Deano6

Damn this man, was just going to say it. Brilliant free kick from a rookie. I'm too young for MLT / Shearer or any older ones.

The protestors themselves explained why they didn't cast a vote in that very article: To explain his point, Oregon gets 7 votes in the electoral college, out of 538 total. These go to the winner of the state, whether they win by 1 vote or a million. Oregon is decidedly democrat and ended up voting for Hillary by over 10%. So casting a vote is really not going to make much of a difference, even in a block, and leads to greater deal of voter apathy in those regions. Of course it's certainly "not in the spirit" of being active in the political system, and it would break down if everyone followed suit, but it does explain why people are less motivated to go to the polls - and they are right in what they say. It's similar where I am in New York which was always going to vote Hillary. I know some people who said they would have voted if they were in a closer state, but in New York it's so far leaning blue it's not going to matter. I'm not sure who's side I'm supporting here, if anyone's, as I didn't go back and read whatever arguments above led to this bickering, but just wanted to point out that article isn't as shocking as it would like to think it is. FYI - Oregon is one of a number of states trying to actively change the election process to reflect the popular vote rather than the electoral college system, but they are some way off getting it agreed nationally. http://www.opb.org/news/series/election-2016/electoral-college-oregon-trump-president-clinton/

Is this all because he didn't get the Swansea job?

Still think a chart comparing points totals each week this year compared to last would be greatly helpful here. One like that have in the cricket where they compare the second batting team's score each over to the first team's progress.

Nutshell

I've been scouring online for a while and this is the best I've managed to find to date: http://bit.ly/2dX13j8 Be interested to hear what else is out there.

Wouldn't plotting on a chart be the clearest way to present this data? And it would avoid needing lots of textual updates each week. And you could include Saints' prior PL seasons, e.g. the 90s.

A 6 point deficit over 5 games translates into 45.6 points deficit across the whole season. Last year we finished 26 points above relegation.

We aren't a top 6 club and nor are Leicester. Check the table this year, or the year before last. Or before that, or before that...

Heisenberg - you have nicely summed up my feelings here. Completely agree with you.

I don't think it's "important" to improve on 6th place in the slightest, particularly since it's not going to happen and would just be a waste of resources. I'd be more than happy with 10th and a Cup final. Particularly given we are currently sitting in 18th!

Consider this post very much not wasted, O Leader!

All hail FTF.

Fine with this, always quite liked Taylor. I guess this is our version of Richard Wright to Man City. Most likely won't be needed but won't cost much either.

That laughing emoji by Sour Mash was a bit weird.

Oh no - we lost away to Manchester United. What a disastrous result.

In retrospect I'm not really sure why MLT is up there. He never really ran around that much, was a flop for England and in years to come will be regarded as just another Sky Sports Pundit. And he lost a penalty competition to Rickie.

Fonte to end up at Swansea, you mark my words!

Puts him miles ahead of most on here, too.

Tails actually. You're describing reverse fallacy. (not that it matters, point is the same) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gambler%27s_fallacy#Reverse_fallacy There is actually some logic to the Reverse Fallacy in a Bayesian world. You would say "I don't know what the true probability is [nobody does] but my starting assumption is it's 50%/50%". You would then keep track of actual observations to update that prior assumption until you fine tune it around the (hopefully) "true" answer. A string of heads in a row would then lead you to think that there was greater than 50% probability of heads. I guess the problem is people are making that calculation but placing too much importance on the observation when it's not truly statistically significant. Not enough samples are observed or they have cherry-picked only the "interesting" sequences.

Only if you mean to keep it in the order written (which is not implied by what you said). "The chances of 5 heads and THEN a tail is exactly the same." Otherwise there is 6 times as much chance.

I wouldn't call 10th placed finish a bad season. Middling / average / a bit disappointing maybe, but not bad.

What even is a "bad season" these days? 15th? ...we've come a long way since the 90s!

Yeah, give him the details of privately held confidential contracts CB Fry - if you don't you lose the argument!

I think Russia should commit serious cyber crime upon the US for one candidate's political gain.