Are you sure?mickleoverclaret wrote:1/9 doesn't represent a 90% chance at all. If that were the case then 10/1 would be the maximum odds quoted for anything.
You're going to have to explain how you work that one out.
Are you sure?mickleoverclaret wrote:1/9 doesn't represent a 90% chance at all. If that were the case then 10/1 would be the maximum odds quoted for anything.
I don't know whether it's wages or something else, I've only the info on BHE plus the little bit I've seen in the press. I think others have suggested the issue is wages.Reecey1987 wrote:So basically you think its down to wages what were struggling on ? Which is fair enough . But what i dont understand is why we have left it so late to make a move for a player in the window if we already knew that we couldnt match his wage demands . Unless the club are hoping that the lure of premier league football could tempt him to leaving
Hi Royboy, what point am I missing?Royboyclaret wrote:"Maybe we will get it sorted with Robbie Brady and maybe we wont. If we don't it is possible that Robbie will still be at Norwich until the summer - playing Championship football, and on a lower wage than he will have been offered by Burnley."
What!?!........I think you're missing the point completely.
Almost.Rileybobs wrote:(1/9)x100 = 11% chance of him not being a Burnley player. However that won't take into account bookmaker's profit margin.
My bad, decimal odds are easier.Tall Paul wrote:Almost.
It's 1/(1+9)x100 which is 10%
For that to happen he'll need to sign by lunchtime MondayCooperclaret wrote:He's coming.
Be on the bench Tuesday
Did anyone see northeastclaret last night?northeastclaret wrote:I would love Brady to sign as he would be a perfect player for us, but if he does I will walk up the steps to my seat in the Bob lord stand at our next match waving my chopper in the air.
Only chopper I saw was Mike Dean.Tall Paul wrote:Did anyone see northeastclaret last night?