Welcome. This site is an archived version of the previous UpTheSaddlers forum (December 2004 to May 2018). To visit the new UTS website, please click here.

Uddersfield (H) League 1- 06/10/07

Reports and reaction from the 2007-08 season as Walsall finished 12th in League 1
philthesaddler
Site Addict
 
Posts: 5371
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 3:13 pm
Location: Bescot Stadium, 'the stadium that never closes'. Opening hours Mon-Fri 10am-4pm

Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:51 pm

Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:Much as your trying to change history again Neil with facts of nominal nature, Kinsella did act as an assistant manager, and without a doubt had clear tactical and performance -based influence on the team


Have it your own way, Phil. After all you are always right, even when you are completely wrong. I'd love to know how you admit something is a fact, then deny its relevance compared to your opinion!


You talking to yourself Neil, because, funnily enough, you're doing exactly what you accuse me of doing, the only difference being that I have stats and facts to back up what i've been saying. But don't let that get in the way of telling me im wrong. :roll:

User avatar
Geordiesaddler
UTS Legend
 
Posts: 1568
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:02 am
Location: Whitley Bay.

Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:52 pm

Yep, absolutely no doubt that DD benefits from having an assistant, so well done to him for identifying the right man, and well done to JB for appointing him.

What you say Phil? Good management all round from the powers that be at Walsall FC?

User avatar
Plastic Hawk
UTS Legend
 
Posts: 1593
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 3:24 pm
Location: Thames Valley

Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:59 pm

tinned wrote:
Plastic Hawk wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:Much as your trying to change history again Neil with facts of nominal nature, Kinsella did act as an assistant manager, and without a doubt had clear tactical and performance -based influence on the team


Have it your own way, Phil. After all you are always right, even when you are completely wrong. I'd love to know how you admit something is a fact, then deny its relevance compared to your opinion!


Whatever his actual title was surely the important "fact" in this case is that Kinsella ran the reserve team (as Mullen is now I believe) and (when not playing) sat on the bench for the first team offering advice to DD. People have been saying that DD would benefit from someone to delegate some of his work to - and the stats appear to back that up. Whether that person is called "assistant manager", "reserve team manager" or "DD's dogsbody" isn't really relevant so long as his presence helps the team.


PH, can you please stand back and let the pack of wolves get to their prey whenever they feel like it :roll:


:lol: :lol: :lol:

I have to say that I don't agree with a lot of what Phil says. But that's no reason not to listen to what he is saying and check that it is wrong (in my opinion) before dismissing it!! On this occasion I think that he's got a point.

philthesaddler
Site Addict
 
Posts: 5371
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 3:13 pm
Location: Bescot Stadium, 'the stadium that never closes'. Opening hours Mon-Fri 10am-4pm

Wed Oct 10, 2007 12:59 pm

Geordiesaddler wrote:Yep, absolutely no doubt that DD benefits from having an assistant, so well done to him for identifying the right man, and well done to JB for appointing him.

What you say Phil? Good management all round from the powers that be at Walsall FC?


Yes, just a shame it took then 10 months to realise.

User avatar
Duke
Site Addict
 
Posts: 7793
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 8:03 pm
Location: Aldridge

Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:00 pm

Nah Geordie , Mullen must have appionted himself :wink:

User avatar
sid swifty
Glitterati
 
Posts: 702
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 9:24 pm
Location: Walsall

Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:00 pm

Salop Saddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:Much as your trying to change history again Neil with facts of nominal nature, Kinsella did act as an assistant manager, and without a doubt had clear tactical and performance -based influence on the team


Have it your own way, Phil. After all you are always right, even when you are completely wrong. I'd love to know how you admit something is a fact, then deny its relevance compared to your opinion!


:shock: :lol: and Miah's feeling much better now, thanks. :lol: :lol: :lol:
Game set and match salop.... :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

User avatar
Plastic Hawk
UTS Legend
 
Posts: 1593
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 3:24 pm
Location: Thames Valley

Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:00 pm

philthesaddler wrote:
Geordiesaddler wrote:Yep, absolutely no doubt that DD benefits from having an assistant, so well done to him for identifying the right man, and well done to JB for appointing him.

