Why are we below Swindon in the table?

[seagullsovergrimsby]

If the internet was available to the general public 35 years ago this thread would have been discussing goal percentages , which would have involved using a calculator the size of a packet of cornflakes or rummaging through good old log tables.

 

[Nottseagull]

FACT

Yes, I realise it should be fewer, but I had to edit my post swiftly from more as I had made a small (but as it turns out, not insignificant) error adding the home and away "goals for" figures in the table.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

4 pages

 

[Nottseagull]

If the internet was available to the general public 35 years ago this thread would have been discussing goal percentages , which would have involved using a calculator the size of a packet of cornflakes or rummaging through good old log tables.

Nope: goal averages. The goals for were divided by the goals against.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

Nope: goal averages. The goals for were divided by the goals against.

which were a percentage as opposed to a fraction.

 

[Nottseagull]

which were a percentage as opposed to a fraction.

So what percentage would 40 goals for and 80 against be, then?

 

[Fazz62]

Best bump this thread up a bit as it nearly fell off the main page

Taybha

Does N's know his way round Leicester, if you know what I mean!!
As you mentioned him trying to lead you "astray" mid-weak"



Sorry. Wrong thread!!

 

[Nottseagull]

But that is how you spell "astray", you dip stick!

 

[Fazz62]

But that is how you spell "astray", you dip stick!

N's

Off topic, but I am due to be be posted on a course for a few days next month in Leicester.

Are there any swingers clubs or "doging" spots you might be able to recomend in the Leicester/Mansfiled area!!

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Swindon's goal record (F 39 A 47) gives them a goal average of 0.83. The Albion's goal record (F 31 A 39) gives us a goal average of 0.79. So they would have been above us in the old days, no question.

If we had scored one more goal, that would put us above them (on goal difference) today, but we would still only have a goal average of 0.82 - meaning that, in the old days, we would still be behind them.

Remember how we avoided relegation into the Conference? Only because the Football League were experimenting with goals scored as the way to rank teams with an equal number of points. Hereford had a goal difference of -15, compared with our -17. Hereford's goal average was 0.77; ours was 0.76. We chose a lucky year to be crap.

 

[bhaexpress]

It's because they have shored MORE goals than us that they are above us, simple as that. That's the method used when two teams have the same goal difference.

 

[Taybha]

Call yaself a statistishun

 

[Taybha]

Bit chilly down here on page 2.

 

[Fazz62]

Bit chilly down here on page 2.

Taybha

Understand that N's might be auditioning this coming week.

For the chance of being the new Carol Voderman on Countdown!!

 

[Fazz62]

As thread geting close to the relegation zone of page 1.

 

[Taybha]

I hope we havnt upset him id hate to think i was in some way responsible for pointing out certain frailties in the poster of this thread!

 

[Fazz62]

I hope we havnt upset him id hate to think i was in some way responsible for pointing out certain frailties in the poster of this thread!

Taybha

N's will be fine!!

I'm due to be going on a course in the Midlands next month. So was going to suggest that I meet up with him for a couple of milds. And between you and me, secretly hoping that he might invite me around to his plaice for a cuppa!!

 

[Taybha]

I find it hard to believe swindon are above anybody frankly

 

[Nottseagull]

Remember how we avoided relegation into the Conference? Only because the Football League were experimenting with goals scored as the way to rank teams with an equal number of points. Hereford had a goal difference of -15, compared with our -17. Hereford's goal average was 0.77; ours was 0.76. We chose a lucky year to be crap.

I log on for the first time in two days and find this thread up near the top again - I think I've got a stalker!
As it is already there, I'll take this opportunity to reply to this post. I realised all this at the time, but I've never seen it repeated until now. Perhaps the fact that we knew that a single point would be enough a week before the match has misted many people's memories. The truth is, only using "goals for" was grossly unfair, and it meant a 0-6 reverse had no worse consequences than a 0-1.defeat. As for avoiding relegation to the Conference, we would have done that had we lost; has everyone forgotten that the GMVC had already declared we would not be admitted on the grounds of groundlessness?

 

[supaseagull]

We have the same goal difference (-8)
We have scored less goals!
We are before them in alphabetical order.

Cancel this post please!

Just because of the shit you've given me on other posts...

get your facts right you bell end