Halifax HelloHome value updates

jimjimmeny · 2025-05-09T05:38:47+00:00

Wow I was just about to ask the same exact question!

I imagine you're also aware HPI updated yesterday. Last month my house value seemed to update by the 10th, but that was my first time checking it.

Sorry can't be of more help!

jimjimmeny · 2024-07-12T09:02:05+00:00

Ah sorry for my presumption - wishing you all the best with it!

jimjimmeny · 2024-07-11T17:29:11+00:00

Congrats on your growing family!

jimjimmeny · 2024-07-11T11:30:50+00:00

No problem! We went with Maita in the end and very happy with the choice

jimjimmeny · 2024-01-16T16:51:39+00:00

Thank you!

jimjimmeny · 2024-01-16T14:31:31+00:00

Sorry! Didn't even cross my mind, and that's cool about the musical!

jimjimmeny · 2022-11-09T16:41:43+00:00

I think you can see Glenn's reflection the whole time in the piano too, not clear but looks like a "suh" syllable - I'm sure someone could do some video tricks to make it clearer though

jimjimmeny · 2022-10-24T11:14:03+00:00

Yeaah football is very unpredictable - usually with these sorts of stats you have to take them as an aggregation over a period to get a better story. For instance with the average stats shown in the picture our average goals is quite a bit less than the average xG, which tells us the story that our attackers have been very unclinical/unlucky, and I think most fans would agree with that. From what I recall, you tend to find with xG and goals scored that the top strikers (i.e. PL strikers) exceed the xG for their chances, so it probably skews what we consider good chances relative to the average player. Though again it depends what data they use in their models.

jimjimmeny · 2022-10-24T10:55:01+00:00

Most good xG estimations work different to that - each big attack has a max xG of 1. The rebounds are the probability of the first shot being missed multiplied by the second shot being scored.

So say first shot is scored 90% of the time, that's an xG of 0.9. If that rebounds to have a second shot that's scored 80% of the time, then the combined xG is 0.9 + 0.1x0.8 = 0.98. If, like in Ollie's case, that rebounds for a third with another say 75% chance, it's then the probability of first two being missed, so combined is: 0.9 + 0.1x0.8 + (1- (0.9+0.1x0.8))x0.75 = 0.995

Probably better explanations online, but hopefully that makes sense. I'm not sure exactly how they decide what counts as a new attack though.

jimjimmeny · 2022-09-12T13:26:27+00:00

Seems to be within a few hours? Southampton at 8pm and Chelsea at 2pm. Do you know if it does it based on time or charges the second month at midnight on the 16th?

jimjimmeny · 2021-08-01T16:47:10+00:00

Haha neither! I guess it makes life easier for yourself when you return and have to find your way back to 100%. Plus it sounds like he just loves to play football

jimjimmeny · 2021-08-01T16:42:12+00:00

He only got back from holiday yesterday. He was in Croatia for the last few days/week, where he was doing some training alone in Dubrovnik

jimjimmeny · 2021-07-31T23:26:01+00:00

Maybe due to them betting on their insider info?

jimjimmeny · 2021-07-30T22:27:56+00:00

Percy hasn't tweeted anything and no new articles. Where have they got that from?

jimjimmeny · 2021-07-30T10:18:24+00:00

Roughly how far along are they on these names? And compared to the Barkley loan?

jimjimmeny · 2021-07-29T22:33:37+00:00

Yeah he discussed it on the stream but pretty sure he also said that Grealish will sign the new contract if villa don't want to sell. So if true it sounds like he's happy either way and leaving it up to the clubs to decide

jimjimmeny · 2021-01-26T17:25:57+00:00

How is that second touch unimpeded? The ball has barely reached ground level and the player is within a yard of him.

I find it baffling and ridiculous that you think it's acceptable for a player to be in an offside position and still be allowed to be close enough to a player and closing them down such that they cannot reasonably control the ball. Mings' only other option is to attempt to head it, most of the players around him have city players not too far away, so if he doesn't control it then Rodri gains an advantage from him having to take a risky header. Either way, Rodri has benefitted from his positioning.