What you say Phil? Good management all round from the powers that be at Walsall FC?


Yes, just a shame it took then 10 months to realise.


:roll:

Much of the good work spoiled...

What (long term) damage has not having an assistant in those 10 months done?

Couldn't you just have agreed and left it at that? No need for the dig at the club.
Last edited by Plastic Hawk on Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
tinned
Site Addict
 
Posts: 10023
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 1:49 pm
Location: Same poo, different day!

Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:02 pm

Salop Saddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:Much as your trying to change history again Neil with facts of nominal nature, Kinsella did act as an assistant manager, and without a doubt had clear tactical and performance -based influence on the team


Have it your own way, Phil. After all you are always right, even when you are completely wrong. I'd love to know how you admit something is a fact, then deny its relevance compared to your opinion!


:shock: :lol: and Miah's feeling much better now, thanks. :lol: :lol: :lol:


To quote Meatloaf: You took the words right out of my mouth :wink:

User avatar
sid swifty
Glitterati
 
Posts: 702
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2005 9:24 pm
Location: Walsall

Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:04 pm

tinned wrote:
Salop Saddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:Much as your trying to change history again Neil with facts of nominal nature, Kinsella did act as an assistant manager, and without a doubt had clear tactical and performance -based influence on the team


Have it your own way, Phil. After all you are always right, even when you are completely wrong. I'd love to know how you admit something is a fact, then deny its relevance compared to your opinion!


:shock: :lol: and Miah's feeling much better now, thanks. :lol: :lol: :lol:


To quote Meatloaf: You took the words right out of my mouth :wink:
Dont think we'll hear much more from Neil today.... :D :D :D

User avatar
Neil Ravenscroft
Site Admin
 
Posts: 5605
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Replacement Baby Is Here!

Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:04 pm

philthesaddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:Much as your trying to change history again Neil with facts of nominal nature, Kinsella did act as an assistant manager, and without a doubt had clear tactical and performance -based influence on the team


Have it your own way, Phil. After all you are always right, even when you are completely wrong. I'd love to know how you admit something is a fact, then deny its relevance compared to your opinion!


You talking to yourself Neil, because, funnily enough, you're doing exactly what you accuse me of doing, the only difference being that I have stats and facts to back up what i've been saying. But don't let that get in the way of telling me im wrong. :roll:


Phil, I did state a fact, which you admitted (calling it "nominal", whatever that's supposed to mean - after all, a fact in name is still a fact). What you posted was a bunch of statistics, where there is NO proven correlation. Without a correlation (and I have a degree in the subject), they are NOT facts, but unsubstantiated supposition. That is a very, very dangerous thing to do. You HAVE to prove a link for any statistics to mean anything. You've just been stating your opinion.

Don't make assumptions, becuase you know what assume does.

User avatar
Geordiesaddler
UTS Legend
 
Posts: 1568
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:02 am
Location: Whitley Bay.

Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:06 pm

Or alternatively, maybe it took 10 months for the right man to become identified and available, and meanwhile well done to DD for single-handedly managing to 1) Get us promoted 2) Win us the Championship, and 3) Make some superb signings in the summer and 4) Bring the youngsters on leaps and bounds.

Now that he has appointed a coach to help with the next phase of the club's development the future looks even brighter for us all.

Fantastic!! Good job the club is managed prudently and logically, rather than by populist sounbite and knee-jerk reactions, like many other clubs are.

philthesaddler
Site Addict
 
Posts: 5371
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 3:13 pm
Location: Bescot Stadium, 'the stadium that never closes'. Opening hours Mon-Fri 10am-4pm

Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:17 pm

Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:Much as your trying to change history again Neil with facts of nominal nature, Kinsella did act as an assistant manager, and without a doubt had clear tactical and performance -based influence on the team


Have it your own way, Phil. After all you are always right, even when you are completely wrong. I'd love to know how you admit something is a fact, then deny its relevance compared to your opinion!


