Scholesy and Owen ?
-
The article suggests he's better at predicting than the bookies. Had you bet on the outcome he predicted in each game you'd have made a profit.
You would, but it's not particularly impressive.
"I'm delighted to hear I've beaten the bookies, because in my experience they don't get too many things wrong," says Mark Lawrenson as the BBC website grab the opportunity to tell us that Lawro's predictions really aren't as bad as we all thought after all. Beaten the bookies, eh? Wow. Well done Lawro. We take it all back.
The final table constructed from Lawro's predictions might have Manchester United ending the season with a record 96 points, QPR sitting pretty in eighth, Swansea relegated and Southampton somehow staying up with just 30 points, but ignore that table. He beat the bookies!
Except. Erm. Wait.
According to the BBC fluff: 'The ex-Liverpool defender turned BBC football expert correctly predicted 200 of the 379 results (win, lose or draw), giving a 52.77% success rate. The bookmakers successfully predicted 199 correct results (ie the home win, draw and away win result with the shortest odds), giving a success rate of 52.36%.
'If you had put £1 on the shortest odds offered by the bookies in each of the 380 games (ie the result they thought most likely), then you would have lost £28.91 over the course of the season. If you had put £1 on all 379 results Lawro predicted, you would have made £18.60.'
Which all makes perfect sense and means Lawro really did beat the bookies...if the bookies ever offered their shortest odds on the draw. Which they absolutely don't. So the point is entirely moot. But yeah, well done Lawro.
-
The article suggests he's better at predicting than the bookies. Had you bet on the outcome he predicted in each game you'd have made a profit.
You would, but it's not particularly impressive.
"I'm delighted to hear I've beaten the bookies, because in my experience they don't get too many things wrong," says Mark Lawrenson as the BBC website grab the opportunity to tell us that Lawro's predictions really aren't as bad as we all thought after all. Beaten the bookies, eh? Wow. Well done Lawro. We take it all back.
The final table constructed from Lawro's predictions might have Manchester United ending the season with a record 96 points, QPR sitting pretty in eighth, Swansea relegated and Southampton somehow staying up with just 30 points, but ignore that table. He beat the bookies!
Except. Erm. Wait.
According to the BBC fluff: 'The ex-Liverpool defender turned BBC football expert correctly predicted 200 of the 379 results (win, lose or draw), giving a 52.77% success rate. The bookmakers successfully predicted 199 correct results (ie the home win, draw and away win result with the shortest odds), giving a success rate of 52.36%.
'If you had put £1 on the shortest odds offered by the bookies in each of the 380 games (ie the result they thought most likely), then you would have lost £28.91 over the course of the season. If you had put £1 on all 379 results Lawro predicted, you would have made £18.60.'
Which all makes perfect sense and means Lawro really did beat the bookies...if the bookies ever offered their shortest odds on the draw. Which they absolutely don't. So the point is entirely moot. But yeah, well done Lawro.
Still more impressive than Sky's psychic Polar bear that is going to predict the Champions League Final winner.
Proof that she is psychic is that she correctly managed to predict one out of the two semi-finals.
Although a psychic Polar bear would still be much better than Shearer as a pundit. Maybe she could eat Lawrenson too, then everyone would be happy.
-
How about the BBC clear them all out ?
Next seasons MOTD presented by Fergie, predictions and punditry from Becks, Scholesy and Owen ?
Problem with that would be that MOTD would always be 8 minutes longer than you thought it would be.
-
Robin Friday was right about Mark Lawrenson all those years ago when he shat in his kitbag after being sent off.
-
Fuck Lawro and the horse he rode in on. The blokes not fit to blow my nose.
-
I'm just glad I got the opportunity to call him and that little Stoke fan (Nick Hancock?)who used to be on everything in the 90s a pair of twats when they were filming some poor quality programme outside my house (Moor Green FC).
He's as much a charmless automaton fannyclown in real life as he is on the TV.
