Talking Footy

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2017 9:53 am**

Just did the research for you because I thought you might be scared of the results sport capital.

And you should be scared!

Members sport seems to be a provider of fake news.

My count, only 17 lead changes in the AFL finals of 2017. Sport may have falsely on purpose counted the first score of each game as a lead change which isn't an actual lead 'change'

And listen to this lil stat. If you take out the one game which I acknowledge was a contest in the AFL, the port week 1 final, if you take that game out there was not one single lead change in the second half of ALL seven of the other AFL finals matches. Not one second half lead change! How shithouse is that?

And here's another interesting stat. Of all the 17 lead changes that sport capital has decided show the AFL games were worth it, of all the 17, four resulted in the port match which makes it only 13 lead changes in 7 of the other matches! And of those 13 lead changes in the 7 lopsided pieces of shit matches? A massive 10 occurred in the first quarter, 3 in the second quarter and as I said NONE in the final half of footy. How damning is that! Basically almost all the lead changes sport capital has tried to mislead you with refer to boring first quarter lead changes where a team gets a behind in the first quarter to go up one nil and then gets their asses handed to em after that!

I'm right, all yo u bitches who challenge me are wrong! $:\:$ $:\:$ $:\:$

$:\:$ $:\:$ $:\:$

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2017 9:58 am**

No wonder our AFL brain washed merinos are submitting to their mantra of cwowds and watings in this thread which has nothing to do with crowds and ratings

if they stick their neck out like sport capital they know it'll get knocked off like I just did to sport Capital!

Basically, they know I'm dead right. It was a shit house lopsided AFL finals series in 2017. There's no other way to put it me bros

there's just no other way to put it.

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2017 10:29 am**

King-Eliagh wrote: Sun Nov 12, 2017 9:53 am
Just did the research for you because I thought you might be scared of the results sport capital.

And you should be scared!

Members sport seems to be a provider of fake news.

My count, only 17 lead changes in the AFL finals of 2017. Sport may have falsely on purpose counted the first score of each game as a lead change which isn't an actual lead 'change'

And listen to this lil stat. If you take out the one game which I acknowledge was a contest in the AFL, the port week 1 final, if you take that game out there was not one single lead change in the second half of ALL seven of the other AFL finals matches. Not one second half lead change! How shithouse is that?

And here's another interesting stat. Of all the 17 lead changes that sport capital has decided show the AFL games were worth it, of all the 17, four resulted in the port match which makes it only 13 lead changes in 7 of the other matches! And of those 13 lead changes in the 7 lopsided pieces of shit matches? A massive 10 occurred in the first quarter, 3 in the second quarter and as I said NONE in the final half of footy. How damning is that! Basically almost all the lead changes sport capital has tried to mislead you with refer to boring first quarter lead changes where a team gets a behind in the first quarter to go up one nil and then gets their asses handed to em after that!

I'm right, all yo u bitches who challenge me are wrong! $:\:$ $:\:$ $:\:$ $:\:$ $:\:$ $:\:$

I'm not sure you grasp the concept of a lead change. No team leads at the start of a match. First score totally qualifies as a lead change. Besides, both comps were counted using the same rules. Deduct them from NRL too. As to the first half/second half point. By half time in AFL has almost played as long as an entire NRL match. BY HALF TIME! From then half the audience have the pleasure of watching their team smash the opposition for the second half. Still worth the watch. Even for impartial viewers.

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2017 12:56 pm**

First score can't qualify as a lead change
Because 0-0 has no one on the lead .
So the lead CANT change if there is no leader

You're just not too bright .
Thought I'd school you before KE comes back to do it

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2017 3:24 pm**

AFLcrap1 wrote: Sun Nov 12, 2017 12:56 pm
First score can't qualify as a lead change
Because 0-0 has no one on the lead .
So the lead CANT change if there is no leader

You're just not too bright .
Thought I'd school you before KE comes back to do it

Being "not too bright" or a lack of schooling has nothing to do with it. When a team scores the first score they "take the lead". Which constitutes a change in the state of who is leading. A lead change. It's really common around the globe.

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2017 5:06 pm**

AFLcrap1 wrote: Sun Nov 12, 2017 12:56 pm
First score can't qualify as a lead change
Because 0-0 has no one on the lead .
So the lead CANT change if there is no leader

You're just not too bright .
Thought I'd school you before KE comes back to do it

Exactly aflcrap, exactly.

A lead change refers clearly to a change in the leader. 0-0 means no one in the 'lead'. Just basic understanding of English really, which sportcPital doesn't seem to have a grasp of

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2017 5:13 pm**

SportCapital wrote: Sun Nov 12, 2017 10:29 am

King-Eliagh wrote: Sun Nov 12, 2017 9:53 am
Just did the research for you because I thought you might be scared of the results sport capital.

And you should be scared!

Members sport seems to be a provider of fake news.

My count, only 17 lead changes in the AFL finals of 2017. Sport may have falsely on purpose counted the first score of each game as a lead change which isn't an actual lead 'change'

And listen to this lil stat. If you take out the one game which I acknowledge was a contest in the AFL, the port week 1 final, if you take that game out there was not one single lead change in the second half of ALL seven of the other AFL finals matches. Not one second half lead change! How shithouse is that?