You talking to yourself Neil, because, funnily enough, you're doing exactly what you accuse me of doing, the only difference being that I have stats and facts to back up what i've been saying. But don't let that get in the way of telling me im wrong. :roll:


Phil, I did state a fact, which you admitted (calling it "nominal", whatever that's supposed to mean - after all, a fact in name is still a fact). What you posted was a bunch of statistics, where there is NO proven correlation. Without a correlation (and I have a degree in the subject), they are NOT facts, but unsubstantiated supposition. That is a very, very dangerous thing to do. You HAVE to prove a link for any statistics to mean anything. You've just been stating your opinion.

Don't make assumptions, becuase you know what assume does.


Have it your own way, Neil. After all you are always right, even when you are completely wrong. I'd love to know how you admit something is a fact, then deny its relevance compared to your opinion!

See What I did there?

User avatar
Geordiesaddler
UTS Legend
 
Posts: 1568
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:02 am
Location: Whitley Bay.

Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:25 pm

philthesaddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:Much as your trying to change history again Neil with facts of nominal nature, Kinsella did act as an assistant manager, and without a doubt had clear tactical and performance -based influence on the team


Have it your own way, Phil. After all you are always right, even when you are completely wrong. I'd love to know how you admit something is a fact, then deny its relevance compared to your opinion!


You talking to yourself Neil, because, funnily enough, you're doing exactly what you accuse me of doing, the only difference being that I have stats and facts to back up what i've been saying. But don't let that get in the way of telling me im wrong. :roll:


Phil, I did state a fact, which you admitted (calling it "nominal", whatever that's supposed to mean - after all, a fact in name is still a fact). What you posted was a bunch of statistics, where there is NO proven correlation. Without a correlation (and I have a degree in the subject), they are NOT facts, but unsubstantiated supposition. That is a very, very dangerous thing to do. You HAVE to prove a link for any statistics to mean anything. You've just been stating your opinion.

Don't make assumptions, becuase you know what assume does.


Have it your own way, Neil. After all you are always right, even when you are completely wrong. I'd love to know how you admit something is a fact, then deny its relevance compared to your opinion!

See What I did there?


Yep sure did.

You got really close to having a meaningful discussion about Walsall FC.

User avatar
Salop Saddler
UTS Veteran
 
Posts: 339
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 11:17 am
Location: The A 5

Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:27 pm

philthesaddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:Much as your trying to change history again Neil with facts of nominal nature, Kinsella did act as an assistant manager, and without a doubt had clear tactical and performance -based influence on the team


Have it your own way, Phil. After all you are always right, even when you are completely wrong. I'd love to know how you admit something is a fact, then deny its relevance compared to your opinion!


You talking to yourself Neil, because, funnily enough, you're doing exactly what you accuse me of doing, the only difference being that I have stats and facts to back up what i've been saying. But don't let that get in the way of telling me im wrong. :roll:


Phil, I did state a fact, which you admitted (calling it "nominal", whatever that's supposed to mean - after all, a fact in name is still a fact). What you posted was a bunch of statistics, where there is NO proven correlation. Without a correlation (and I have a degree in the subject), they are NOT facts, but unsubstantiated supposition. That is a very, very dangerous thing to do. You HAVE to prove a link for any statistics to mean anything. You've just been stating your opinion.

Don't make assumptions, becuase you know what assume does.


Have it your own way, Neil. After all you are always right, even when you are completely wrong. I'd love to know how you admit something is a fact, then deny its relevance compared to your opinion!

See What I did there?


Don't worry about it Phil. There's only one other person who operates along the same lines as Neil, and he runs a hotel in Torquay.

It's got to be one of the best loffs I've ever had :lol: :lol: :lol:

User avatar
Geordiesaddler
UTS Legend
 
Posts: 1568
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:02 am
Location: Whitley Bay.

Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:39 pm

Salop Saddler wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:Much as your trying to change history again Neil with facts of nominal nature, Kinsella did act as an assistant manager, and without a doubt had clear tactical and performance -based influence on the team


Have it your own way, Phil. After all you are always right, even when you are completely wrong. I'd love to know how you admit something is a fact, then deny its relevance compared to your opinion!


