Chelsea 1 - 2 Arsenal

Brentford 2 - 0 Burnley

Man. City 2 - 0 Leeds United

Nottingham Forest 2 - 2 Brighton

Aston Villa 3 - 0 Wolves

West Ham 1 - 1 Liverpool

Everton 2 - 1 Newcastle

Sunderland 2 - 2 Bournemouth

Tottenham 1 - 0 Fulham

Crystal Palace 2 - 1 Man. United

If the senior citizen conditions were that clear then Mark would not have needed to add the ammendment 3 hours and 15 minutes(approx) prior to the deadline and i would guess that many more managers would have bought into the extra 20 SL idea but simply did not have time due to being unaware...

But it was not clear to many of us even though it has been stated that it was ?

Surely fairness should prevail whereby the age old rule of a MAXIMUM of 10 PU stands.

Just seen the reasoning and the previous correction of the error at auction.

'Trade: DEE - CB

DEE sends Budgie McGhie (1/14 MF) to CB for..

Traded(?) the day after being acquired by DEE in the latest auction now on the CB roster.

Must be an error surely ?

Brighton 2 - 2 Brentford

Burnley 0 - 3 Chelsea

Leeds United 0 - 2 Aston Villa

Wolves 0 - 2 Crystal Palace

Bournemouth 2 - 1 West Ham

Fulham 1 - 1 Sunderland

Arsenal 2 - 0 Tottenham

Man. United 1 - 1 Everton

Liverpool 2 - 0 Nottingham Forest

Newcastle 1 - 1 Man. City

Thanks for the comparison Steve.

It all makes far more sense now.

Steve said  in response to my question re Game #23.....

'Years ago me, my sister and young nephew  played Ludo where it's roll a 6 to bring a man out. After about 15 rolls, Ashley still hadn't  got a man out - a 6% chance.

EDI were unlucky.'

MMmm....Hopefully Steve will now explain the rules and relevance of 'Ludo' to SESL game outcomes ???

In advance...many thanks Steve

After reading the very constructive suggestions of the IT guys(?) who have access to the workings of SESL....

EDI have rolled the dice (LUDO style) and are certain of 6 points in the upcoming league session.

Of course, if EDI fail to secure 6 points...Mrs Turner is sure to explain (IN FULL) why his advice fell short.

In a nutshell.....EDI start the game with DOUBLE the shot %age of the oppostion, by half-time,  NAI have DOUBLE the shots of EDI and are 0-2 up.  But to rub salt into the wounds, on 60 minutes NAI switch tactics to 'STALL'...2 minutes later NAI are 0-3 up.

So i am asking for an explaination for EDI losing that game 0-3....and please do not mention the term 'Random', this is beyond random in my opinion.

Please, please watch the game on 'Viewer' and give me the logic for the scoreline and the final result taking into consideration the STATS from start to finish.

Has someone changed the game engine this season and we have not been told ?