Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Roughyhead true

playoff crowds

150 posts in this topic

So because you post a graph with nothing to say what it is I have to prove otherwise!!!!!

 

A statement was made that crowds were down, the evidence shows otherwise. The poster who claimed the crowds were down posted nothing to back it up.

 

I posted a chart of all the aggregates since 76/77, anyone can go and check those aggregates.

 

You are dismissing my figures but producing nothing to show them to be wrong, conclusion, you cannot prove them wrong.

 

If you can I will concede, I'll bet you can't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have still posted a graph of crowd figures. They could be the crowd figures that pass through a particular London Underground station for all I know. You just can't post unidentified statistics and then challenge others to disprove them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like I have to dig this one out again. Oh well. 

 

 

AggregateAttendances.jpg

That kind of proves my point, we've shrunk the well and we go to it more often

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have still posted a graph of crowd figures. They could be the crowd figures that pass through a particular London Underground station for all I know. You just can't post unidentified statistics and then challenge others to disprove them.

 

London underground has 3 divisions does it.

 

You know very well what the graph is, but it doesn't suit your argument.

 

Have you got the figures to show those aggregates are wrong or not. If you haven't then I suggest you drop it until you have, because you are just becoming to look a little bit silly now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That kind of proves my point, we've shrunk the well and we go to it more often

 

How do you figure that, the overall number of people attending is up, the number of clubs has hardly changed. If you check the chart, the one thing that always has a big bearing on the aggregate figure is whether we have 2 or 3 divisions. The trend however of numbers through the gates is increasing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know a few Headingley season ticket holders who also watch Leeds United, but don't have season tickets for Elland Road because they're so expensive. As it was all-pay for the Rhinos don't you think that some dual-code fans will have chosen to watch Leeds V Burnley today and couldn't afford to go to both?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

London underground has 3 divisions does it.

 

You know very well what the graph is, but it doesn't suit your argument.

 

Have you got the figures to show those aggregates are wrong or not. If you haven't then I suggest you drop it until you have, because you are just becoming to look a little bit silly now.

Your graph just says 1,2,3. Nowhere does it say they are divisions. It could mean the people passing through a particular London underground station at 1 o'clock, 2 o'clock and 3 o'clock for all I know.Vague doesn't begin to describe your "evidence".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your graph just says 1,2,3. Nowhere does it say they are divisions. It could mean the people passing through a particular London underground station at 1 o'clock, 2 o'clock and 3 o'clock for all I know.Vague doesn't begin to describe your "evidence".

 

It seems OMEGA gets it, you are just being deliberately obtuse, you know exactly what the figures are. They have been posted on here many times.

 

When you have figures to contradict them get back to me, or when you've sobered up will do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems OMEGA gets it, you are just being deliberately obtuse, you know exactly what the figures are. They have been posted on here many times.

 

When you have figures to contradict them get back to me, or when you've sobered up will do.

Now, now let's not get personal just because I've seen a flaw in your "argument".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now, now let's not get personal just because I've seen a flaw in your "argument".

 

There is no flaw in the argument, you know what the chart is, you know what it shows. You are either being deliberately obtuse or you are drunk and not thinking straight.

 

You got any figures yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The flaw in his argument is he has no titles on the graph axis's, that's a flaw in an argument? Maybe 20 watching YouTube videos of excel will help his argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The flaw in his argument is he has no titles on the graph axis's, that's a flaw in an argument? Maybe 20 watching YouTube videos of excel will help his argument.

So he's the RFL's official statistician whose graphs are gospel, even if they aren't titled?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So he's the RFL's official statistician whose graphs are gospel, even if they aren't titled?

 

Check the figures and show me they are wrong, its very simple.

 

Nobody, not even you, has shown any other figures. Mine are based on the official published records.

 

If you wish to continue the discussion produce figures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Check the figures and show me they are wrong, its very simple.

 

Nobody, not even you, has shown any other figures. Mine are based on the official published records.

 

If you wish to continue the discussion produce figures.

And a lovely graph with titles and pretty colours and stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And a lovely graph with titles and pretty colours and stuff.

:biggrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That kind of proves my point, we've shrunk the well and we go to it more often

It proves nothing of the sort. I don't what it is about our game that attracts so many young fogies who can't or won't recognise facts. Padge and I disagree on many topics but on this, the main topic on the main forum of the leading RL publication,, we are in total agreement. You should respect his grasp of the issues, his logical and analytic approach and his devotion to factual accuracy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And a lovely graph with titles and pretty colours and stuff.

Ah. There are no titles, that's part of my scepticism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah. There are no titles, that's part of my scepticism.

You've no figues

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah. There are no titles, that's part of my scepticism.

 

Now, in Padge's defence, he has taken an aggregate of all attendances from the Rothmans/Gilette books from 1976 to 2011 and produced 'his own' graph. What is there not to understand here? I have the same set of books. They are collectors items for those who love stats and I am pretty sure they are accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've no figues

I never claimed to have any. You have figures but no evidence of what they prove.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never claimed to have any. You have figures but no evidence of what they prove.

 

I take it you're not good with numbers then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is magnificent.

 

Can you back up exactly what you consider is magnificent?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can you back up exactly what you consider is magnificent?

 

Only acceptable if he has a number.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is magnificent.

 

It is, I'm enjoying myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



League Express - Mon 10th April 2017

Rugby League World - April 2017