Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

How did this become a ***** on grammer, though we were talking football here, not hoe someone decides to spell or use grammer!?!?!?

 

Anyway, buying at the last minute. I dont see it as panic buying. Alot of clubs will wait until the last min to purchase players so save paying wages and to get a better fee. Thats quite sensible, especially where funds are tight.

Posted
there is only 1 team below us my friend so by your stats it's 50-50, what about the other 24 teams above us with ni Dutch influence at all?

 

Note. you got me banged to rights, billy no mates!

 

It was all tongue in cheek.

Posted (edited)
There are two other teams in the relegation battle that don't have Dutch experiments going on, so my stats prove it is far more likely to succeed under the Dutch Experiment than a non-Dutch one.

 

 

I think we established a while ago that you were not good at understanding when one should use "AND", and when instead "OR" should be used in a sentence.

 

Now you are showing up your poor grip on statistics.

 

There is 1 team undergoing a dutch experiment. That team is in the drop zone. That means at present a dutch experiment has a 100% chance of failure. That leaves 2 places left for the 23 "no dutch experiment" teams - i.e. a "no dutch experiment", as things stand, shows a 2/23 chance of being in the relegation places (8.7%).

 

Unless of course you meant that a dutch experiment in the relegation battle has a better chance of succeeding in getting relegated? The current statistics certainly do prove that.

 

(tongue-in-cheek thingy)

Edited by hughieslastminutegoal
Posted
I think we established a while ago that you were not good at understanding when one should use "AND", and when instead "OR" should be used in a sentence.

 

Now you are showing up your poor grip on statistics.

 

There is 1 team undergoing a dutch experiment. That team is in the drop zone. That means at present a dutch experiment has a 100% chance of failure. That leaves 2 places left for the 23 "no dutch experiment" teams - i.e. a "no dutch experiment", as things stand, shows a 2/23 chance of being in the relegation places (8.7%).

 

Unless of course you meant that a dutch experiment in the relegation battle has a better chance of succeeding in getting relegated? The current statistics certainly do prove that.

 

(tongue-in-cheek thingy)

 

Stats can say anything really. For instance, 1 in 10 accidents are caused by drunk drivers, meaning 9 in 10 are sober. It follows that it must be far safer to get wasted before getting behind the wheel.

Posted
Stats can say anything really. For instance, 1 in 10 accidents are caused by drunk drivers, meaning 9 in 10 are sober. It follows that it must be far safer to get wasted before getting behind the wheel.

 

No it doesn't. It just says there are much less people driving drunk than sober people.

Posted
Find something better to do.

 

Without me you'd be allowed to plough on regardless being silly though...i'm trying to help you alpine...

 

You could try thanking me from time to time...but i guess that's asking too much...

Posted
Stats can say anything really. For instance, 1 in 10 accidents are caused by drunk drivers, meaning 9 in 10 are sober. It follows that it must be far safer to get wasted before getting behind the wheel.

 

Yep, you can prove anything with statistics when used incorrectly, especially when crucial factors are left out - as in your example above, the relative populations of drunk and sober drivers.

 

Exactly the same "mistake" you made in your initial "dutch experiment/no dutch experiment and relegation" statistic.

 

No offense, just winding you up a little.

Posted
Yep, you can prove anything with statistics when used incorrectly, especially when crucial factors are left out - as in your example above, the relative populations of drunk and sober drivers.

 

Exactly the same "mistake" you made in your initial "dutch experiment/no dutch experiment and relegation" statistic.

 

No offense, just winding you up a little.

 

No offence taken. Is the "s" in offense an "and/or" situation?

Posted
Ah i see! The fact i left out an ' in a word makes what i've said impossible to read right?

 

Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at an Cmardibge uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, olny taht the frist and lsat ltteres are at the rghit pcleas. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by ilstef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

 

:)

 

 

Yep but the government gives research grants to some real pr@ts at Cambridge (and elsewhere). Nepotism is usually involved.

Posted
Yep but the government gives research grants to some real pr@ts at Cambridge (and elsewhere). Nepotism is usually involved.

 

I think it's quite clever. Shows words being spelt wrong is not as important as some would like to believe. The other interesting thing about the study is they show how words are spelt one way then change the way it is spelt over time. Meaning a way we spell something today might not hold the same meaning in the future. An example of that is we used to spell football "foteball". Another interesting thing is it was Cambridge University that came up with the football rules we use now! :)

Posted
Stats can say anything really. For instance, 1 in 10 accidents are caused by drunk drivers, meaning 9 in 10 are sober. It follows that it must be far safer to get wasted before getting behind the wheel.

 

No it doesn't. It just says there are much less people driving drunk than sober people.

 

But out ot 600 thousand odd random breath tests a year about 100 thousand are positive. So with 1 in 6 road users drunk but only 1 in 10 accidents caused by drunk people it still works out that driving drunk is marginally safer than driving sober ;)

 

Statistics are all ****** really.

Posted

I'm actually feeling quite positive about Wotte as a manager. I would've preferred a manager like Aidy Boothroyd or Ian Dowie, but he seems like he knows what he's doing (unlike JP (and apart from not starting Saga on Tuesday)) and I think that he could be a decent manager for us.

 

I know most people will be hoping that he fails so that they can have more ammunition to snipe at the board, but I hope that he succeeds. He seems like a nice guy and I think he might be able to keep us up.

Posted

Just posted this on the donny v norwich thread as well. Read in to this what you will. Just had a message from my mate who i went to norwich game with on tuesday (norwich fan) to say that Mark Wotte is at the Donny v Norwich game. Can anyone confirm this as if true must be scouting for a player as we have played both teams twice already and its a pretty long way to go the night before a game just to watch a game.

 

Any thoughts

Lupoli again?

Posted
there is only 1 team below us my friend so by your stats it's 50-50, what about the other 24 teams above us with ni Dutch influence at all?

 

Note. you got me banged to rights, billy no mates!

 

As the team below us cannot be above us at the same time and we cannot be above ourselves as well as being in 23rd position I make that only 22 teams above us, hth :D

Posted

Wayne Brown went to Leicester on loan today, I do hope we was in for him and he chose them over us (can't blame him). If not, which is probably the case, the management really are more clueless than I thought. Exactly the type of player we need.

Posted
Wayne Brown went to Leicester on loan today, I do hope we was in for him and he chose them over us (can't blame him). If not, which is probably the case, the management really are more clueless than I thought. Exactly the type of player we need.

 

 

how could he chose leicester over us if we were not in for him...?

Posted

More OS PR crap. I do wish they would stop thinking we believe what is posted on there - there might be nearly one obscure signing rather like Ryan Smith taking over in Rudi's position.

Posted
I think it's quite clever. Shows words being spelt wrong is not as important as some would like to believe. The other interesting thing about the study is they show how words are spelt one way then change the way it is spelt over time. Meaning a way we spell something today might not hold the same meaning in the future. An example of that is we used to spell football "foteball". Another interesing thing is it was Cambridge University that came up with the football rules we use now! :

 

 

If Cambridge University is responsible for the present offside rule, then that less than august seat of learning should forego funding until a workable offside rule replaces that which currently plagues the game. Of course this is only my humble opinion and nothing at all to do with statistics, grammar, or much of anything else really.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...