No, Cheer Cheer, drawing comparisons with the tossing of a coin in which "the law of averages" means something and a football player is ridiculous. Show me the "law of averages" anywhere in the AFL rule book! It means nothing in a game involving as many factors as team sport.
Provocative Akermanis labels taggers as cheats
Collapse
X
-
On the ABC 4pm radio news Leigh Matthews supported Aker's comments re Crouch. He was quoted as saying that "If there was an umpire to watch each player then taggers would be penalised all the time."
The Lions sweating pre Round One! Must have been Voss who predicted us for the Grand Final in the Captains' pick.Comment
-
Originally posted by Sanecow
No, Cheer Cheer, drawing comparisons with the tossing of a coin in which "the law of averages" means something and a football player is ridiculous. Show me the "law of averages" anywhere in the AFL rule book! It means nothing in a game involving as many factors as team sport.No.1 ticket holder of Nick Davis Fan Club...Comment
-
I'll lump it. If the "law of averages" means anything in Footy, Nicks will be all Australian this year. He was pretty average last year, so he must be ready for a blinder!
I can guareentee for example if he plays us another 6 times in his career he will have at least two games where he has been really brilliant.
I'm happy to disagree if you are!Comment
-
Originally posted by Sanecow
I'll lump it. If the "law of averages" means anything in Footy, Nicks will be all Australian this year. He was pretty average last year, so he must be ready for a blinder!
What odds will you give me? If you guarantee it as you claim, you can give me 1 million to 1 against it and I'll bet a dollar.
I'm happy to disagree if you are!
Why dont you start using Buckley / Simon Black / or top 10 quality afl players to make a comparison ? and perhaps you will start to understand my point - instead of trying to convince yourself such an unwritten law doesnt exist when you think of players such as Nicksy! Or the St.kilda footbal club Bah!No.1 ticket holder of Nick Davis Fan Club...Comment
-
Nicks was all Australian in the past, but had a crap year last year. Therefore, your imaginary "law of averages" means he's up for a blinder. Or is there some kind of small group ("top 10 quality afl players") that obey the law while others are left out of its reach? That's a fine "law" you have there. The "Cheer Cheer law of averages for the top 10 AFL players". Quite a mouthful.
And what odds will you give me if you are so absolutely certain of Aker's future performance?Comment
-
That is right there is a select group of players which my " law" stands for as I have constantly pointed out during all my responses and which you have finally picked up on - and I have stated the criteria clearly which I hope you have finally picked up on and no, Nicks or the Saints footy club isnt in the criteria, which hopefully you can see now.
Aker is part of this group, as is Buckley , Cousins , Crawford etc which I have used as examples. The current criteria is recent brownlow medalists and / or star consistent players (usually both go hand in hand ) Cousins for e.g is a player who hasn't won the Brownlow but is an absolute star.
On another point which is not really related : -
Nicks has been crap for a few years dating back and the All-Australian selection is not all that it suggests because he was chosen for the " rules" series not the "actual" AA team where there is quite a gulf in terms of talent ( No offence but Crouch for example)
Are we all clear now Sanecow? I hope we are -Last edited by Cheer Cheer; 23 March 2004, 07:36 PM.No.1 ticket holder of Nick Davis Fan Club...Comment
-
So certain of your dodgy "law" but no willing to give me odds. Interesting.
There are two common ways to misunderstand and misapply the law of large numbers:
...
"I just got 5 tails in a row. My chances of getting heads must be very good now." False.Comment
-
I as have exhaustively been saying I'm not going by the pure definition of the law of averages as you have gone to the trouble of looking up - I have my own law with own definition as stated many times.
And sorry never have gambled - not going to start now.
Bottom line is ofcourse I hope I am wrong! And Akermanis keeps having bad game against us.
How about I buy you a beer in 3 years if I am wrong from now as Aker would have played around 6 times V Swans and I tipped my law averages he would have least 2 brilliant games in that space.No.1 ticket holder of Nick Davis Fan Club...Comment
-
I guess what Sanecow is trying to point out is -
If you (for example) say that Aker has a 80% chance of playing a great game whether he has had a few bad games doesn't change the odds.
It's funny when you here people marvel at the fact that some numbers in lotto drop more than others. Of course they do. If all the numbers were to drop an equal amount of time this would point to the fact that each outcome was dependant on the others.
The 'law' of averages aside, the concept Cheer Cheer is trying to define is that good players that have a few bad ones are likely to have a good one because they will TRY harder. Humans can influence this outcome, it's not all down to chance.
Now that I've probably misrepresented both of your views, flame on ;-)Comment
-
I'm just being argumentative because I have sworn off of eBay for a month so I have more time to ... type.
Cheer Cheer, I get what you were saying. But I hope that Crouch has Aker's number and he won't star against us. I look forward to that beer!Comment
-
I hope I am wrong! (Especially for this weekend) My shout!No.1 ticket holder of Nick Davis Fan Club...Comment
Comment