'Dismiss a component of a result and then base reasoning upon that'
You definitely don't understand the point.
comment by SAF_The_Legend-FreePalestine (U5768)
posted 25 minutes ago
Sad. Your making this about Chelsea. I don't care who he compares United too he is trying to distract from something. Personally I think it is his failure to date . whatever the truth it's amusing.
.................................................................
Ahh what?!
The only thing this has to do with Chelsea is the fact that Chelsea have (a widely acknowledged) good defence that is performing well...
You do realise the fact he picked you as his example is actually complimentary... I mean there is a reason he didn't pick Liverpools defence to make his statement as it would be meaningless.
He picked Chelsea's defence because it has been good, its a compliment.
.............................................................
Hey if you want to use maths and figures to hypothesise about certain situations, fine.
But reality is you shipped 5 goals to Leicester, thereby cannot be discounted as a basis of reasoning.
.................................................................
Sorry Redinthehead you'll have to point me to the part of LVG's statement where he says those goals didn't count?
He make a statement about if you don't include them how our defence has conceded less than another team but he never once said they didn't count?
Maybe this is his problem Winston, he hasn't actually managed to read the statement properly yet....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As has been said, it matters not who he compares us to only what he has tried to do, manipulate numbers to give a more favourable impression of his team.
I don't care that he is being complimentary to Chelsea, Southampton or Accrington Stanley. It's laughable and you will have and will do when other managers (Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, Southampton, whoever) have done the same.
TBH I have done some work (very very little) with statistics where we do similar...
You sometimes look at the figures without statistical outliers...
I would think its perfectly acceptable no matter who does it...
In the same way I was calling everyone who cared about Terry having an affair an a gossip magazine reading woman...
Because despite the fact that United didn't have an affair scandal at the time I honestly believe anyone who genuinely cares about that is some kind of gossip magazine reader.
Similarly with this, I don't care if Brendan had said it, its a perfectly valid, logical and mathematically sound argument to make.
Even if Kenny had said it, he would have a point.
It's only laughable if you've missed the point.
You guys have been too quick to assume LVG's intentions, made a silly judgement and now find yourself stuck on repeat.
LVG's point was perfectly reasonable. I don't happen to agree with it, but that doesn't make it laughable.
Next time try digesting what's been said, rather than making prats of yourselves.
LVG is entitled to say whatever he likes, we are entitled to judge it.
You can judge it however you wish my post above was just to clarify I have strong views on (a fair few) subjects that wouldn't change regardless of who says similarly or different.
To be perfectly honest I think I might have even made a couple of posts myself regarding our conceding stats with the Leicester game excluded before LVG even said anything about it...
Because its a natural manipulation of the numbers to look at them in different ways, similarly if we scored 7 goals in one game but far less in the rest then that one would be a statistical outlier as well, even if Brendan Rodgers said it was.
There are plenty of people that do, me I laugh at them.
Ifa, woulda, coulda I can't be doing with. What has happened is more important to what will happen than what might of happened.
Its just common sense really....
If you get £100,000 a year for 10 years (so £1M overall) but then get £49M on the lottery on the tenth year...
So your earnings over 10 years have been £50M, which is £5M a year...
But that is in fact completely misleading, a less misleading way of saying it would probably be excluding my £49M lottery win I have been earning a 100k a year on average....
Statistical outliers, it isn't just for Maths, its common sense!
Of course you're entitled to judge.
But your judgement makes it clear that you've missed the whole point.
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 2 minutes ago
Enjoy your math.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its the common sense I am really enjoying....
Enjoy ignoring common sense
comment by SAF_The_Legend-FreePalestine (U5768)
posted 4 minutes ago
Its just common sense really....
If you get £100,000 a year for 10 years (so £1M overall) but then get £49M on the lottery on the tenth year...
So your earnings over 10 years have been £50M, which is £5M a year...
But that is in fact completely misleading, a less misleading way of saying it would probably be excluding my £49M lottery win I have been earning a 100k a year on average....
Statistical outliers, it isn't just for Maths, its common sense!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Quite clear.
I think perhaps we're at the point where people will refuse to admit they got it wrong, and just argue anyway.
Typical of this forum, sadly.
If you get £100,000 a year for 10 years (so £1M overall) but then get £49M on the lottery on the tenth year...
So your earnings over 10 years have been £50M, which is £5M a year...
--------
At which point do you announce that £5m a year? Obviously after the "lottery win" when it becomes fact.
Van Gaal saying if you discount "x" thereby we have achieved "y" is ridiculous. Because "x" has actually happened.
No one is discounting anything.
All he is doing is considering the general performance, with the exception of one particularly bad performance.
It's astounding that you are still unable to pick this up.
Funny though, that you went quiet after the reference to Hodgson.
