: Wed Jun 17, 2009 11:29 am  

No, you harped on about metres made and conveniently ommited metres per carry, thus using the stats to paint a certain picture. Had you included metres per carry your supposed point would not have been anywhere near as significant as you were implying. And, as you said, you'd have to be thick not to take as much relevant information as possible into account.

: Wed Jun 17, 2009 11:33 am  

Danril wrote:

No, you harped on about metres made and conveniently ommited metres per carry, thus using the stats to paint a certain picture. Had you included metres per carry your supposed point would not have been anywhere near as significant as you were implying. And, as you said, you'd have to be thick not to take as much relevant information as possible into account.

if you read all that into it as i said before thats your problem not mine. all i said was leeds made more meters and hudds made more tackles. which is still a fact.

but im sure you will keep coming back

: Wed Jun 17, 2009 11:42 am  

Yes, I will seeing as it's the Huddersfield forum and you've been caught out.

As I said, stats are easily twisted. Leeds gains far bigger than Huddersfield? Not in metres per carry son, not in metres per carry.

: Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:25 pm  

think someone famous once said "there are lies, damn lies and then statistics."

: Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:27 pm  

elyob wrote: think someone famous once said "there are lies, damn lies and then statistics." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_damn ... statistics Disraeli, Mark Twain and now you!

elyob wrote: think someone famous once said "there are lies, damn lies and then statistics." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lies,_damn ... statistics Disraeli, Mark Twain and now you!