It's all over for Jan....

[tisspahars]

Just when I was beginning to dream again comes this from the OS....

"We want them to give 100% - more if possible".

 

Ah well, it was nice while it lasted....

[trousers]

Just when I was beginning to dream again comes this from the OS....

"We want them to give 100% - more if possible".

 

Ah well, it was nice while it lasted....

 

If his English Language is as poor as his Math(s) then he'll be sure to qualify a superlative next. You heard it here first...

[cellone]

Please don't doubt. Everything is just peachy.

[Deanovski]

and whys that?talkin rott

[Rattlehead]

You are assuming 100% was the given effort in the previous game though. If more was possible it wouldn't have been 100%.

[Saintandy666]

It's an expression people! It just means to work your socks off, stop all being so particular.

[DrSuess1979]

jesus this is why i can t be arsed to post anymore

[Wes Tender]

It's a bit like those people who say etc,etc,etc.

 

And those sci-fi idiots who say to infinity and beyond.

 

Standards of English grammar are falling fast, not helped by the fact that the Americans are increasingly speaking a different sort of English. About time that we called what they speak American.

[SaintMike]

You have never heard of people giving 110%???

[Wes Tender]

You have never heard of people giving 110%???

 

 

Yes. But do they put in more effort than those who give 100%? I don't think so.

[TopGun]

It's a bit like those people who say etc,etc,etc.

 

And those sci-fi idiots who say to infinity and beyond.

 

Standards of English grammar are falling fast, not helped by the fact that the Americans are increasingly speaking a different sort of English. About time that we called what they speak American.

 

 

Doesn't it annoy you when you see multi-lingual websites and the English version is marked up with a stars and stripes though?

[aintforever]

Yes. But do they put in more effort than those who give 100%? I don't think so.

 

Yeah about 10% more

[dubai_phil]

Well, as far as most on here are concerned maybe this is the end....

 

http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/saints/news/3670918.Youngsters_want_to_follow_Theo_s_example/

 

Jan suggesting that the best youngsters should leave us and go to the PL so they can become England players.......

 

Is one way to read this, the other way is that he is motivating them to bounce back after a flat performance and a spell of 7 games in 21 days which will strain the squad and no doubt the supporters

[NorthamSteve]

[trousers]

http://mathforum.org/library/drmath/view/58166.html

 

More Than 100 Percent

 

From: Michael

Subject: More than 100%?

 

Please help to settle an ongoing argument with a friend: is it correct to use a value of more than 100%? I say that there's no such thing as anything larger than 100%; my friend says that it is okay to say 200% or 300% and so on.Thank you.

 

From: Doctor Rick

Subject: Re: More than 100%?

 

Hi, Michael.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with using percentages greater than 100%. Whether this makes sense depends entirely on the context.A percentage is simply another way of writing a fraction with a denominator of 100. For example, 6% = 6/100. Just as you can have an improper fraction (a fraction whose numerator is greater than the denominator), such as 4/3, so you can have what we might call an "improper percentage" like 120% or 300%.There are situations in which a percentage greater than 100% makes no sense. For instance, "The Math Doctors answered 146% of the questions received last month." This makes no sense because if we received 5061 questions, we couldn't possibly answer more than all of them. It's just as nonsensical as saying "I ate 4/3 of the cake."On the other hand, sometimes percentages are used like this: "The number of questions received was up 15.7%, from 5450 in February to 6305 in March." In other words, the increase from February to March was 6305-5450 = 855, and 855 is 15.7% of 5450. (These facts are true, by the way.)Now, what if the number of questions received went up to 14000 in April? (It didn't.) This would be an increase of 122% from March to April. There is nothing wrong with this - no law says that the number of questions can't do more than double from one month to the next.So the answer is, there is such a thing as a percentage larger than 100%, but not everything can have a percentage larger than 100%.

 

- Doctor Rick, The Math Forum http://mathforum.org/dr.math/

[Wes Tender]

Yeah about 10% more

 

What? Like a glass that's 110% full.