What's the matter, realised you're a hypocrite?
comment by SAF_The_Legend-FreePalestine (U5768)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 2 minutes ago
Enjoy your math.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its the common sense I am really enjoying....
Enjoy ignoring common sense
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Common sense is to use maths in hypothetical scenarios to try and back up your managers comments is it?
Common sense would be to focus on what has happened rather than what might have.
Sadly there's no sense where a "name" like van gaal is lauded when he has performed worse than moyes.
That's a fact
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by SAF_The_Legend-FreePalestine (U5768)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 2 minutes ago
Enjoy your math.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its the common sense I am really enjoying....
Enjoy ignoring common sense
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Common sense is to use maths in hypothetical scenarios to try and back up your managers comments is it?
Common sense would be to focus on what has happened rather than what might have.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Common sense is ignoring statistical outliers....
If you get struck by lightening 52 times in one year, and thats the only times you have ever been struck by lightening in your 52 years....
Then you get struck by lightening once a year....
Except you don't really, saying the above would be completely misleading, you would point out that you never get struck by lightening except for one strange year when it happened 52 times...
Or look back at the money example..
I really cannot make this any more simple, its devastatingly simple common sense!!
Look at these two - it really is rather embarrassing.
Redinthehead is particularly amusing - I think perhaps Liverpools poor form is making him a little angry.
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 14 minutes ago
If you get £100,000 a year for 10 years (so £1M overall) but then get £49M on the lottery on the tenth year...
So your earnings over 10 years have been £50M, which is £5M a year...
--------
At which point do you announce that £5m a year? Obviously after the "lottery win" when it becomes fact.
Van Gaal saying if you discount "x" thereby we have achieved "y" is ridiculous. Because "x" has actually happened.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You would mention it in the same sentence, like LVG did with his statement...
He didn't pretend the Leicester game didn't exist or didn't happen...
Similarly you wouldn't pretend the lottery win didn't happen. You would however point out its a statistical outlier and give the figures without it...
Unless you're trying to make yourself look good I guess.
I'm imagining a whole host of scenarios.
Imagine redinthehead's wife (I know - but it is hypothetical!) says the series 24 is great except season 2.
He starts screaming at her "BUT IT HAPPENED. YOU CANT JUST PRETEND IT DIDNT HAPPEN. SEASON TWO HAPPENED YOU STUPID WOMAN"
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 minute ago
Look at these two - it really is rather embarrassing.
Redinthehead is particularly amusing - I think perhaps Liverpools poor form is making him a little angry.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Since Liverpool started looking like their heading back to their usual midtable finishes the Scousers have been getting awful mouthy even by their standards!
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 14 seconds ago
I'm imagining a whole host of scenarios.
Imagine redinthehead's wife (I know - but it is hypothetical!) says the series 24 is great except season 2.
He starts screaming at her "BUT IT HAPPENED. YOU CANT JUST PRETEND IT DIDNT HAPPEN. SEASON TWO HAPPENED YOU STUPID WOMAN"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by SAF_The_Legend-FreePalestine (U5768)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by SAF_The_Legend-FreePalestine (U5768)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 2 minutes ago
Enjoy your math.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its the common sense I am really enjoying....
Enjoy ignoring common sense
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Common sense is to use maths in hypothetical scenarios to try and back up your managers comments is it?
Common sense would be to focus on what has happened rather than what might have.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Common sense is ignoring statistical outliers....
If you get struck by lightening 52 times in one year, and thats the only times you have ever been struck by lightening in your 52 years....
Then you get struck by lightening once a year....
Except you don't really, saying the above would be completely misleading, you would point out that you never get struck by lightening except for one strange year when it happened 52 times...
Or look back at the money example..
I really cannot make this any more simple, its devastatingly simple common sense!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Has anyone ever been struck by lightning 53 times in one year. I am familiar with statistics and the use of numbers to plan project or forecast, I understand the need to watch out for anomalies and to take them into account and can still laugh at what LVG said, as for you, well you take it to anther level.
Similarly you wouldn't pretend the lottery win didn't happen. You would however point out its a statistical outlier and give the figures without it...
---------
When would you announce the 5m a year?
Before or after the lottery win?
Redinthehead - tell us again how Liverpool fans stayed behind Hodgson.
I appear to have missed your reply on that point.
What's the matter? Caught out, again?
Sign in if you want to comment
LVG claims United defence better than ours
Page 4 of 24
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
posted on 7/11/14
'Dismiss a component of a result and then base reasoning upon that'
You definitely don't understand the point.
posted on 7/11/14
comment by SAF_The_Legend-FreePalestine (U5768)
posted 25 minutes ago
Sad. Your making this about Chelsea. I don't care who he compares United too he is trying to distract from something. Personally I think it is his failure to date . whatever the truth it's amusing.
.................................................................