-
Since 'Paul The Octopus' popped his eight clogs the media have been determined to contrive a successor. The polar bear being the latest. Seeing as this annoys me as much as 'Lawro' (80's speak for a Liverpool player, as in 'Aldo' and 'Beardo'), I would prefer they stick him in a Zoo and get him to guess results. Then two things that annoy me are handily packaged into just one big annoyance.
-
How about the BBC clear them all out ?
Next seasons MOTD presented by Fergie, predictions and punditry from Becks, Scholesy and Owen ?
With Phil Dowd as the "referee expert" it would be a massive Manu Lovefest!
No change there then!
-
Jonathon Ross and Russell Brand hosting and phoning up referees to 'question them' on their decisions (and female members of their family). A panel of Roy Keane, Joey Barton and that bloke off Big Brother from a few years back who had Tourettes as a bit of a wildcard.
-
I can't believe the BBC still pay him.
Do they think there is anyone anywhere in the country who actually appreciates his "insight"?
Not just that but I must be the only one who can't stand his apparent witty remarks when he's doing co-comms on 5 live? That's one reason to be thankful BBC have no live football currently.
-
The way that they try to hint at past games between members of the MOTD, or equivalent, panel, hinting about bad tackling or poor scoring records, pisses me off. This is especially annoying when the careers of the individuals concerned do not overlap at all.
-
It is a totally bland old boys club that would only appeal to casual football fans who want to see the goals. Even ITV are ahead of them for God's sake with the likes of Dixon and Keane. And Gary Neville is excellent on SKY. The likes of Souness and Hoddle tell it as they see it too. Even the resident fence sitters like Redknapp and Wilkins are more value than the MOTD three.
-
The BBC really do employ a lot of shit pundits. And as soon as they find anybody with a modicum of insight, such as Dixon, they get saddled with Colin Murray on MOTD2 unable to break into the Saturday night boy's club. So they run off to ITV, SKY or whoever will pay them enough and give them a lead pundit's role.
-
Why don't the bookies ever offer the shortest odds on a draw?
-
Don't need to promote bookmakers, just find one of the best odds setters at one of the big bookies and offer him a job for the money they pay Lawro they'd get someone.
Don't need to promote bookmakers, just find one of the best odds setters at one of the big bookies and offer him a job for the money they pay Lawro they'd get someone.
Don't need to promote bookmakers, just find one of the best odds setters at one of the big bookies and offer him a job for the money they pay Lawro they'd get someone.
But then everyone would back their predictions and it would fuck the bookies up wouldn't it?
-
Don't need to promote bookmakers, just find one of the best odds setters at one of the big bookies and offer him a job for the money they pay Lawro they'd get someone.
We have some smug ****** by the name of Tom Waterhouse spruiking his booky business while pretending to be a pundit during the Rugby League over here... so be careful what you wish for.
-
Why don't the bookies ever offer the shortest odds on a draw?
Psychologically people are moved to bet when they have a strong view on the outcome of a game. Generally this will be that a particular team will win. It's difficult to be convinced the game will be a draw. As the odds reflect the weight of money bet a draw is often longer prices that the actual probability.
-
Thanks lovejoy, you are a wise man.
-
If I was that wise the bookies would owe me money not the other way around!
-
I take part in a predictions league on another site and Lawro's predictions have been inserted there for the best part of the last ten years. He does surprisingly well overall - he finished sixth in Division 1 this season. The site also tells you how much you would have won had you bet on each of the predictions made and only five players out of 160-odd would have made more money than him.
-
I take part in a predictions league on another site and Lawro's predictions have been inserted there for the best part of the last ten years. He does surprisingly well overall - he finished sixth in Division 1 this season. The site also tells you how much you would have won had you bet on each of the predictions made and only five players out of 160-odd would have made more money than him.
That may well be the case but he's still an arse biscuit.
-
Lawro's predictions are indicative of the lazy bell end he is. More so his justifications.
