Talking Footy

Xman wrote:

Tertiary level maths, bachelor of physics to be exact dipshit.

What part of my comment was incorrect?

Well your comment implies that if an NRL game finishes with a result where a team scores "double" the other team, that this must be a blowout. This is simply not the case, and so far this season its not the case in the majority of games where this result has occurred. The testicle for brains they let through uni these days is disturbing, I guess its justified by the prices one pays now at uni. You're definitely one of the nutbrains who's 'paid for their degree' as I'll prove again below

testiclebrained physics grad wrote:

The fact is if a team can only score 6 points over almost an entire game it is very unlikely they will score another 12 in quick time.

Sheezus your maths is shoddy. Didnt you say "double" before? Tell me how 6 + 12 = 6 X 2 Xman?

nutbrain physics grad wrote:

I do however realize this concept is beyond your comprehension.

:_<> :_<>

King-Eliagh wrote:

Xman wrote:

Tertiary level maths, bachelor of physics to be exact dipshit.

What part of my comment was incorrect?

Well your comment implies that if an NRL game finishes with a result where a team scores "double" the other team, that this must be a blowout. This is simply not the case, and so far this season its not the case in the majority of games where this result has occurred. The testicle for brains they let through uni these days is disturbing, I guess its justified by the prices one pays now at uni. You're definitely one of the nutbrains who's 'paid for their degree' as I'll prove again below

testiclebrained physics grad wrote:

The fact is if a team can only score 6 points over almost an entire game it is very unlikely they will score another 12 in quick time.

Sheezus your maths is shoddy. Didnt you say "double" before? Tell me how 6 + 12 = 6 X 2 Xman?

nutbrain physics grad wrote:

I do however realize this concept is beyond your comprehension.

:_<> :_<>

Case in point, a team was trailing 10 - 22 the other week with 3 minutes to go, they stormed home and won 24 -22. How often does that sort of thing happen in AFL??? NEVER - never ever?


A team was trailing 17-0 the other night. Stormed home but were beaten 17-16 - And we get nail biting games that go down to the wire every single week.

King-Eliagh wrote:

Xman wrote:

Tertiary level maths, bachelor of physics to be exact dipshit.

What part of my comment was incorrect?

Well your comment implies that if an NRL game finishes with a result where a team scores "double" the other team, that this must be a blowout. This is simply not the case, and so far this season its not the case in the majority of games where this result has occurred. The testicle for brains they let through uni these days is disturbing, I guess its justified by the prices one pays now at uni. You're definitely one of the nutbrains who's 'paid for their degree' as I'll prove again below

testiclebrained physics grad wrote:

The fact is if a team can only score 6 points over almost an entire game it is very unlikely they will score another 12 in quick time.

Sheezus your maths is shoddy. Didnt you say "double" before? Tell me how 6 + 12 = 6 X 2 Xman?

nutbrain physics grad wrote:

I do however realize this concept is beyond your comprehension.

:_<> :_<>

When I went to uni the governemnt were paying the fees, so a big fail on that one chump.

My comment is in response to claims the NRL is more evenly contested than the AFL. Sure, the higher scoring nature of ARs means the margins are larger in AFL games. But the fact that scoring is harder in RL means a small margin can still make for a very one sided affair.

I said more than double dickbrain!

pussycat wrote:

King-Eliagh wrote:

Xman wrote:

Tertiary level maths, bachelor of physics to be exact dipshit.

What part of my comment was incorrect?

Well your comment implies that if an NRL game finishes with a result where a team scores "double" the other team, that this must be a blowout. This is simply not the case, and so far this season its not the case in the majority of games where this result has occurred. The testicle for brains they let through uni these days is disturbing, I guess its justified by the prices one pays now at uni. You're definitely one of the nutbrains who's 'paid for their degree' as I'll prove again below

testiclebrained physics grad wrote:

The fact is if a team can only score 6 points over almost an entire game it is very unlikely they will score another 12 in quick time.

Sheezus your maths is shoddy. Didnt you say "double" before? Tell me how 6 + 12 = 6 X 2 Xman?

nutbrain physics grad wrote:

I do however realize this concept is beyond your comprehension.

:_<> :_<>

Case in point, a team was trailing 10 - 22 the other week with 3 minutes to go, they stormed home and won 24 -22. How often does that sort of thing happen in AFL??? NEVER - never ever?


A team was trailing 17-0 the other night. Stormed home but were beaten 17-16 - And we get nail biting games that go down to the wire every single week.

Never? AFL teams can score more than 60 points in a single quarter. Comebacks from 10 goals down happen. From 5 goals down aren't unusual at all.

All I was pointing out is that both codes have one sided games, despite what the scoring difference suggests.

They can but how often do they

pussycat wrote:

They can but how often do they

You will get a significant comeback every round or so. Just like most games, the final result may show a substantial margin. But the game can be up for grabs up until the last 10% of the game time. NRL fans seem to struggle with high numbers like those seen in AFL games.

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

They can but how often do they

You will get a significant comeback every round or so.

Coughbullshit. Unless you're referring to RL

The government were paying the fees? You mean you were on a government scholarship?

In any case it was money poorly spent, your mathemtatical reasoning is all over the shop, shocking stuff above Xman

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

They can but how often do they

. But the game can be up for grabs up until the last 10% of the game time. .

yeah sure Xman


sure

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

pussycat wrote:

They can but how often do they

. But the game can be up for grabs up until the last 10% of the game time. .

yeah sure Xman


sure

Because ARs is so high scoring a team is within reach of a comeback up to 10minutes from the end of the game if they are only 24 points down or less. This would apply to many games.

In RL a comeback is very often within reach within the last 3 mins of the game, even if the winning team is ahead by "double" the points. As I've said before RL is a much more intense sport, all packed into a neat rectangle with ferocity aplenty for 80mins. A great game Xman, you should give it a try sometime.

King-Eliagh wrote:

In RL a comeback is very often within reach within the last 3 mins of the game, even if the winning team is ahead by "double" the points. As I've said before RL is a much more intense sport, all packed into a neat rectangle with ferocity aplenty for 80mins. A great game Xman, you should give it a try sometime.

So much more interesting that a game on foxtel can rate 200k when only 8k show up to the ground?

These figures suggest you are wrong!

Foxtel shmoxtel. The games on fta regularly rate 1miiiiiiilliiiion viewers. This suggests I'm spot :D and now we dance

King-Eliagh wrote:

Foxtel shmoxtel. The games on fta regularly rate 1miiiiiiilliiiion viewers. This suggests I'm spot :D and now we dance

I note you said "games" and you are correct. The NRL need 2 live games on FN to get 1 million viewers.

The other games they show at 9.30 and on Sunday fail to make the top 20 which has a cutoff of 400k or so.

Then for a number of games the crowd is 10k or less!

Oh how exciting! :D