You talking to yourself Neil, because, funnily enough, you're doing exactly what you accuse me of doing, the only difference being that I have stats and facts to back up what i've been saying. But don't let that get in the way of telling me im wrong. :roll:


Phil, I did state a fact, which you admitted (calling it "nominal", whatever that's supposed to mean - after all, a fact in name is still a fact). What you posted was a bunch of statistics, where there is NO proven correlation. Without a correlation (and I have a degree in the subject), they are NOT facts, but unsubstantiated supposition. That is a very, very dangerous thing to do. You HAVE to prove a link for any statistics to mean anything. You've just been stating your opinion.

Don't make assumptions, becuase you know what assume does.


Have it your own way, Neil. After all you are always right, even when you are completely wrong. I'd love to know how you admit something is a fact, then deny its relevance compared to your opinion!

See What I did there?


Don't worry about it Phil. There's only one other person who operates along the same lines as Neil, and he runs a hotel in Torquay.

It's got to be one of the best loffs I've ever had :lol: :lol: :lol:


:!: :!: Eeeeeh God Bless you Salop, I'm deeply saddened by this bombshell.

May what's left of your life contain a whole lifetime's hilarity, and I really mean that by the way.

User avatar
Salop Saddler
UTS Veteran
 
Posts: 339
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 11:17 am
Location: The A 5

Wed Oct 10, 2007 1:46 pm

Oh, my aching sides :lol: Pathos is such a wonderful thing. And thank you Geordiemeister, you receive a doffed cap award. :D

Oh, and don't worry about not 'getting it'. Sences of humour take differing and diverse pathways. One size doesn't fit all, so to speak :wink:

User avatar
Geordiesaddler
UTS Legend
 
Posts: 1568
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 11:02 am
Location: Whitley Bay.

Wed Oct 10, 2007 2:30 pm

I'm still trying to "get" the one about signing Lee Frecklington.

But hey you little cliques have your in jokes :D

User avatar
WFCNIL
 
Posts: 88
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 1:54 pm
Location: Going down the wednesbury rd ............

Wed Oct 10, 2007 3:48 pm

Geordiesaddler wrote:I'm still trying to "get" the one about signing Lee Frecklington.

But hey you little cliques have your in jokes :D


:lol: :lol:

User avatar
Salop Saddler
UTS Veteran
 
Posts: 339
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 11:17 am
Location: The A 5

Wed Oct 10, 2007 6:13 pm

Ah yes, the Frecklington, player X clique. Dangerous people I hear. Best not to mention it.

User avatar
tinned
Site Addict
 
Posts: 10023
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 1:49 pm
Location: Same poo, different day!

Wed Oct 10, 2007 8:07 pm

Neil Ravenscroft wrote:Phil, I did state a fact, which you admitted (calling it "nominal", whatever that's supposed to mean - after all, afact in name is still a fact). What you posted was a bunch of statistics, where there is NO proven correlation. Without a correlation (and I have a degree in the subject), they are NOT facts, but unsubstantiated supposition. That is a very, very dangerous thing to do. You HAVE to prove a link for any statistics to mean anything. You've just been stating your opinion.

Don't make assumptions, becuase you know what assume does.


Oh the irony ......

User avatar
Exile
Jobsworth
 
Posts: 23623
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 7:06 pm
Location: ヽ༼ຈل͜ຈ༽ノ

Wed Oct 10, 2007 8:53 pm

Quality, this. Could it be the longest-running match thread ever?

I agree with phil by the way, whose presentation of raw data disguised as facts had me totally fooled. Luckily I think that DD works better with an assistant as was therefore able to twist this data to suit my opinion. Fact.

womblesaddler
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:12 pm

Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:15 pm

Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:Much as your trying to change history again Neil with facts of nominal nature, Kinsella did act as an assistant manager, and without a doubt had clear tactical and performance -based influence on the team


Have it your own way, Phil. After all you are always right, even when you are completely wrong. I'd love to know how you admit something is a fact, then deny its relevance compared to your opinion!


You talking to yourself Neil, because, funnily enough, you're doing exactly what you accuse me of doing, the only difference being that I have stats and facts to back up what i've been saying. But don't let that get in the way of telling me im wrong. :roll:


Phil, I did state a fact, which you admitted (calling it "nominal", whatever that's supposed to mean - after all, a fact in name is still a fact). What you posted was a bunch of statistics, where there is NO proven correlation. Without a correlation (and I have a degree in the subject), they are NOT facts, but unsubstantiated supposition. That is a very, very dangerous thing to do. You HAVE to prove a link for any statistics to mean anything. You've just been stating your opinion.

