NRL 360 + other footy shows

[hineyrulz]

Because Australia wont be winning FFS!

My NZ @ 8.50 is looking quite delicious atm.

 

[Gary Gutful]

My NZ @ 8.50 is looking quite delicious atm.

mmmm....World Cup-o-licious....

 

[Chipmunk]

My NZ @ 8.50 is looking quite delicious atm.

That price is well over the odds. I'd say that NZ are more chance of winning the World Cup at present, than Parra, Cowboys or Souths are of winning the NRL Premiership.

 

[Legal Eel]

Smith also won some preliminary finals (four of them) so his losses in those games don’t prove he couldn’t win them. Likewise his grand final losses don’t prove anything.

This is some world class prevaricating from the forum's great contrarian.

Brian Smith lost four grand finals at there different clubs with three different playing groups.

Added to this, the circumstances were entirely different each time:

1) St George in 92 were clear outsiders;
2) St George in 93 were probably mild favourites;
3) Parra in 2001 were overwhelming favourites; and
4) Roosters in 2010 were mild outsiders.

The one common denominator in all these was Brian Smith

Really, this particular factual matrix is probably the one time that we can conclude with certainty that a coach was incapable of coaching a grand final victory.

You can argue the speculative reasons why this is the case, but the inevitable conclusion from the above is that Brian Smith couldn't coach a grand final victory.

Any attempt to argue otherwise is just another episode of "Pou's Counterfactuals"...

 

[Bandwagon]

Really, this particular factual matrix is probably the one time that we can conclude with certainty that a coach was incapable of coaching a grand final victory.

I tossed a coin four times

It came up tails on all tosses.

Therefore I can conclude with certainty I am incapable of tossing heads.

 

[Legal Eel]

I tossed a coin four times

It came up tails on all tosses.

Therefore I can conclude with certainty I am incapable of tossing heads.

Likening a grand final to a random event such as a coin toss is just your staggering ignorance on display.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

It’s pretty difficult to prove a negative but you can demonstrate a positive claim.
Eg You can’t “prove” a coach isn’t capable of winning a premiership but you can prove that they are if they demonstrate it.

Exactly

 

[Bandwagon]

Likening a grand final to a random event such as a coin toss is just your staggering ignorance on display.

So what would you call being unable to recognise the exact same application of your own flawed logic to the point where you label it staggering ignorance?

A self own?

 

[Legal Eel]

So what would you call being unable to recognise the exact same application of your own flawed logic to the point where you label it staggering ignorance?

A self own?

So you are going with the equivalency of a grand final with a coin toss?

No tactical acumen or preparation is necessary? It's just pure luck on the day?

 

[King-Gutho94]

This is some world class prevaricating from the forum's great contrarian.

Brian Smith lost four grand finals at there different clubs with three different playing groups.

Added to this, the circumstances were entirely different each time:

1) St George in 92 were clear outsiders;
2) St George in 93 were probably mild favourites;
3) Parra in 2001 were overwhelming favourites; and
4) Roosters in 2010 were mild outsiders.

The one common denominator in all these was Brian Smith

Really, this particular factual matrix is probably the one time that we can conclude with certainty that a coach was incapable of coaching a grand final victory.

You can argue the speculative reasons why this is the case, but the inevitable conclusion from the above is that Brian Smith couldn't coach a grand final victory.

Any attempt to argue otherwise is just another episode of "Pou's Counterfactuals"...

Story about the 2010 GF. And the contrasting styles of Bennett and Smith.

https://www.news.com.au/sport/nrl/wayne-bennetts-words-of-wisdom-to-dragons-squad-during-2010-nrl-grand-final/news-story/271eba4f770a3095d39b9d0fafaa3ff5

 

[Bandwagon]

So you are going with the equivalency of a grand final with a coin toss?

No tactical acumen or preparation is necessary? It's just pure luck on the day?

Nope.

I'm going with your assertion that 4 losses and 0 wins provides certainty that Smith's incapable of winning a GF being dogshit.

Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Likening a grand final to a random event such as a coin toss is just your staggering ignorance on display.

I know you’re not Mathematical Eel but how much better than 50% would he have to be to guarantee at least one win from four? Take your time with this one.

 

[Legal Eel]

I know you’re not Mathematical Eel but how much better than 50% would he have to be to guarantee at least one win from four? Take your time with this one.

Imagine dragging such a simple conclusion into the mathematical mire...

Keep being contrary.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

So you are going with the equivalency of a grand final with a coin toss?

No tactical acumen or preparation is necessary? It's just pure luck on the day?

I think it’s fair to assess that Smith reduced his teams’ chances of victory in big games. The data is inconclusive but at least supports this assessment.

But to say it proves he was incapable of winning a premiership is absolutely wrong. It is incorrect as well.

 

[Poupou Escobar]

Imagine dragging such a simple conclusion into the mathematical mire...

Keep being contrary.

Well hold on mate, you’re the one claiming the data supports an absolute conclusion. If I’m ‘contrary’ it’s because the accepted narrative is demonstrably, mathematically wrong.

 

[Legal Eel]

We hold on mate, you’re the one claiming the data supports an absolute conclusion. If I’m ‘contrary’ it’s because the accepted narrative is demonstrably, mathematically wrong.

In that case, no one can ever express an opinion that someone is incapable of doing something, unless that someone is dead.

On that basis, I concede you are right...you have successfully defined a field that can mathematically destroy people's opinions, even when those opinions are based on relatively obvious factual sets.

you have won the internet argument and restored Brian Smith's reputation to the point where he can be regarded as a coach capable of winning grand finals.

Huzzah! Someone should alert Brian that the monkey is off his back and that he was actually a grand final winner all along, he just couldn't show it!

As your reward, here is your dopamine hit: You are masterful, indefatigable and indefeasible.

 

[Bandwagon]

In that case, no one can ever express an opinion that someone is incapable of doing something, unless that someone is dead.

Wrong again.

 

[Legal Eel]

Wrong again.

Of course that's wrong, I was being facetious to illustrate the stupidity of the position, but that was obviously a little to much for you.

Don't worry though, I'm sure Uncle Pou is very proud that you have come to his defence

 

[Bandwagon]

Of course that's wrong, I was being facetious to illustrate the stupidity of the position, but that was obviously a little to much for you.

Don't worry though, I'm sure Uncle Pou is very proud that you have come to his defence

He doesn't need my defence.

'Cause you aint that bright mate.

 

[Gary Gutful]

But to say it proves he was incapable of winning a premiership is absolutely wrong. It is incorrect as well.

I'd also suggest its erroneous.