Ahh what?!
The only thing this has to do with Chelsea is the fact that Chelsea have (a widely acknowledged) good defence that is performing well...
You do realise the fact he picked you as his example is actually complimentary... I mean there is a reason he didn't pick Liverpools defence to make his statement as it would be meaningless.
He picked Chelsea's defence because it has been good, its a compliment.
.............................................................
Hey if you want to use maths and figures to hypothesise about certain situations, fine.
But reality is you shipped 5 goals to Leicester, thereby cannot be discounted as a basis of reasoning.
.................................................................
Sorry Redinthehead you'll have to point me to the part of LVG's statement where he says those goals didn't count?
He make a statement about if you don't include them how our defence has conceded less than another team but he never once said they didn't count?
Maybe this is his problem Winston, he hasn't actually managed to read the statement properly yet....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
As has been said, it matters not who he compares us to only what he has tried to do, manipulate numbers to give a more favourable impression of his team.
I don't care that he is being complimentary to Chelsea, Southampton or Accrington Stanley. It's laughable and you will have and will do when other managers (Chelsea, Liverpool, Arsenal, Southampton, whoever) have done the same.
posted on 7/11/14
TBH I have done some work (very very little) with statistics where we do similar...
You sometimes look at the figures without statistical outliers...
I would think its perfectly acceptable no matter who does it...
In the same way I was calling everyone who cared about Terry having an affair an a gossip magazine reading woman...
Because despite the fact that United didn't have an affair scandal at the time I honestly believe anyone who genuinely cares about that is some kind of gossip magazine reader.
Similarly with this, I don't care if Brendan had said it, its a perfectly valid, logical and mathematically sound argument to make.
Even if Kenny had said it, he would have a point.
posted on 7/11/14
It's only laughable if you've missed the point.
You guys have been too quick to assume LVG's intentions, made a silly judgement and now find yourself stuck on repeat.
LVG's point was perfectly reasonable. I don't happen to agree with it, but that doesn't make it laughable.
Next time try digesting what's been said, rather than making prats of yourselves.
posted on 7/11/14
LVG is entitled to say whatever he likes, we are entitled to judge it.
posted on 7/11/14
You can judge it however you wish my post above was just to clarify I have strong views on (a fair few) subjects that wouldn't change regardless of who says similarly or different.
To be perfectly honest I think I might have even made a couple of posts myself regarding our conceding stats with the Leicester game excluded before LVG even said anything about it...
Because its a natural manipulation of the numbers to look at them in different ways, similarly if we scored 7 goals in one game but far less in the rest then that one would be a statistical outlier as well, even if Brendan Rodgers said it was.
posted on 7/11/14
There are plenty of people that do, me I laugh at them.
Ifa, woulda, coulda I can't be doing with. What has happened is more important to what will happen than what might of happened.
posted on 7/11/14
Its just common sense really....
If you get £100,000 a year for 10 years (so £1M overall) but then get £49M on the lottery on the tenth year...
So your earnings over 10 years have been £50M, which is £5M a year...
But that is in fact completely misleading, a less misleading way of saying it would probably be excluding my £49M lottery win I have been earning a 100k a year on average....
Statistical outliers, it isn't just for Maths, its common sense!
posted on 7/11/14
Enjoy your math.
posted on 7/11/14
Of course you're entitled to judge.
But your judgement makes it clear that you've missed the whole point.
posted on 7/11/14
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 2 minutes ago
Enjoy your math.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its the common sense I am really enjoying....
Enjoy ignoring common sense
posted on 7/11/14
comment by SAF_The_Legend-FreePalestine (U5768)
posted 4 minutes ago
Its just common sense really....
If you get £100,000 a year for 10 years (so £1M overall) but then get £49M on the lottery on the tenth year...
So your earnings over 10 years have been £50M, which is £5M a year...
But that is in fact completely misleading, a less misleading way of saying it would probably be excluding my £49M lottery win I have been earning a 100k a year on average....
Statistical outliers, it isn't just for Maths, its common sense!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Quite clear.
I think perhaps we're at the point where people will refuse to admit they got it wrong, and just argue anyway.
Typical of this forum, sadly.
posted on 7/11/14
If you get £100,000 a year for 10 years (so £1M overall) but then get £49M on the lottery on the tenth year...
So your earnings over 10 years have been £50M, which is £5M a year...
--------
At which point do you announce that £5m a year? Obviously after the "lottery win" when it becomes fact.
Van Gaal saying if you discount "x" thereby we have achieved "y" is ridiculous. Because "x" has actually happened.
posted on 7/11/14
No one is discounting anything.
All he is doing is considering the general performance, with the exception of one particularly bad performance.
It's astounding that you are still unable to pick this up.
Funny though, that you went quiet after the reference to Hodgson.
