[Fantastic Mr Catpiss]

: Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:44 am  

Dico wrote:

You don't need statistics to see he can't remotely tackle one on one.
Still, I'd have him in the team imo

wrong, so wrong.

: Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:49 am  

Tony Catsmith wrote:

wrong, so wrong.

Humongously incorrect.

: Mon Mar 23, 2009 11:58 am  

Thelonius wrote:

Lies, damn lies and statistics.

With Penny on the field this season we have conceded an average of 0.19 points per minute, which would work out at 15 points per game.

With Penny in the stands we have conceded an average of 0.47 points per minute, or 37.3 per game.

I'm not trying to claim Penny is defensively sound, or that King is weak. Just pointing out that stats can be used/twisted to show whatever you want them to.

In case you didn't know, IMO, means "In My Opinion" which is what i put at the end of my post, how can it be said im lying about my opinion

: Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:36 pm  

I apologise, the quote I should have used, and was thinking of when I posted was.

Latchford Wolvesfan wrote:

Hicks is fine, reasonable defense and scores the tries, ive provided the facts and unfortunately for you, facts cant be denied.

The fact still remains that this season, as a team, on average we have conceded 2.5 times as many points with Penny off the pitch as we have on it. Stats can't lie can they!

And I am fully aware what IMO means, I have some of my own, but I prefer to keep them to myself.

: Mon Mar 23, 2009 12:52 pm  

Latchford Wolvesfan wrote:

Good point well made, King played on the Wing for Melbourne and was very successful in playing in that position so is it not the fault of the coach for playing King out of position in the first place
Although King was playing out of position i don't believe he was a liability and it certainly isn't a fact.
I would also like to reiterate that saying Penny is a weak defender is my opinion and if you watch the academy games, he isn't that strong in defence there either.

Loving that you quote posts, but take the bits out where people have a pop at you, and are completely correct about you.

: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:20 pm  

Latchford Wolvesfan wrote:

In case you didn't know, IMO, means "In My Opinion" which is what i put at the end of my post, how can it be said im lying about my opinion

You clearly don't rate Penny. That is your opinion, and an opinion you have every right to hold and I will not argue with you about it.

I am saying that the statistics show that so far this season, on average, with Penny off the pitch we have conceded 2.5 times more points per game than with him on it. This is a fact, as shown by the statistics, and as you have stated yourself, "can't be denied".

: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:23 pm  

Thelonius wrote:

You clearly don't rate Penny. That is your opinion, and an opinion you have every right to hold and I will not argue with you about it.

I am saying that the statistics show that so far this season, on average, with Penny off the pitch we have conceded 2.5 times more points per game than with him on it. This is a fact, as shown by the statistics, and as you have stated yourself, "can't be denied".

I love stats.

: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:36 pm  

getdownmonkeyman wrote:

I love stats.

They're great aren't they mate? In a thoroughly Stat-tastic kind of way.

You ain't seen nothing yet. Let's Rock!

: Mon Mar 23, 2009 1:41 pm  

Latchford Wolvesfan wrote:

None of last weeks tries were scored down King's wing and none this week either, Penny was the problem.

So Hicks and Gleeson are the problem(s)?

: Mon Mar 23, 2009 3:29 pm  

JWP wrote:

Loving that you quote posts, but take the bits out where people have a pop at you, and are completely correct about you.

I like to try and stick to the topic in hand rather than petulant insults which offer no use to a discussion.