Talking Footy

King-Eliagh wrote:

Xman wrote:

King-Eliagh wrote:

Xman you are the weakest link, goodbye.

Is that your final answer? Well lock it in.

Sorry, the answer was C, you fail

You're a beaten man Xman!

Seeming you've already proven yourself to be the weakest link and are now referring to who wants to be a millionaire I have 2 questions for you and you got no lifelines left bitch.

Q1: So tell me Xman, which comp out of the NRL and AFL had the closer results in their respective round ones?

(a) the NRL
(b) the AFL
(c) derrr the NFL?
(d) I'm thick in the head and dont know

Q2: And Xman, which member of TF's fight club made the closest prediction as to the closeness of the results in the repective round 1's of the AFL and NRL

(a) Raiderdave
(b) Xman aka crimson shades
(c) coslettuce; or
(d) the littlestaflfan

Clocks ticking down Xman!

Show the comparative scores.....

I've already looked em up on the web and thats your job you lazy slug. Now its your turn. Quick Xman, clocks ticking down and no lifelines left pal! :<>

So this is the last bastion of rl pride. This is Custer's last stand.
You're trying to salvage some thing out of the abyss by comparing the "closeness" of the scores.

WTF cares? Not the fans. They voted with thier feet. memberships and their remote controlls.

But just to humour the poor fellow.
Did you see the Docker's game?
Did you see the NM game?
Did you see Port's game?
All the other games were competitive.

How do you compare margins when they hardly score in rl?
Typically you'd need about 3 tries to win nrl and at least 15 goals to win AFL.
So the conversion rate is about five Aussie goals to one imported try.
Using that gauge AFL is well out in front.

AFL rnd 1 saw 2 blowouts, 4 comfortable victories, and 3 close games

NRL rnd 1 saw 2 blowouts, 3 comfortable victories, and 3 close games

NRL had 1 blowout. 2 comfortable victories and 5 close games: The eels broncos match was in the balance with 12 mins left and 6 points is not a comfortable victory by any stretch.

AFL had 5 blowouts and four close games. I'm calling the hawks collingwood a close game and winning by atleast 6 goals is a blowout by anyones standards, so thats 5 blowouts.



Oh and cos, what are you on about you silly sandgroper?

King-Eliagh wrote:

NRL had 1 blowout. 2 comfortable victories and 5 close games: The eels broncos match was in the balance with 12 mins left and 6 points is not a comfortable victory by any stretch.

AFL had 5 blowouts and four close games. I'm calling the hawks collingwood a close game and winning by atleast 6 goals is a blowout by anyones standards, so thats 5 blowouts.



Oh and cos, what are you on about you silly sandgroper?

The NRL had 2 blow outs: one team that didn't score, one team that tripled the other teams score!

The AFL had 2 blowouts. The other games were either extremely close or well in contention in the last quarter until late goals sealed the match.

You really do have NFI about AFL!

King-Eliagh wrote:

NRL had 1 blowout. 2 comfortable victories and 5 close games: The eels broncos match was in the balance with 12 mins left and 6 points is not a comfortable victory by any stretch.

AFL had 5 blowouts and four close games. I'm calling the hawks collingwood a close game and winning by atleast 6 goals is a blowout by anyones standards, so thats 5 blowouts.



Oh and cos, what are you on about you silly sandgroper?

Before one can compare the closeness of the two rounds one must first understand the game then watch it. Now I dont understand nrl (seems to be cross between netball and line dancing) so i cant compare but im sure all 37 people at the eel/bronco game were thrilled. That been said while some games "blewout" in the AFL not one game proved boring with fans n experts alike declaring AFL rnd1 one of the best rounds of sport period.

I thought you knew something about AFL KE.
If you actually knew something about AF you'd know the score often doesn't reflect the game.
A team can have control all the game. One goal or two goal control per quarter means the difference between a 4 or 8 goal win.
Most big margins are the result of of a late run over a tiring team.
Sometimes it's the result of spectacular play.

It's all academic because people prefer to attend and watch AFL over nrl.

Exactly cos thats why i kept the hawks collingwood match as a close game when the hawks won by four goals. This game was still in the balance in the last 10-15mins. Unfortuntely we're talking about the closeness of games cos and 6 goals + simply isnt considered a close game in marngrook.

Milznjim you dimwit, i suggest you learn what we're talking about before spouting from left field next time. We're talking about close games. In this thread i dont give two hoots whether people enjoyed the game or not. This goes for you too cos. Really, your arguments are for other threads so dont spread your regurgitating vommitting lies aka more people watch the AFL comp in here. I want clarity and intelligence in here, not a bunch of shmacked out buffoons repeating their same old moans.

And Xman i already explained the parra brsbane 18 - 6 game was still in the balance with 10mins remaining. It was considered a close match with parra leading until just before the 50min mark.

cos789 wrote:

I thought you knew something about AFL KE.

Ahhh this coming from the man who has stated atleast a dozen times "you know nothing about the AFL"...

Which one is it cos? You are quite the confusing one arent you. It appears quite clear that you dont actually know what you think

Oh dear.

King-Eliagh wrote:

Exactly cos thats why i kept the hawks collingwood match as a close game when the hawks won by four goals. This game was still in the balance in the last 10-15mins. Unfortuntely we're talking about the closeness of games cos and 6 goals + simply isnt considered a close game in marngrook.