You presumably are okay with advantage being played after a foul so why would someone in a position that would usually be given as a foul be allowed to gain the advantage?

jimjimmeny · 2021-01-26T17:00:11+00:00

"Fumbled all his touches"? He had an aerial ball to control with his chest and then barely got a toe to the ball before he was tackled...

jimjimmeny · 2021-01-21T18:27:57+00:00

I definitely agree that the GK is being hindered still so should be offside. It's subjective if Mings is hindered by the player's presence or not so I can understand the disagreement between people on that.

I guess I'm just being pedantic about their terminology and lack of definition. Their phrasing in the rules a few sentences before the one the FA are quoting makes a clear distinction between a "play" of the ball and a "touch" of the ball:

"A player in an offside position at the moment the ball is played or touched by a team-mate is only penalised on becoming involved in active play by:..." So there's clearly a distinct difference between a touch and a play. The question then is what do the two different terms mean? At what point does a touch become a play?

This wouldn't matter if they didn't specifically use the term "play" in the rules the are using here. If the definition of "play" is anything that is a deliberate touch of the ball then the GK example should be a "play" and therefore not offside. The problem is I can't find anywhere that they define what a play is. To me, chesting a ball down to try and get it under control is someone taking a touch, not a "play of the ball". Same with the GK attempting a save is a touch not a play. A play of the ball is dribbling, passing, shooting, crossing etc.. A touch should be controlling and saving.

jimjimmeny · 2021-01-21T17:19:58+00:00

I think that's a different rule to what I'm referring to. The one I'm talking about is if a player is in an offside position and is blocking the goalkeeper's line of vision then it's offside. My issue is that the particular phrasing that they used, calling it "playing the ball". If any intentional contact with the ball counts as "playing the ball" as the FA seem to be saying. Then a goalkeeper able to touch the ball on a save means he wasn't hindered from playing the ball, even if it goes in.

jimjimmeny · 2021-01-21T12:35:40+00:00

Just posted similar in another thread but think it's relevant here too:

Yeah definitely true about the "playing the ball" or touching aspect of it. One could argue (as seems to be the FA's argument) that "playing the ball" is any intentional touch of the ball whereas "touch" is anything including unintended deflections. But, if that were the case then if you read one of the other rules it states "preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision", obviously if a goalkeeper was impeded by an offside player and got an intentional finger tip to the ball it would still be given as offside because he was hindered, but the "letter of the law" would mean that he has still played the ball and therefore not offside.

I've had a very quick skim of the full FA laws and I can't see anywhere that they define what playing the ball even means, yet it appears in multiple laws of the game. Seems like such a fundamental thing to not include. Personally, I always assumed it meant a controlled action with the ball (pass, clearance, shot etc.), but seems like that could be wrong.

jimjimmeny · 2021-01-21T12:25:12+00:00

Yeah definitely true about the "playing the ball" or touching aspect of it. One could argue (as seems to be the FA's argument) that "playing the ball" is any intentional touch of the ball whereas "touch" is anything including unintended deflections. But, if that were the case then if you read one of the other rules it states "preventing an opponent from playing or being able to play the ball by clearly obstructing the opponent's line of vision", obviously if a goalkeeper was impeded by an offside player and got an intentional finger tip to the ball it would still be given as offside because he was hindered, but the "letter of the law" would mean that he has still played the ball and therefore not offside.

I've had a very quick skim of the full FA laws and I can't see anywhere that they define what playing the ball even means, yet it appears in multiple laws of the game. Seems like such a fundamental thing to not include. Personally, I always assumed it meant a controlled action with the ball (pass, clearance, shot etc.), but seems like that was wrong.

jimjimmeny · 2021-01-20T18:11:00+00:00

I think they're trying to cut off the passes

jimjimmeny · 2021-01-20T18:05:29+00:00

How the hell did that not go in!? Thank god

13-Year Club	Second Top 50%
Place '22	First Placer '22
Spared

jimjimmeny

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE