My god, you guys are complete fools. I can't believe it. I thought you were just arguing it for arguments sake but in fact you actually believe it. I'm shocked, I really am.

Filters - he hasn't proved it's more difficult to get pens at Fulham

..............

He did actually.

TOOR - exactly!

this is not anti-United... remove the stats from football and put them into another scenario and maybe then you will be able to see the point being made guys.

comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 7 seconds ago

My god, you guys are complete fools

...........

There we go again with the abuse..

Vidic - no he didn't. You clearly don't understand how statistics work.

TOOR - don't lower yourself to Vidicshin's level, there's no need for insults.

Just keep posting the clear and obvious truth about this and those who can't accept it will look worse than they will be any insult you dish out anyway!

comment by MrMortimer (U8234)

posted 21 seconds ago

Filters - he hasn't proved it's more difficult to get pens at Fulham... this just simply is not true.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well he has given stats that in the past 6 seasons figures showing that Fulham, in fact, are less likely to concede a penalty at home than United.

Theres that fulham myth again

BTW I am favoring the validity of the jounos stats over ripleys......

-------------------

Which is why, in my first post on this thread today, I said "look this up for yourself". Validate yourself which stats are correct and which are not. Then, should you find that the journo's stats don't match up with your own research, then you have a reason to doubt his conclusions.

That's what I have done, hence why I am questioning the author of the Telegraph article. I am criticising him (not United), because

a) the stats he lists are different to the stats that I have.

b) the time period in which he has chosen to validate his own opinion

c) that the stat on its own isn't enough to prove or disprove the myth, no matter how positive or negative they are towards United.

Do your own research, formulate your own opinion.

And I guarantee that if a journalist wrote an article that showed that United have conceded fewer penalties than any other premier league team who has played x amount of premier league games over a certain time period, and then concluded that this validates the myth, you wouldn't agree with his conclusion.

And I'd say that you'd be right not to agree with his conclusion. For that is the underlying point that is being made here - questioning the journalists conclusion, not having a dig at United.

Fulham were denied a late penalty in the 1-0 loss at Old Trafford as United moved three points clear of Manchester City at the Premier League summit.
"It evens itself out over a season and that will never change," said Ferguson, whose club have won 19 league titles.
-----------------------------------
Do people believe that it evens itself out over the season?

I think this is a ridiculous statement.

comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by There'sOnlyOneReds (U1721)
posted 7 seconds ago

My god, you guys are complete fools

...........

There we go again with the abuse..
--------------------------
That actually did make me laugh also i just happened to have a mouthful of coffee and pointed at the computer screen and spat it.

I think this is a ridiculous statement.

..........................

You would, however if Dalglish or Rafa had made it, you would feel differently, becsause that is the kind of person you are.

comment by filters=wimps (U11635)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by MrMortimer (U8234)

posted 21 seconds ago

Filters - he hasn't proved it's more difficult to get pens at Fulham... this just simply is not true.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well he has given stats that in the past 6 seasons figures showing that Fulham, in fact, are less likely to concede a penalty at home than United.

Theres that fulham myth again
-----------------------------------------------
No he didn't. He proved there have been less penalties at Fulham in the past six seasons, not you're less likely to get one.

comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 2 seconds ago
I think this is a ridiculous statement.

..........................

You would, however if Dalglish or Rafa had made it, you would feel differently, becsause that is the kind of person you are.
-------------------------------
Not a chance. This is a statement I've been arguing for years about. An Educated person would find that statement ridiculous. It's logically impossible, taking all the variables into account.

To effectively determine if it is indeed more difficult to get a penalty at Craven Cottage than Old Trafford. You'd have to find the stats for every single turned down penalty appeal over the same period and determine how many of those appeals should have been penalties.
The stats in that article are meaningless in this argument.

No he didn't. He proved there have been less penalties at Fulham in the past six seasons, not you're less likely to get one.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Manchester United more likely to concede penalty at home than Fulham despite manager Martin Jol's claims.