[Raven on the wing]

So if "100 per cent effort" is by definition the maximum possible - then the use of the expression you must give 110 per cent effort , is physically impossible and just used by footballers/managers and commentators of very low intellect , and those not able to think for themselves. Surely not ?

[aintforever]

What? Like a glass that's 110% full.

 

yeah just like that, but you need a bigger glass otherwise it will spill all over the floor and that aint good.

[Wes Tender]

yeah just like that, but you need a bigger glass otherwise it will spill all over the floor and that aint good.

 

There is no bigger glass; that is the whole point. If anybody was capable of greater effort than 100%, what they gave before was not 100%. Athletes can beat their personal best, but that doesn't mean that they achieved better than 100%.

[derry]

Inflation in Zimbabwe given as 11million%.

[aintforever]

There is no bigger glass; that is the whole point. If anybody was capable of greater effort than 100%, what they gave before was not 100%. Athletes can beat their personal best, but that doesn't mean that they achieved better than 100%.

 

That's a loser's mentality, a winner says **** that, I'm gonna find a bigger glass.

[St Marco]

That's a loser's mentality, a winner says **** that, I'm gonna find a bigger glass.

 

I bet George could find one

 

 

 

 

I kid i kid!

[CB Fry]

There is no bigger glass; that is the whole point. If anybody was capable of greater effort than 100%, what they gave before was not 100%. Athletes can beat their personal best, but that doesn't mean that they achieved better than 100%.

 

 

 

Well, you're wrong.

 

If we're going to be completely pedantic, you cannot measure "effort" in terms of percentages - your capacity to try is not like a glass with a finite, measurable limit.

 

How do you know the athlete who has just beaten his personal best has put in more of his % of "effort" compared to the person that finished sixth?

 

You don't.

 

So you can't measure "effort" in percentage terms of a whole.

 

You can only measure effort in comparative terms (ie more effort than last week), and when you are talking about comparatives, then of course you can have more than 100%.

 

20 is 200% of 10. You can have 300%, 400% and 1,000% increases. So you could give 200% effort compared to previously.

 

Meaning "we're going to give 200%" is a perfectly acceptable thing to say.

[Wes Tender]

Well, you're wrong.

 

If we're going to be completely pedantic, you cannot measure "effort" in terms of percentages - your capacity to try is not like a glass with a finite, measurable limit.

 

How do you know the athlete who has just beaten his personal best has put in more of his % of "effort" compared to the person that finished sixth?

 

You don't.

 

So you can't measure "effort" in percentage terms of a whole.

 

You can only measure effort in comparative terms (ie more effort than last week), and when you are talking about comparatives, then of course you can have more than 100%.

 

20 is 200% of 10. You can have 300%, 400% and 1,000% increases. So you could give 200% effort compared to previously.

 

Meaning "we're going to give 200%" is a perfectly acceptable thing to say.

 

I don't agree at all that effort is something that can be increased beyond 100%. If somebody gave 100% effort one week and then by your analysis was able to give 110% the following week, I still contend that the effort given the week before was not logically 100%, but less than 100%

 

You contradict yourself by stating that effort cannot be measured in percentage terms and then went on to say that it is perfectly acceptable to say that a team was going to give 200% (effort). Which is correct in your opinion? Can effort be measured in %s or not? If not, then it follows that it is incorrect to state that you are going to give x% effort.

[aintforever]

I don't agree at all that effort is something that can be increased beyond 100%. If somebody gave 100% effort one week and then by your analysis was able to give 110% the following week, I still contend that the effort given the week before was not logically 100%, but less than 100%

 

You contradict yourself by stating that effort cannot be measured in percentage terms and then went on to say that it is perfectly acceptable to say that a team was going to give 200% (effort). Which is correct in your opinion? Can effort be measured in %s or not? If not, then it follows that it is incorrect to state that you are going to give x% effort.

 

Blimey, this has gone on too long. This sort of conversation can only happen on an internet message board.

 

"Give 110%" is just something foootball managers say, it's just a figure of speach, every manager I played for said it at least once, it just means try really hard.

[wightman35]

Blimey, this has gone on too long. This sort of conversation can only happen on an internet message board.