Don't make assumptions, becuase you know what assume does.


I have no degree in this subject, but am i right in thinking that raw data is that collected by such means as opinion polls and surveys??

and these "figures" that have been quoted be facts as they show an event that has taken place and show the STATISTICS of the results? I only did one modular in completing my 3 years Economics degree on statistics but im sure im not far from the point in stating this. This giving credibility to the fact, that these figures can be researched and found to be true? making it a fact?

but hey 99% of statistics are all lies, damned lies!! :D
Last edited by womblesaddler on Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Magic Man Fan
Site Addict
 
Posts: 10977
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 6:30 pm
Location: Warning. Some posts may cause offence...to the over sensitive or slow.

Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:18 pm

Plastic Hawk wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:
Geordiesaddler wrote:Yep, absolutely no doubt that DD benefits from having an assistant, so well done to him for identifying the right man, and well done to JB for appointing him.

What you say Phil? Good management all round from the powers that be at Walsall FC?


Yes, just a shame it took then 10 months to realise.


:roll:

Much of the good work spoiled...

What (long term) damage has not having an assistant in those 10 months done?

Couldn't you just have agreed and left it at that? No need for the dig at the club.


WHAT?! WHAT?! The words currant d'etre spring to mind.

Following on from phil's facts about an assistant....the only consistently good spells under Colin Lee came when he had an assistant manager. Discuss. :D:D:D

User avatar
Salop Saddler
UTS Veteran
 
Posts: 339
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 11:17 am
Location: The A 5

Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:31 pm

Yes, MMF. The Colin Lee assertion is quiet true.

Bernie
UTS Legend
 
Posts: 1868
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 8:27 pm

Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:38 pm

womblesaddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote: What you posted was a bunch of statistics, where there is NO proven correlation. Without a correlation (and I have a degree in the subject), they are NOT facts, but unsubstantiated supposition. That is a very, very dangerous thing to do. You HAVE to prove a link for any statistics to mean anything. You've just been stating your opinion.

Don't make assumptions, becuase you know what assume does.
I have no degree in this subject, but am i right in thinking that raw data is that collected by such means as opinion polls and surveys??

and these "figures" that have been quoted be facts as they show an event that has taken place and show the STATISTICS of the results? I only did one modular in completing my 3 years Economics degree on statistics but im sure im not far from the point in staing this. This giving credibility to the fact, that these figures can be researched and found to be true? making it a fact?

but hey 99% of statistics are all lies, damned lies!! :D


Quite right to be puzzled Womble. There seems to be some confusion between correlation and causation. There can certainly be a strong correlation between two variables without there being any causal connection between them. For example the sales of ice cream and sun cream have a positive correlation, but buying an ice cream does not cause someone to need sun cream, nor vice versa.

To say that without a correlation the statistics are not facts but unsubstantiated suppositions does not really make any sense at all. Perhaps what was meant was that if you merely have a correlation, but with no proven causal connection, then all you have is unproven speculation.

What Phil was trying to show was the existence of a correlation between Walsall doing well and Richard Money having assistance. I would say that to some extent he succeeded in showing a correlation, and that this gave him some evidence which did support his argument, but that the correlation would certainly not on its own be enough to prove it.

User avatar
Pedagogue
Board Pedant
 
Posts: 7293
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:21 pm
Location: Can I fix it? Can I ****!

Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:42 pm

tinned wrote:PH, can you please stand back and let the pack of wolves get to their prey whenever they feel like it :roll:


Come on, moderators - obscene language alert!!!!

Just ban him! :D :D :D

User avatar
Salop Saddler
UTS Veteran
 
Posts: 339
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 11:17 am
Location: The A 5

Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:49 pm

womblesaddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:Much as your trying to change history again Neil with facts of nominal nature, Kinsella did act as an assistant manager, and without a doubt had clear tactical and performance -based influence on the team


Have it your own way, Phil. After all you are always right, even when you are completely wrong. I'd love to know how you admit something is a fact, then deny its relevance compared to your opinion!


