Page 6 of 18
Re: BS Claim#2: The RFL alone is bigger than all the AFL....
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 6:40 pm
by Xman
King-Eliagh wrote:Xman wrote:Ok, for parra to win this claim he needs to show quantitative proof that RL is 50 times bigger than ARs outside of Australia.
This means he needs to show quantitative Proof of numbers of clubs, leagues or players for RL in England.
PLUS he needs to show comparative figures for the ARs outside of Australia.
Yep, that's right. After all, how can HE claim a figure like 50times if he doesn't know how big ARs is outside Australia.
If he made the claim without knowing the size of both codes then his claim was clearly BS in the first place!!
Over to you Parra! :D
BS.
Bigger does not simply refer to the numbers of clubs. The money they make, the earnings of players and all the other variables parra came up with such as crowd figures also clearly indicate the code is bigger. I do understand the numbers thing so I'd say the better avenue here is to look at crowd figures (i know you AFL mob love and respect these) and Topper must demonstrate international AFL clubs draw equal or more fans to games.
The fact remains he needs to show quantitative and comparable evidence for both codes to prove the factor of 50. This is his job alone. If he doesn't have this evidence he never should have made the claim as it was clearly BS!
Re: BS Claim#2: The RFL alone is bigger than all the AFL....
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 7:16 pm
by NSWAFL
The man in the street sees number of clubs or competitions as the sole definition of "bigger". That is the context that the I made the challenge and it is that context that Parra has to prove.
Who saw King's typo? If it was a typo! How could anyone mix me up with Topper? :D
Re: BS Claim#2: The RFL alone is bigger than all the AFL....
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 8:53 pm
by King-Eliagh
Well picked up NSW. I've almost made that typo many times before actually and have had to retype you're name instead. I dont know what it is but as the littlest AFL fan you remind me heaps of topper me boy.
I'll try not to do it again but you gotta forgive me if I do ok, there's just something so similar about you lil guys.
Re: BS Claim#2: The RFL alone is bigger than all the AFL....
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:44 pm
by NSWAFL
There's one big difference. I don't have an obsession with burps and farts. And I haven't ignored anyone either.
Re: BS Claim#2: The RFL alone is bigger than all the AFL....
Posted: Mon Jan 23, 2012 10:55 pm
by King-Eliagh
Yep you're a real trooper, I'll give you that littlest AFL fan, I'll give you that.
Re: BS Claim#2: The RFL alone is bigger than all the AFL....
Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2012 12:53 am
by ParraEelsNRL
Poor little bumfluffer, better luck next BS file eh?
Re: BS Claim#2: The RFL alone is bigger than all the AFL....
Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2012 8:02 am
by NSWAFL
I'm winning this one because you still haven't proved there are 3000 comps in Britain.
Re: BS Claim#2: The RFL alone is bigger than all the AFL....
Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2012 8:32 am
by Xman
NSWAFL wrote:I'm winning this one because you still haven't proved there are 3000 comps in Britain.
He has shown participation numbers in the UK for RL but from what I can see we do not know exactly what age groups these are taken from.
He now needs to show clear and comparable evidence for AFL numbers outside Australia, within the same age groups, to prove his factor of 50.
This is the problem folks. If you're going to come out with bold claims that such as this clearly measurable comparison you need to have the appropriate proof. Otherwise you need to qualify the claim as your opinion.
Again, this is exactly what the BS file was made for. Curtailing these sort of 'cowboy' BS claims. Parra will learn, I hope.
Re: BS Claim#2: The RFL alone is bigger than all the AFL....
Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2012 8:37 am
by King-Eliagh
NSWAFL wrote:I'm winning this one because you still haven't proved there are 3000 comps in Britain.
And numerous of your comps were either unreferenced or referenced by facebook!
Could Xman be so dumb as to set this as a precedent for winning BS file threads?
I spose its possible
NSWAFL wrote:you need to have the appropriate proof
Again NSW, you are a hoot mate, one of a kind, a real talking parrot, a juggling bear, there's not much better than watching you make arguments.
Facebook.com
Re: BS Claim#2: The RFL alone is bigger than all the AFL....
Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2012 8:41 am
by King-Eliagh
How many actually have links?
There's so little proof but the littlest AFL fan has the support of Xman in this!
Xman seriously, do you want the BS files to work or do you want them to be a place where BS is displayed? If you like I'll step in and ajudicate this one, otherwise, over to you mate.
NSW you've only provided 27 links with several as facebook.
Again, special stuff mate
Re: BS Claim#2: The RFL alone is bigger than all the AFL....
Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2012 8:49 am
by Xman
King-Eliagh wrote:
How many actually have links?
There's so little proof but the littlest AFL fan has the support of Xman in this!
Xman seriously, do you want the BS files to work or do you want them to be a place where BS is displayed? If you like I'll step in and ajudicate this one, otherwise, over to you mate.
NSW you've only provided 27 links with several as facebook.
Again, special stuff mate
This is actually totally beside the point, and I'm surprised someone like you doesn't see it.
Parra needs to show us all the evidence he has that demonstrates either club, comp or players numbers for both RL and AFL. He can then successfully show that RL is 50 times bigger. Once he shows evidence we can compare and NSWAFL can introduce his own evidence if he finds some that contradicts Parras.
It's up to parra to prove his claim. So far his figures are for only half his claim, the RL part.
Anyway, he still has a few more days to show us.
Re: BS Claim#2: The RFL alone is bigger than all the AFL....
Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2012 9:49 am
by NSWAFL
King-Eliagh wrote:NSW you've only provided 27 links with several as facebook.
Again, special stuff mate
So you deny that the other 36 countries ever played in the EC (European Cup) or the IC (International Cup)?
Re: BS Claim#2: The RFL alone is bigger than all the AFL....
Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2012 10:41 am
by King-Eliagh
Nope, I saw the netherlands in there. Having first hand experience of the netherlands comp, I know it was the size of a flee in comparison to the English League competition. You've piled up 60 little flea comps from around the globe and put them next to a multi million dollar goliath league in England NSW.
Nice work mate!
Facebook and those other crumby linksas the only ones he could find says it all really
Re: BS Claim#2: The RFL alone is bigger than all the AFL....
Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2012 4:41 pm
by NSWAFL
I didn't need to go after the ones that played in the EC and the IC. You want them anyway? Okay, I'll see what I can do!
Meanwhile, you prove that the "goliath" league is 50 times 60 competitions (equivalent = 3000 comps).
Re: BS Claim#2: The RFL alone is bigger than all the AFL....
Posted: Tue Jan 24, 2012 5:07 pm
by ParraEelsNRL
King-Eliagh wrote:
How many actually have links?
There's so little proof but the littlest AFL fan has the support of Xman in this!
Xman seriously, do you want the BS files to work or do you want them to be a place where BS is displayed? If you like I'll step in and ajudicate this one, otherwise, over to you mate.
NSW you've only provided 27 links with several as facebook.
Again, special stuff mate
I'm afraid the BS file is not going to work until there's a RL mod keeping it 50/50.
Good concept, but ex woman and Bearsey are just too biased.