Dont know guys sort of dents the whole myth thing




how yis getting on with the Fergie Time myth

comment by MrMortimer (U8234)
posted 7 minutes ago

Vidic - no he didn't.

.............

Yes he did.

...............

You clearly don't understand how statistics work.

................

I understand how the ones in the Telegraph article work.

It quite clearly shows that you are less likely to get a penalty at Craven Cottage than you are at OT over the time period measured.

You would have to be a bit dim not to understand this one actually because the formula used was very simple.

That is why I am amazed TOOR still has trouble understanding it.

Ripley - again good post.

Though I fear it will fall on deaf ears.
What you have put will be read as:
"I hate united, united are rubbish, fergie is a terrible manager and the referees cheat"

This entire thread is depressing...

People's inability to use logic. The reliance on insults to try and win an argument - and posters refusing to look beyond their own party lines and try and see the facts of the case as they really are.

If we were trying to argue over the length of a piece of string I'm sure it would get sidetracked into a discussion of whether it was red or blue string!

Vidic - the argument doesn't follow from the stats provided though.

that is the point.

If United don't concede a penalty in their next home game - and every other club does, will that prove that united are treated unfairly? No insults - no avoiding the question, please just answer. WIll that be "proof".

comment by MrMortimer (U8234)
posted 11 minutes ago

Vidic - the argument doesn't follow from the stats provided though

...............

United 9 penalties given against them at home, Fulham 8 penalties give against them at home.

There is not an argument. It is crystal clear.

There are a myriad of ways which anyone can interpret these stats contained in The Telegraph (the errors notwithstanding).

a) Over the last 5-6 years, United are less likely to concede a penalty at home than Fulham are.

b) Fulham are less likely to commit a foul in the penalty area at home than United are

c) The referees miss more incidents in games at Old Trafford than they do at Craven Cottage.

d) Fulham players are better at sticking to the rules of the game in such situations than United players are.

e) The refs are more biased towards Fulham than they are towards United

f) The number of penalties awarded are not a reflection of the number of penalties that SHOULD have been awarded

g) The penalties awarded do not reflect the validity of each penalty that was awarded in and of itself.

And given that we only have the stats to work with (which the Telegraph has done), no one, I repeat NO ONE can dispute any of these interpretations without doing further research. Which leads us to an undeniable conclusion - the stats, in and of themselves, prove nothing.

United 9 penalties given against them at home, Fulham 8 penalties give against them at home.

There is not an argument. It is crystal clear.

-----------------

In the time period laid down in The Telegraph article, United have conceded 8 penalties at home, not 9. The Telegraph gets this stat wrong. Do you own research if you don't believe me.

The Telegraph article also contradicts itself. For the author says that since Aug 2006 Chelsea have conceded 5 penalties at home, yet the table he provides states that Chelsea have conceded 6.

All of which is meaningless as the statistics presented are not a proper indication of how difficult it is to get a penalty at certain grounds.

All of which is meaningless as the statistics presented are not a proper indication of how difficult it is to get a penalty at certain grounds.

----------------

Exactly.

Ripley - you could infer each of those statements - though the stats don't prove them right. These stats don't prove the referees are biased, and they don't prove they miss more at certain grounds - the inference can of course be wrong.

The only thing the stats prove are that United conceded more penalties in that period, and that Fulham conceded less. Any more than that cannot be proved!

comment by Skandinavian - Why always me? (U3522)

posted 3 minutes ago

All of which is meaningless as the statistics presented are not a proper indication of how difficult it is to get a penalty at certain grounds.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly despite the inconsistancys in the way the stats are presented the bottom line is the numbers atrributed to UTD dont set UTD apart as the legend of the myth would have you think and that in itself is proof that the myth dosent exist or is greatly exaggerated. In other words you would expect a greater disparity in the figures that would reflect the moaning that emanates from visiting fans and teams alike...