Off Topic The What kind of ****ery is this? thread...

Dutch has morphed into Castro.

 

Solutions: hold race at 0900
Pub shut till 1800.

There. Sorted.

 

Norwich!!!

 

It's okay they were just horsing about...

 

Think OB are too late: the horse has bolted....

 

Certainly no offence taken. I may be a grumpy old git but thankfully am not easily offended. I was just messing, plagiarise all you like, we all do.
I first came across mahoosive used by that comedian who hosts that tv game show, wheel of fortune or something, then heard it again shortly after. Only very recent so I hope it's not yet in the dictionary but may well end up there if it catches on. Thankfully I don't yet have grandchildren of my own bloodline but have a son who is 15 and daughter 18 so they keep me up to date on some of the modern lingo. I have been a step-grandfather when with 2 former wives but since they are former wives I guess they no longer count!
I don't mind being educated, informed or enlightened by others. I am always willing and happy to learn anything new if it interests me. As for being educated, we are all educated, without exception. Yes, I have achieved a reasonable level of education both formal and self-taught but I would never claim to be better educated than anyone else, just differently educated.

 

You and I are going to get along just fine.

 

Couldn't agree more. Just cheap tv and very little real about it at all.

 

Statistics - really dislike, or rather the misunderstanding of how to use them and the blatant use of them to misinform or confuse people - both rampant today.
Also proof, particularly when applied to science as in 'science proves.' Any good scientist knows all too well that science proves nothing and the word proof should be reserved for the discipline of mathematics only.
I bet that stirs up a hornet's nest.

 

What are your views on average crowd as a percentage of immediate catchment area for football clubs?

 

I really don't have a view as I know nothing about it, nor wish to.

I would suggest however that as for most data, its efficacy is dependent on what and how the many variables are taken into account. My issue with statistical data is that whilst it can be a useful tool, it should be better understood and recognised as an indicator, of varying quality, perhaps like a light shining in the dark, not wrapped up and sold as fact and used to promote something, whether a product or idea. In society today we are bombarded with statistical data designed to make us react emotionally and thus often fail to question its reliability. Most is presented in numerical terms and ignores creativity, art, instinct, perception. 'Not all things can be counted and many shouldn't', if my quote is correct, but whether or no, it is a truism we ignore at our peril.

Footy stands, for me, as a wonderful case in point. I look at the footy data, it's fun, but largely meaningless. Is a players value for example the same as a players worth? Either way, does it make statistical sense that a striker costs more than a defender, or is it maybe because a striker may have more entertainment value? I rather admire McCann's policy of looking to recruit players of good character. Whatever he means by that, it is a judgement that cannot be made solely on data. Perception and instinct needed - as with a player on the pitch whose skills, vision, creatively, etc. etc., and ability to please a crowd cannot and should not be reduced to data.

 

Totally agree on the abuse of 'science', which is largely due to a lack of understanding of what 'science' actually is and is not, and also the misuse and abuse of 'data', which sadly is not limited to the media or politicians, as I've seen people deemed as experts totally abusing data, and misrepresenting what they are actually 'experts' in.

For footballers, the data may well show a player has scored a lot of goals, but rarely if ever takes account of the work of the rest of the team they are in facilitating that. Likewise, a keeper can have a good record of clean sheets, but there are ten players in front of them that can stop the ball getting to the keeper in the first place.

Both situations show the limitations of relying just on data, especially if you're not looking at the environment that data was generated in, and how the statistical elements are compiled.

 

Statically , only 3% of hornet"s nests are stirred, 27% are shaken and 70% are mistaken for wasps.

 

Well in the 70s it meant you could shag anyone one you took a fancy to....

Now of course you can only shag the ones who take a shine to you too....

 

Political correctness gone mad

 

Ffs

 

You are learning.

 

Yes, no one could do that before then. Films stars in the 1930s, 1940x 1950 and 1960s and the rock stars of the 1960s were positively celibate compared to the 1970s.

 

Where will it all end?

 

I have decided that it is so predictable that it isn't worth bothering. Though it is humbling to find that someone diligently reads and remembers my posts from years ago.