Fawning of Appy Arry, consistent 1-1 draws between the 'Big' teams now minus his beloved Liverpool and stating the bleedin obvious.
The beeb need a serious overhaul of their pundits and please don't give Michael Bland Owen a full time role.
-
Why don't the bookies ever offer the shortest odds on a draw?
Psychologically people are moved to bet when they have a strong view on the outcome of a game. Generally this will be that a particular team will win. It's difficult to be convinced the game will be a draw. As the odds reflect the weight of money bet a draw is often longer prices that the actual probability.
Statistically, draws are a lot less likely than the alternatives as well.
-
I take part in a predictions league on another site and Lawro's predictions have been inserted there for the best part of the last ten years. He does surprisingly well overall - he finished sixth in Division 1 this season. The site also tells you how much you would have won had you bet on each of the predictions made and only five players out of 160-odd would have made more money than him.
You are a secret Lawro lover you are coming on here with your Lawro facts and spoiling our hatefest.
-
I take part in a predictions league on another site and Lawro's predictions have been inserted there for the best part of the last ten years. He does surprisingly well overall - he finished sixth in Division 1 this season. The site also tells you how much you would have won had you bet on each of the predictions made and only five players out of 160-odd would have made more money than him.
You are a secret Lawro lover you are coming on here with your Lawro facts and spoiling our hatefest.
Rationality has no place here. Be gone I tell him!
-
I take part in a predictions league on another site and Lawro's predictions have been inserted there for the best part of the last ten years. He does surprisingly well overall - he finished sixth in Division 1 this season. The site also tells you how much you would have won had you bet on each of the predictions made and only five players out of 160-odd would have made more money than him.
You are a secret Lawro lover you are coming on here with your Lawro facts and spoiling our hatefest.
Rationality has no place here. Be gone I tell him!
Ha ha! Classic! Sorry, gents. I'll re-phrase my earlier offering:
"Lawro was relegated from Division 3B last season and has been pitiful at predicting ever since his predictions have been added to the predictions league. He struggles to make it past 100 points in a season. Shocking form."
I wonder how many pages it will take before that is mis-quoted as being justification for his poor predicting skills!
-
I take part in a predictions league on another site and Lawro's predictions have been inserted there for the best part of the last ten years. He does surprisingly well overall - he finished sixth in Division 1 this season. The site also tells you how much you would have won had you bet on each of the predictions made and only five players out of 160-odd would have made more money than him.
You are a secret Lawro lover you are coming on here with your Lawro facts and spoiling our hatefest.
Rationality has no place here. Be gone I tell him!
Ha ha! Classic! Sorry, gents. I'll re-phrase my earlier offering:
"Lawro was relegated from Division 3B last season and has been pitiful at predicting ever since his predictions have been added to the predictions league. He struggles to make it past 100 points in a season. Shocking form."
I wonder how many pages it will take before that is mis-quoted as being justification for his poor predicting skills!
That was funny a few weeks back when there was a stream of vitriol towards Lazy Lawro based on predictions he might have made but hadn't actually.
-
As a so called pundit he is pretty dire and boring along with Mr.Opinionated (Hansen). That said we have to be grateful that neither of them are so-called presenters like Adrian Boing Boing Chiles and Mogadon man Matt Smith....how ITV employ these 2 wastes of space beggars belief. Their F A Cup coverage on that channel is totally inept & don't get me started on their coverage of the CL. Still can't believe the BBC shoved Manish Bhasin onto the Football League show leaving Mr Potato Head Lineker to run MOTD !
-
There's a statistical piece on the beeb website - apologies if already posted.
Lawro outperformed the bookies over the season. But he does play it very safe. He basically predicts every game te be 1-1, 2-0 or 2-1. He only ever predicts away wins for top six sides, and he never predicts that anyone will get more than three goals. Ever.
-
Really is time to bring in a fresh face with someone who has an up to date view and has not got a one eyed antiquated opinion ........