And here's another interesting stat. Of all the 17 lead changes that sport capital has decided show the AFL games were worth it, of all the 17, four resulted in the port match which makes it only 13 lead changes in 7 of the other matches! And of those 13 lead changes in the 7 lopsided pieces of shit matches? A massive 10 occurred in the first quarter, 3 in the second quarter and as I said NONE in the final half of footy. How damning is that! Basically almost all the lead changes sport capital has tried to mislead you with refer to boring first quarter lead changes where a team gets a behind in the first quarter to go up one nil and then gets their asses handed to em after that!

I'm right, all yo u bitches who challenge me are wrong! $:\:$ $:\:$ $:\:$ $:\:$ $:\:$ $:\:$
I'm not sure you grasp the concept of a lead change. No team leads at the start of a match. First score totally qualifies as a lead change. Besides, both comps were counted using the same rules. Deduct them from NRL too. As to the first half/second half point. By half time in AFL has almost played as long as an entire NRL match. BY HALF TIME! From then half the audience have the pleasure of watching their team smash the opposition for the second half. Still worth the watch. Even for impartial viewers.

Ahh lemme put this as plain and simple as I can for you sport my man.

1. You're wrong on the "lead change" - as aflcrap has stated, someone needs to be in the ahem lead for a ahem... Ahem "lead" "change" to take place.

2. An AFL half of footy goes for forty minutes of match time. The reason the game goes for longer is because the game is a slower game with shitloads more stoppages (time stoppages) than in NRL. There's actually very little difference in actual action time, the AFL is just a slower game because it has shitloads more stoppages.

You must stop bringing fake news to this reputable forum. Seriously, it's just not cool to make shit up and try to deceive our readers

I am right, you are wrong.. I know this won't be easy for you but It's time you bow down and admit your arguments have been....pulverised by the KING

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2017 7:09 pm**

He’s right re lead change. If the score was 50 all and someone kicks a point ... it’s a lead change. Makes no difference if it is 50 all or nil all. Hope that clears that up. Happy to help.

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2017 7:22 pm**

Another AFL fan who seems to be struggling with comprehension of the words lead and change. If it's 50-50 and the team that has been leading scores the next point then there has been no change of the leader, therefore no actual lead change.

Sport capital described lead changes as "in my opinion when a lead changes supporters experience a peak/trough in emotional response. Depending on allegiances. Basically more exciting"

He's clearly talking about a change in leader.

In any case I blew his whole dumb argument out of the water with the stats I provided $:\:$ I could use his 24-16 lead changes numbers and still blow his argument out of the water!

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2017 8:09 pm**

How the fuck can there be a lead change
When no one was ever in the lead .

Something has to be established before it can change
At 0-0
No lead is established

The stupidity of fumblers is astounding .

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2017 8:19 pm**

Let's not count first scores then.
24 vs 16 becomes 15 vs 7.
50% more becomes 114% more lead changes in the AFL finals. (Math verified as correct)
That's more than twice as many for those less schooled slightly dimmer type out there.

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2017 9:32 pm**

So the AFL finals had over double the lead changes of the RL finals. To add to that we saw a runaway minor premier sweep the NRL finals, scoring 64-6 in their last 2 finals.

KE is getting slaughtered in his own thread

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2017 9:57 pm**

Avg AFL match = 400% more points than avg rugby league match.

During seven of the eight AFL matches ZERO Lead changes in second half of footy.The worm doesn't lie

That's right ZERO! And zero second half lead changes when in the AFL 400% more points are scored?

What the fuck went wrong in the AFL 2017 finals series?

Thanks for coming douchebrains, the AFL 2017 finals were lopsided pieces of shit and there's no dodgy sums you can do to change the fact.

$:\:$

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2017 10:14 pm**

King-Eliagh wrote: Sun Nov 12, 2017 9:57 pm
Avg AFL match = 400% more points than avg rugby league match.

During seven of the eight AFL matches ZERO Lead changes in second half of footy.The worm doesn't lie
That's right ZERO! And zero second half lead changes when in the AFL 400% more points are scored? What the fuck went wrong in the AFL 2017 finals series?

Thanks for coming douchebrains, the AFL 2017 finals were lopsided pieces of shit and there's no dodgy sums you can do to change the fact.

$:\:$

That sounds like 400% more exciting to me!
PS. Is that math verified...?

Posted: **Sun Nov 12, 2017 10:22 pm**

2016 AFL finals = 25 total lead changes --- 2017 = just 15.

2016 AFL finals = 13 second half lead changes --- 2017 = just 4 (and they were all in one match)

The 2017 AFL finals series was nothing more than a lopsided piece of dogshit

The truth is out there me AFL laddettes, you just gotta open dem scared shut eyes and face it!

$:\:$

Talking Footy

NRL VS AFL competition - finals 2017

Re: NRL VS AFL competition - finals 2017

Re: NRL VS AFL competition - finals 2017

Re: NRL VS AFL competition - finals 2017

Re: NRL VS AFL competition - finals 2017

Re: NRL VS AFL competition - finals 2017

Re: NRL VS AFL competition - finals 2017

Re: NRL VS AFL competition - finals 2017

Re: NRL VS AFL competition - finals 2017

Re: NRL VS AFL competition - finals 2017

Re: NRL VS AFL competition - finals 2017

Re: NRL VS AFL competition - finals 2017

Re: NRL VS AFL competition - finals 2017

Re: NRL VS AFL competition - finals 2017

Re: NRL VS AFL competition - finals 2017

Re: NRL VS AFL competition - finals 2017