You talking to yourself Neil, because, funnily enough, you're doing exactly what you accuse me of doing, the only difference being that I have stats and facts to back up what i've been saying. But don't let that get in the way of telling me im wrong. :roll:


Phil, I did state a fact, which you admitted (calling it "nominal", whatever that's supposed to mean - after all, a fact in name is still a fact). What you posted was a bunch of statistics, where there is NO proven correlation. Without a correlation (and I have a degree in the subject), they are NOT facts, but unsubstantiated supposition. That is a very, very dangerous thing to do. You HAVE to prove a link for any statistics to mean anything. You've just been stating your opinion.

Don't make assumptions, becuase you know what assume does.


I have no degree in this subject, but am i right in thinking that raw data is that collected by such means as opinion polls and surveys??

and these "figures" that have been quoted be facts as they show an event that has taken place and show the STATISTICS of the results? I only did one modular in completing my 3 years Economics degree on statistics but im sure im not far from the point in stating this. This giving credibility to the fact, that these figures can be researched and found to be true? making it a fact?

but hey 99% of statistics are all lies, damned lies!! :D


I have to admit to having no degree in the subjects of statistics or economics, choosing instead to idle away three years of valuable life in the NUS bar attaining a BA thingy in art and design. But I too am able to grasp the concept of a win being a win, a draw being a draw, and a loss being, well, a loss.

I thought Phil presented a well detailed and reasoned case, to be honest, regarding the marked upturn in results achieved by the team when DD had a right hand man in place, as compared to when he was flying solo, so to speak. I really can't understand why Neil had to pick holes in what was simply a well stated presentation of the facts.

User avatar
Salop Saddler
UTS Veteran
 
Posts: 339
Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 11:17 am
Location: The A 5

Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:52 pm

Bernie wrote:
womblesaddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote: What you posted was a bunch of statistics, where there is NO proven correlation. Without a correlation (and I have a degree in the subject), they are NOT facts, but unsubstantiated supposition. That is a very, very dangerous thing to do. You HAVE to prove a link for any statistics to mean anything. You've just been stating your opinion.

Don't make assumptions, becuase you know what assume does.
I have no degree in this subject, but am i right in thinking that raw data is that collected by such means as opinion polls and surveys??

and these "figures" that have been quoted be facts as they show an event that has taken place and show the STATISTICS of the results? I only did one modular in completing my 3 years Economics degree on statistics but im sure im not far from the point in staing this. This giving credibility to the fact, that these figures can be researched and found to be true? making it a fact?

but hey 99% of statistics are all lies, damned lies!! :D


Quite right to be puzzled Womble. There seems to be some confusion between correlation and causation. There can certainly be a strong correlation between two variables without there being any causal connection between them. For example the sales of ice cream and sun cream have a positive correlation, but buying an ice cream does not cause someone to need sun cream, nor vice versa.

To say that without a correlation the statistics are not facts but unsubstantiated suppositions does not really make any sense at all. Perhaps what was meant was that if you merely have a correlation, but with no proven causal connection, then all you have is unproven speculation.

What Phil was trying to show was the existence of a correlation between Walsall doing well and Richard Money having assistance. I would say that to some extent he succeeded in showing a correlation, and that this gave him some evidence which did support his argument, but that the correlation would certainly not on its own be enough to prove it.


You're clearly an expert Bernie, but have you been going through Paul Taylor's last round of expences by any chance :?:

User avatar
tinned
Site Addict
 
Posts: 10023
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 1:49 pm
Location: Same poo, different day!

Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:55 pm

Salop Saddler wrote:
womblesaddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote:
philthesaddler wrote:Much as your trying to change history again Neil with facts of nominal nature, Kinsella did act as an assistant manager, and without a doubt had clear tactical and performance -based influence on the team


Have it your own way, Phil. After all you are always right, even when you are completely wrong. I'd love to know how you admit something is a fact, then deny its relevance compared to your opinion!