What's the matter, realised you're a hypocrite?
posted on 7/11/14
comment by SAF_The_Legend-FreePalestine (U5768)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 2 minutes ago
Enjoy your math.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its the common sense I am really enjoying....
Enjoy ignoring common sense
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Common sense is to use maths in hypothetical scenarios to try and back up your managers comments is it?
Common sense would be to focus on what has happened rather than what might have.
posted on 7/11/14
Sadly there's no sense where a "name" like van gaal is lauded when he has performed worse than moyes.
That's a fact
posted on 7/11/14
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by SAF_The_Legend-FreePalestine (U5768)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 2 minutes ago
Enjoy your math.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its the common sense I am really enjoying....
Enjoy ignoring common sense
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Common sense is to use maths in hypothetical scenarios to try and back up your managers comments is it?
Common sense would be to focus on what has happened rather than what might have.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Common sense is ignoring statistical outliers....
If you get struck by lightening 52 times in one year, and thats the only times you have ever been struck by lightening in your 52 years....
Then you get struck by lightening once a year....
Except you don't really, saying the above would be completely misleading, you would point out that you never get struck by lightening except for one strange year when it happened 52 times...
Or look back at the money example..
I really cannot make this any more simple, its devastatingly simple common sense!!
posted on 7/11/14
Look at these two - it really is rather embarrassing.
Redinthehead is particularly amusing - I think perhaps Liverpools poor form is making him a little angry.
posted on 7/11/14
comment by Redinthehead - FreeGaza - فلسطين (U1860)
posted 14 minutes ago
If you get £100,000 a year for 10 years (so £1M overall) but then get £49M on the lottery on the tenth year...
So your earnings over 10 years have been £50M, which is £5M a year...
--------
At which point do you announce that £5m a year? Obviously after the "lottery win" when it becomes fact.
Van Gaal saying if you discount "x" thereby we have achieved "y" is ridiculous. Because "x" has actually happened.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You would mention it in the same sentence, like LVG did with his statement...
He didn't pretend the Leicester game didn't exist or didn't happen...
Similarly you wouldn't pretend the lottery win didn't happen. You would however point out its a statistical outlier and give the figures without it...
Unless you're trying to make yourself look good I guess.
posted on 7/11/14
I'm imagining a whole host of scenarios.
Imagine redinthehead's wife (I know - but it is hypothetical!) says the series 24 is great except season 2.
He starts screaming at her "BUT IT HAPPENED. YOU CANT JUST PRETEND IT DIDNT HAPPEN. SEASON TWO HAPPENED YOU STUPID WOMAN"
posted on 7/11/14
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 1 minute ago
Look at these two - it really is rather embarrassing.
Redinthehead is particularly amusing - I think perhaps Liverpools poor form is making him a little angry.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Since Liverpool started looking like their heading back to their usual midtable finishes the Scousers have been getting awful mouthy even by their standards!
posted on 7/11/14
comment by Winston (U16525)
posted 14 seconds ago
I'm imagining a whole host of scenarios.
Imagine redinthehead's wife (I know - but it is hypothetical!) says the series 24 is great except season 2.
He starts screaming at her "BUT IT HAPPENED. YOU CANT JUST PRETEND IT DIDNT HAPPEN. SEASON TWO HAPPENED YOU STUPID WOMAN"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 7/11/14
comment by SAF_The_Legend-FreePalestine (U5768)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by SAF_The_Legend-FreePalestine (U5768)
posted 15 minutes ago
comment by JFDI (U1657)
posted 2 minutes ago
Enjoy your math.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its the common sense I am really enjoying....
Enjoy ignoring common sense
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Common sense is to use maths in hypothetical scenarios to try and back up your managers comments is it?
Common sense would be to focus on what has happened rather than what might have.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Common sense is ignoring statistical outliers....
If you get struck by lightening 52 times in one year, and thats the only times you have ever been struck by lightening in your 52 years....
Then you get struck by lightening once a year....
Except you don't really, saying the above would be completely misleading, you would point out that you never get struck by lightening except for one strange year when it happened 52 times...
Or look back at the money example..
I really cannot make this any more simple, its devastatingly simple common sense!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Has anyone ever been struck by lightning 53 times in one year. I am familiar with statistics and the use of numbers to plan project or forecast, I understand the need to watch out for anomalies and to take them into account and can still laugh at what LVG said, as for you, well you take it to anther level.
posted on 7/11/14
Similarly you wouldn't pretend the lottery win didn't happen. You would however point out its a statistical outlier and give the figures without it...
---------
When would you announce the 5m a year?
Before or after the lottery win?
posted on 7/11/14
Redinthehead - tell us again how Liverpool fans stayed behind Hodgson.
I appear to have missed your reply on that point.
What's the matter? Caught out, again?
Page 4 of 24
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10