You Bears

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@bphillipsonMP Imagine being proud of disrupting the education of 10,000’s of children for absolutely no benefit whatsoever and at a cost to the taxpayer. A truly odious individual.

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@TheFamous72_ @Handy_Andy96 Cape Verde won the kick off market vs Spain.

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@TheFamous72_ @Handy_Andy96 Surely if the underdog thinks there is an advantage choosing which end to attack first then the same should be true of the fav.

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@craig7171smith @Handy_Andy96 Surely if Liverpool lost the toss the away side would choose to kick off towards the Kop to disrupt Liverpool’s plans thereby making the “to kick off” market a pick ‘em.

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@TheFamous72_ @Handy_Andy96 But it’s always the match fav who is fav to kick off. Not one match has so far has been the other way around.

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@t_north97 @Handy_Andy96 It can’t be that as it is always the match fav who is fav to kick off. If it was down to specific team preferences the kick off fav would vary.

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@geoffbanksbet Every change is leading to something else and should be considered in that light. They are not standalone amendments to legislation.

The question that needs to be asked of campaigners is “how do you envisage the industry looking once all your demands have been met?”

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@geoffbanksbet Death by 1000 cuts.

Industry accepts lower limits for under 25’s. Doesn’t sound too contentious in itself and it becomes law.

No surprise then that the now agreed principle of under 25’s being higher risk is then used by campaigners to look for further draconian restrictions.

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@paleblue0000 @quarterfirst4 Is there a non paywall version?

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@paleblue0000 @LZ_Racing180 @quarterfirst4 Why would an away side or underdog change ends more often? If it infers an advantage then surely the favs would want to force them to do the opposite given the choice?

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@paleblue0000 @LZ_Racing180 @quarterfirst4 No. It’s definitely the kick off market. The coin toss market is something completely different.

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@paleblue0000 @LZ_Racing180 @quarterfirst4 Why is the underdog more likely to choose which way to play first? I’ve not seen similar prices for any other competition, they always offer 10/11 each of 2.

There has to be another factor at play.

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@LZ_Racing180 @paleblue0000 @quarterfirst4 It’s not that.

If you look at today’s games they’re all the same. The match favs are also favs to kick off and the shorter they are to win the match the shorter the kick off price. Can’t work out why.

Switzerland 8/15, Scotland 8/15 and Brazil 4/6.

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@SDP76842783 @markstretch Typical VAT policy supporter. Talks nonsense and believes the misleading lines from Labour without checking the data. Then has to block when they are exposed. Pathetic, but they are the type Labour rely on.

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@SDP76842783 @markstretch Huge numbers can. Way more than Labour like to pretend is the case. However most people don't value education so prefer to spend more on big houses, cars and holidays instead.

The data doesn't lie no matter how inconvenient it is to your argument.

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@SDP76842783 @markstretch Huge numbers favour expensive housing to access "free" schools so they can start on the list.

Then add in the majority of higher earners who use state schools.

Then add in the ones who could afford it with a bursary.

The list is getting pretty long.

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@SDP76842783 @markstretch Literally a direct response to your inaccurate comments.

I appreciate those in support of the policy have to ignore facts otherwise they find themselves having to agree with taxpayers paying more to harm children's education with no compensatory benefit which isn't a good look.

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@SDP76842783 @markstretch Approx 7% attend private schools and the vast majority of even the highest earners use state schools so that metric alone shows that huge numbers could afford it they just choose not to.

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@SDP76842783 @markstretch Plenty spend more on housing to access top state schools.

I never stated "most" could afford it, much the same as most can't afford to move to top state areas however the number that could but decide to prioritise other spending is far higher than you are led to believe.

[You Bears @bearnotpear2]

@SDP76842783 @markstretch Your original point was wrong. Have a look at the income breakdown for parents who use private schools. Labour has created a totally disingenuous rhetoric when discussing private education and poorly informed voters have lapped it up.