Lawro predicted we would have NINE points from 28 games !

[MaximusDecimus]

If Lawros Fulham predictions had been correct this season we would have played 28 games and picked up just NINE points. Am starting to think he may be biased towards us ?  049:gif

[scotto2000]

you reckon?

[Craven Mad]

Lawro just doesn't know much about football and chooses the obvious team each week. You may as well look at the bookies' favourites for each game and then say '2-1' or '1-0' etc. Rinse repeat.

eg Liverpool have been on their knees for weeks with a flimsy defence and we've been well-organised and creating chances; it was a great result for us, but it wasn't that surprising if you follow football... Any guesses how Lawro predicted the game to go?

I'd be more interested in some Opta-sports statistical analysis before the games, rather than enduring the drivel of the not-so-in-the-know ex players...

[bobby01]

The guest pundit tipped us to lose 12-0

[Kemosabe]

To be fair, he was a massive ("celebrity") Liverpool fan.

If one of our fans was asked to predict our score against Walham Green, he or she would probably do something similar...

[HobGoblin]

To be fair he is a tool

[Woolly Mammoth]

If Lawros Fulham predictions had been correct this season we would have played 28 games and picked up just NINE points. Am starting to think he may be biased towards us ?  049:gif

He is in the wrong job, he is no soothsayer.

[filham]

Lawro is so good for us in that he usually predicts a Fulham defeat and takes any pressure away.

[Arthur]

If Lawros Fulham predictions had been correct this season we would have played 28 games and picked up just NINE points. Am starting to think he may be biased towards us ?

Lawrenson doesn't get asked to predict how many points we will amass over 28 matches; he gets asked to predict each of our games in isolation. And, on a game-by-game basis, the form book has favoured our opponents either winning or drawing; rarely has it clearly looked like a win for us.

Over the course of a run of matches, it is easier to make a more generous prediction that has a greater chance of being accurate. By way of example: looking at our games against Spurs, Liverpool and Manchester City individually, the most likely outcome in each is defeat. Look at them as a group of games, however, and it is easier to predict we will not lose all three; the prediction doesn't have to specify the opposing team in order to be correct.

Further to this: were I, so far this season, not to have predicted even a single victory for us - but to have gone for the draw against Sheffield, West Brom, Brighton, Newcastle, Burnley, Southampton and Palace, while suggesting a loss to every other opponent, I would have given us a mere 11 points (only a couple more than Lawrenson has). And yet my predictions would have been correct in as many as 19 of our 28 games. In terms of the percentage - almost 70% accuracy - I would be a successful pundit.

I don't think it's fair to say Lawrenson must have a bias against us.

[Woolly Mammoth]

Whether he has a biased against us or not and I think he has, he should be investigated for impersonating a pundit.

[The Rational Fan]

Whether he has a biased against us or not and I think he has, he should be investigated for impersonating a pundit.

I have investigated him, he is completely clueless and knows even less about football than our DOF, so beyond any reasonable doubt he must be a pundit.

[Woolly Mammoth]

Whether he has a biased against us or not and I think he has, he should be investigated for impersonating a pundit.

I have investigated him, he is completely clueless and knows even less about football than our DOF, so beyond any reasonable doubt he must be a pundit.

Agreed

[I Ronic]

Whether he has a biased against us or not and I think he has, he should be investigated for impersonating a pundit.

I think he may have misread the application  and thought it said Puppet.

[Jim©]

The guest pundit tipped us to lose 12-0

I actually play football with him down here. Needless to say, on the back of the 12-0 prediction AND the fact Brentford is his second team, I may leave one on him when we next play.

[Woolly Mammoth]

Whether he has a biased against us or not and I think he has, he should be investigated for impersonating a pundit.

I think he may have misread the application  and thought it said Puppet.

064.gif

[Kimbleman]

I've said it on here before....blokes just plain biased.

[Bill2]

He consistently ignores our form since we took a point off Liverpool at home (should have been 3) and seems to base his prediction on our form from the first 6 matches.

[General]

To be fair he is a tool

Yeah but A) he's a Liverpool fan and B) he also caveated the 12-0 as a joke.

[Sting of the North]

If Lawros Fulham predictions had been correct this season we would have played 28 games and picked up just NINE points. Am starting to think he may be biased towards us ?

Lawrenson doesn't get asked to predict how many points we will amass over 28 matches; he gets asked to predict each of our games in isolation. And, on a game-by-game basis, the form book has favoured our opponents either winning or drawing; rarely has it clearly looked like a win for us.

Over the course of a run of matches, it is easier to make a more generous prediction that has a greater chance of being accurate. By way of example: looking at our games against Spurs, Liverpool and Manchester City individually, the most likely outcome in each is defeat. Look at them as a group of games, however, and it is easier to predict we will not lose all three; the prediction doesn't have to specify the opposing team in order to be correct.

Further to this: were I, so far this season, not to have predicted even a single victory for us - but to have gone for the draw against Sheffield, West Brom, Brighton, Newcastle, Burnley, Southampton and Palace, while suggesting a loss to every other opponent, I would have given us a mere 11 points (only a couple more than Lawrenson has). And yet my predictions would have been correct in as many as 19 of our 28 games. In terms of the percentage - almost 70% accuracy - I would be a successful pundit.

I don't think it's fair to say Lawrenson must have a bias against us.

:plus one:

[Statto]

Lawrenson doesn't get asked to predict how many points we will amass over 28 matches; he gets asked to predict each of our games in isolation. And, on a game-by-game basis, the form book has favoured our opponents either winning or drawing; rarely has it clearly looked like a win for us.

I think Craven Mad's and Bill2's explanations above are more accurate. Had our results followed the bookies' odds going into each game, we'd have more than 9pts.

From a quick glance at the Palace game for example, I can see that whilst (quelle surprise) Lawrenson predicted a Palace win, the bookies predicted a Fulham win.

Those odds only look one match ahead but they factor in, as Lawrenson should, each team's form, fatigue, players available, how their playing styles will match up, any home advantage and all other material information.

I don't necessarily think he's biased, just using a much more limited and inferior set of criteria - probably just league position and/or his misguided perception of us based on our early-season performances.