You talking to yourself Neil, because, funnily enough, you're doing exactly what you accuse me of doing, the only difference being that I have stats and facts to back up what i've been saying. But don't let that get in the way of telling me im wrong. :roll:


Phil, I did state a fact, which you admitted (calling it "nominal", whatever that's supposed to mean - after all, a fact in name is still a fact). What you posted was a bunch of statistics, where there is NO proven correlation. Without a correlation (and I have a degree in the subject), they are NOT facts, but unsubstantiated supposition. That is a very, very dangerous thing to do. You HAVE to prove a link for any statistics to mean anything. You've just been stating your opinion.

Don't make assumptions, becuase you know what assume does.


I have no degree in this subject, but am i right in thinking that raw data is that collected by such means as opinion polls and surveys??

and these "figures" that have been quoted be facts as they show an event that has taken place and show the STATISTICS of the results? I only did one modular in completing my 3 years Economics degree on statistics but im sure im not far from the point in stating this. This giving credibility to the fact, that these figures can be researched and found to be true? making it a fact?

but hey 99% of statistics are all lies, damned lies!! :D


I have to admit to having no degree in the subjects of statistics or economics, choosing instead to idle away three years of valuable life in the NUS bar attaining a BA thingy in art and design. But I too am able to grasp the concept of a win being a win, a draw being a draw, and a loss being, well, a loss.

I thought Phil presented a well detailed and reasoned case, to be honest, regarding the marked upturn in results achieved by the team when DD had a right hand man in place, as compared to when he was flying solo, so to speak. I really can't understand why Neil had to pick holes in what was simply a well stated presentation of the facts.


Bernie was spot on. A correlation is just a formula that tests the strength (or lack of) between two sets of data. I don't think it can be argued (he says more in hope than expectation) that the figures provided display a high correlation. Whether one causes the other is something entirely different.

As for your last sentence Salop, because it's Phil, that's why. If Phil said "It's October" Neil would have to come back with some smart ar5e comment, rubbishing it.

womblesaddler
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 2:12 pm

Wed Oct 10, 2007 10:56 pm

Bernie wrote:
womblesaddler wrote:
Neil Ravenscroft wrote: What you posted was a bunch of statistics, where there is NO proven correlation. Without a correlation (and I have a degree in the subject), they are NOT facts, but unsubstantiated supposition. That is a very, very dangerous thing to do. You HAVE to prove a link for any statistics to mean anything. You've just been stating your opinion.

Don't make assumptions, becuase you know what assume does.
I have no degree in this subject, but am i right in thinking that raw data is that collected by such means as opinion polls and surveys??

and these "figures" that have been quoted be facts as they show an event that has taken place and show the STATISTICS of the results? I only did one modular in completing my 3 years Economics degree on statistics but im sure im not far from the point in staing this. This giving credibility to the fact, that these figures can be researched and found to be true? making it a fact?

but hey 99% of statistics are all lies, damned lies!! :D


Quite right to be puzzled Womble. There seems to be some confusion between correlation and causation. There can certainly be a strong correlation between two variables without there being any causal connection between them. For example the sales of ice cream and sun cream have a positive correlation, but buying an ice cream does not cause someone to need sun cream, nor vice versa.

To say that without a correlation the statistics are not facts but unsubstantiated suppositions does not really make any sense at all. Perhaps what was meant was that if you merely have a correlation, but with no proven causal connection, then all you have is unproven speculation.

What Phil was trying to show was the existence of a correlation between Walsall doing well and Richard Money having assistance. I would say that to some extent he succeeded in showing a correlation, and that this gave him some evidence which did support his argument, but that the correlation would certainly not on its own be enough to prove it.


thats a much better summary from my understanding of it, it certainly seems that an assistant has worked out for the better for wfc, and i for one would not like to test the theory or correlation later down the line of being in a position of not having an assistant as im sure there is some credibility in the figures stated.

DD did a great job on his own, but its like looking a crossword puzzle, u can do well but when another set of eyes and brains come in they can spot the answer straight away for what u have been trying to figure out for a while. Walsall fc started off as a puzzle for many this season, heres hoping that the right answers have now been found

PreviousNext
Return to 2007-08 Season

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests