Very revealing that the three players to have scored the most goals under David Moyes at Everton (across both spells) were midfielders.
Just imagine if he’d had Lukaku!
Anthony J. Evans retweeted
Only 13 Everton players have scored more goals for Moyes than Barry’s 18 (level with McFadden)
Jelavic 19
Ferguson 20
Radzinski 21
Johnson & Baines 22
Pienaar 25
Anichebe 26
Fellaini 32
Yakubu 33
Saha 34
Arteta 35
Osman 51
Cahill 68
15 players if only look at PL goals
This anecdote would be better if he ended up locked in the office.
lol reminds me of an anecdote from Richard Feynman.
Feynman's hobby was cracking locks and vaults. One time at Los Alamos, a physicist got locked out of his safe and he had forgotten the combination. No one could open it, so he called Feynman... Feynman walks into the office and locks the door behind him to be alone.
In the previous weeks, he had realized he could manipulate the dial to get the last two numbers of someone's safe if it was left open. Feynman would go into people's offices and distract them while he got their last two digits, and jotted them down on a sheet of paper. By getting the last two, that left only 20 possible numbers for the rest of the combination, which could be brute forced easily.
Anyway, Feynman enters the office with his sheet of paper and opens the safe in one minute. To give the impression that he had been working hard and safeguard his reputation, he didn't go out until after 25 minutes had passed. Read a magazine in the meantime or something.
113
It’s weird, because portraying Everton in that light implies a total lack of understanding. And yet he’s not ignorant.
💬 “At Everton I was fighting relegation for 2-3 years. At Newcastle, we were fighting for maybe Champions League and to push up the table.”
📈 Anthony Gordon on how far he’s come
sportwitness.co.uk/at-everto… #efc
133
Anthony J. Evans retweeted
Look at this Schar tackle on Thierno Barry and explain how Everton didn’t get a penalty?
Newcastle got lucky there not even the referee or Var intervened nitter.gq/Eli_Sam_/status/211736…
Raise the price and it will be tomorrow…
bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c6n8…
65
The David Moyes tendency of dealing with a concerning run of form with a highly disciplined and well thought out 3 points is not to be sniffed at.
You need to raise the floor before getting to talk about ceilings. (Here’s hoping for a solid point at home vs Coventry.)
96
watched a video yesterday on racial bias in commentary, how white players are more often praised for cognitive qualities compared to black players mostly praised for physical ones.
barry’s one of the most intelligent strikers in the league. he’ll probably never get that credit
Look forward to reading this. One thing I don’t “get” about China vs US is that we typically think growth is due to good political and legal institutions. And yet the irony is:
We’re delighted to announce that @danwwang is making his debut as a contributor, with a column for this issue of @WorksInProgress.
worksinprogress.co/issue/sic…
Few people understand the China–US contrast as well as Dan Wang, and fewer still write about it with so much talent. His book Breackneck has introduced the now famous meme of China as a “country of engineers” and United States as a “country of lawyers,” to explain the differences in building capacity and physical world stagnation we are seeing between the two polities.
In his new column for us, he takes up one specific thread in the long-running debate over how China and the US compare and argues that both owe part of their power to being polycentric.
One observation is that both the American and US capitals are not their biggest cities. Vienna, London, Seoul and Paris dwarf their countries’ second cities, by four to seven times. By contrast, Beijing isn’t China’s largest city, and DC isn’t even in the top five in the US. Does this make US and China lame, for having smol capitals? No! On the contrary, Dan thinks that this friction between political and economic centers is important and at least partially explains why both countries can combine dynamism with strong states.
But the two countries are polycentric in very different ways. China’s regions are culturally distinct and are shaped heavily by geography. While coastal provinces tend to look outward, mountain areas like Sichuan and Chongqing are characterized by evading the center’s edicts. Dan also points out some misconceptions: yes, China has central control, but it is weaker than it look. Local officials often ignore or quietly subvert senseless directives from Beijing, with enforcement thinning out quickly beyond the big cities.
The characteristic feature of American polycentrism is how well it sorts people into domains and “sends” them to specific cities: this is reminiscent of the point @patio11 has made around “The Sort.” In America, the smartest and most driven tend to cluster in a handful of cities, above all New York and San Francisco, with Washington and Boston are slightly behind them. More than this: each field has an obvious center: AI has its capital in SF, for policy and politics you have DC, for finance New York and for biotech Boston and more recently, SF.
Different cities in America also prize different things: Miami values looking good, Boston being intelligent and bookish, LA how famous you are and New York how rich you are. There is so much variety in terms of who you can choose to become in America. And the city you decide to live in might end up shaping who you are, moreso than in any other country!
1
116
The start of the Industrial Revolution) wasn’t really within a nation state, and American growth was concentrated in areas much smaller than the federal level. In both case those institutions were *broader* than where growth occurred (and necessarily so??)
1
69



