 

"Give 110%" is just something foootball managers say, it's just a figure of speach, every manager I played for said it at least once, it just means try really hard.

 

Quite true; it is only a figure of SPEECH ( I am pedantic about spelling too!) and we all know what is intended in the expression. It does invite inflation, however, so someone might ask for 200% from our team tomorrow.

[Wes Tender]

Well, let's hope that JP doesn't want to play the square ball...the round one works much better in this game

 

And let's hope that regardless of whether the team give a performance of whichever level on the percentage scale, it is sufficient to gain us 3 points later today. Personally I'd rather they didn't bust a gut and won rather than gave everything and lost each week.

[CB Fry]

I don't agree at all that effort is something that can be increased beyond 100%. If somebody gave 100% effort one week and then by your analysis was able to give 110% the following week, I still contend that the effort given the week before was not logically 100%, but less than 100%

 

You contradict yourself by stating that effort cannot be measured in percentage terms and then went on to say that it is perfectly acceptable to say that a team was going to give 200% (effort). Which is correct in your opinion? Can effort be measured in %s or not? If not, then it follows that it is incorrect to state that you are going to give x% effort.

 

 

You thinking I've contradicted myself shows your lack of understanding in percentages more than anything.

 

You can't eat more than 100% of a single cake, but you can bake a bigger cake next time that represents 110% or 200% or whatever of the previous cake. So a master baker can say with my next cake I's going to be 200% of the last one. (Clumsy English, but not wrong).

 

You can't measure "effort" as a cake with a finite size, so there is no such thing as 100% effort. In fact of all the percentages you can effectively use for effort, 100% is the one figure you shouldn't use.

 

If you are managing people, you are either asking to perform above themselves (hence 110%), or you are asking for more from them ("we were 75% there today").

 

What manager says "that was just enough lads and we can't possible give any more ever again".

 

So as a figure of speech (which is what this is, nothing more) then use any number you like 110%, 1000%, 200%, 50% just not 100%.

 

The pedants thinking anything other than 100% is wrong are the people that are actually wrong.

 

And that is my final dull contribution to this silly debate.

[instinct]

does it even matter?? he just wants more effort

[Wes Tender]

The pedants thinking anything other than 100% is wrong are the people that are actually wrong.

 

And that is my final dull contribution to this silly debate.

 

You're wrong, actually.

[Calvin]

I feel sorry for Jan. He joined a ****ed up club with no balls to go forward, as Rupert and Wilde wouldn't invest enough money into the club. God knows why the experienced players are hiding.

I hope that Jan gets another management job at another football club... a football club which wants to take risks and give Jan the support he needs.

 

 

Youth won't do anything to improve the results. at times, you need experienced players to make a team good. Perhaps we have some talent in the squad but we are no Arsenal. we got good players but they need the experience! AND experienced players helping them

Davis is actually running the team. If it wasn't for Kelvin, god knows what would happen to the Saints scores. Hero of the season so far.

 

 

I am crazy to say this but I will attend the Saints game this Wednesday. COME ON YOU REDS.

 

 

The ref was a ****ing joke along with the linesman. Stupid championship refs.

Ah well, they are improving each match, the squad is.

Edited 14 September, 2008 by Calvin

[graemeread1234]

Typical things on the saints forum, we lose a game and now we are all going to die of depression and everything in the world is pointless.

 

Its only a game, and there were many good things to take out. I felt we could have gone on a scored another goal, but it was a terrible offside decision, that lino was dreadfull.

[Calvin]

Typical things on the saints forum, we lose a game and now we are all going to die of depression and everything in the world is pointless.

 

Its only a game, and there were many good things to take out. I felt we could have gone on a scored another goal, but it was a terrible offside decision, that lino was dreadfull.

 

Whats the point of being positive based on the result?

It's hard hard to take positivity at times, espcially when the club is falling.

I can only look forward to Wednesday.

[Charlie Wayman]

Now it is a question of how long we can afford for this type of performance to go on.. I like the total football approach of Jan Poorvliet but it just ain't working and so he needs a Plan B very soon, or it's a quick flight back to Holland if there are still any budget airlines in existence to carry him home.