Milznjim you dimwit, i suggest you learn what we're talking about before spouting from left field next time. We're talking about close games. In this thread i dont give two hoots whether people enjoyed the game or not. This goes for you too cos. Really, your arguments are for other threads so dont spread your regurgitating vommitting lies aka more people watch the AFL comp in here. I want clarity and intelligence in here, not a bunch of shmacked out buffoons repeating their same old moans.

And Xman i already explained the parra brsbane 18 - 6 game was still in the balance with 10mins remaining. It was considered a close match with parra leading until just before the 50min mark.

Fine KE,

I will compare nrl v AFL rnd 1 for "closeness"
But in order to do that you cannot look at each individual game but the entire round.

So I will...

Sourced from AFL and nrl website

AFL
Total points for- 1566
Total points against -1128
point differential -438
Avg losing margin- 48.66 (3.1% of total scored)
Goals scored- 261
avge game length - 120 min
Goals per game a minute avg- 0.24
Lead changes for round- 41 (4.5 a game)
time taken to score 36 points - 24 minutes (20% of total game time)

NRL

Total points for-248
Total against- 193
point differential -55
avge losing margin- 6.9 (2.8% of total scored)
tries scored- 46
Game legnth- 80
tries per minute- 0.2
lead changes- na
Time to score 18 points- 22.5 minutes (28.1% total game time)

So if, as I was told, compare the ROUNDS not games, ect then the AFL was closer because-

AFL scored 6.5 times more then the nrl so a 36 point margin is not a blow out
NRL avg losing margin was lower as a percntage but if you deducted the 33% longer game time the AFL avg loss margin was only 2% of total scored.

I hope this is to our likin g boss

King-Eliagh wrote:

Exactly cos thats why i kept the hawks collingwood match as a close game when the hawks won by four goals. This game was still in the balance in the last 10-15mins. Unfortuntely we're talking about the closeness of games cos and 6 goals + simply isnt considered a close game in marngrook.

Milznjim you dimwit, i suggest you learn what we're talking about before spouting from left field next time. We're talking about close games. In this thread i dont give two hoots whether people enjoyed the game or not. This goes for you too cos. Really, your arguments are for other threads so dont spread your regurgitating vommitting lies aka more people watch the AFL comp in here. I want clarity and intelligence in here, not a bunch of shmacked out buffoons repeating their same old moans.

And Xman i already explained the parra brsbane 18 - 6 game was still in the balance with 10mins remaining. It was considered a close match with parra leading until just before the 50min mark.

They tripled their oppositions score!!

If Parra only scored 6 points for the entire game how where they going to double that in 10minutes?

Xman wrote:

King-Eliagh wrote:

Exactly cos thats why i kept the hawks collingwood match as a close game when the hawks won by four goals. This game was still in the balance in the last 10-15mins. Unfortuntely we're talking about the closeness of games cos and 6 goals + simply isnt considered a close game in marngrook.

Milznjim you dimwit, i suggest you learn what we're talking about before spouting from left field next time. We're talking about close games. In this thread i dont give two hoots whether people enjoyed the game or not. This goes for you too cos. Really, your arguments are for other threads so dont spread your regurgitating vommitting lies aka more people watch the AFL comp in here. I want clarity and intelligence in here, not a bunch of shmacked out buffoons repeating their same old moans.

And Xman i already explained the parra brsbane 18 - 6 game was still in the balance with 10mins remaining. It was considered a close match with parra leading until just before the 50min mark.

If Parra only scored 6 points for the entire game how where they going to double that in 10minutes?

ah...
West Tigers Led Souths 16-4 with 4 minutes remaining last week ... The Tigers had a score FOUR times that of Souths wombat
Souths scored 2 converted tries in less then 4 minutes ... to level it at 16-all
they force golden point

then kick a field goal & win 17-16 in extra time
thrilling stuff

the Roosters did something similar in rnd 1

thats our game
the best there is

Raiderdave wrote:

Xman wrote:

King-Eliagh wrote:

Exactly cos thats why i kept the hawks collingwood match as a close game when the hawks won by four goals. This game was still in the balance in the last 10-15mins. Unfortuntely we're talking about the closeness of games cos and 6 goals + simply isnt considered a close game in marngrook.

Milznjim you dimwit, i suggest you learn what we're talking about before spouting from left field next time. We're talking about close games. In this thread i dont give two hoots whether people enjoyed the game or not. This goes for you too cos. Really, your arguments are for other threads so dont spread your regurgitating vommitting lies aka more people watch the AFL comp in here. I want clarity and intelligence in here, not a bunch of shmacked out buffoons repeating their same old moans.

And Xman i already explained the parra brsbane 18 - 6 game was still in the balance with 10mins remaining. It was considered a close match with parra leading until just before the 50min mark.

If Parra only scored 6 points for the entire game how where they going to double that in 10minutes?

ah...
West Tigers Led Souths 16-4 with 4 minutes remaining last week ... The Tigers had a score FOUR times that of Souths wombat
Souths scored 2 converted tries in less then 4 minutes ... to level it at 16-all
they force golden point

then kick a field goal & win 17-16 in extra time
thrilling stuff

the Roosters did something similar in rnd 1

thats our game
the best there is

Notable because it's unusual, therefore 18-6 is a blowout

King-Eliagh wrote:

cos789 wrote:

I thought you knew something about AFL KE.

Ahhh this coming from the man who has stated atleast a dozen times "you know nothing about the AFL"...

Which one is it cos?

Obviously you have the same grasp of english grammar as AF. It's simple.
You say you know something about AF but we know you don't.