R10 Mon - Sea Eagles vs Broncos @ The Fortress

[Frank_Grimes]

If you think a poll on this forum would provide any thing remotely close to empirical evidence, then you are worse off than I first thought.

Your investment in this topic is amusing though.

 

[t-ba]

If you think a poll on this forum would provide any thing remotely close to imperical evidence, then you are worse off than I first thought.

Your investment in this topic is amusing though.

If you want to look smart with the big words and stuff, get a spellcheck...

 

[Frank_Grimes]

Cheers.

I don't need to look smart with "the big words and stuff". It is the mark of a poor argument however, to go looking for spelling errors. Nice effort though.

 

[t-ba]

Cheers.

I don't need to look smart with "the big words and stuff". It is the mark of a poor argument however, to go looking for spelling errors. Nice effort though.

For starters, your argument is sh*t. A poll on an internet forum would produce empirical (look up the meaning of it btw) evidence, it just wouldn't be very valid or reliable...

So yes, you have been caught using big words you don't know the meaning of.

Next time, just do the right thing and say 'An internet poll isn't worth a piece of sh*t'

 

[Frank_Grimes]

I really shouldn't bother but I will.

After reading this you'll probably note that I stated a poll on this forum would not provide empirical evidence to support any kind of argument. Polls on this forum generate probably 3 honest responses for every 10 bullsh*t or sh*t stirring response. (BTW am I dumbing it down enough for you now?)

So that's a no to your point. I haven't been caught out using big words I don't know. You've been caught out failing to read in full, and grasp the content of my post. "Caught in the crossfire" one might say.

 

[t-ba]

If you think a poll on this forum would provide any thing remotely close to imperical evidence, then you are worse off than I first thought.

Nothing about support in your first post...Just plain old imperical...

After reading this you'll probably note that I stated a poll on this forum would not provide empirical evidence to support any kind of argument. Polls on this forum generate probably 3 honest responses for every 10 bullsh*t or sh*t stirring response. (BTW am I dumbing it down enough for you now?)

Better...but not what you initially said. The empirical evidence produced from an internet poll could still support any kind of argument, but it would have more holes than Swiss Cheese when it came to its reliability and its validity.



Next time, just save everyone some time and say 'An internet poll is sh*t and proves nothing.' succinct, to the point, and in no way making you look stupid for both failing to spell a word correctly and grasp its meaning.

 

[Snoop]

If you think a poll on this forum would provide any thing remotely close to empirical evidence, then you are worse off than I first thought.

Your investment in this topic is amusing though.

If you think stating that 'many will submit', backed by absolutely no evidence, is a compelling argument then you are as geniused as Razor.

You should invest in an education.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

I do thank you again for the concern, but it is unwarranted. My original point quite clearly expresses my opinion that a poll on this forum will not provide any empirical evidence (as in - discovered by experiment. A poll on this forum is a farce rather than an experiment).

You've been caught wandering into an argument you don't understand, trying to make a point, and you've been made to look rather sheepish by having to go over my post again and then re-hash your original (and really quite petty to be honest) point about spelling.

Anyway, it's after 5 and the family life calls. But I'll be happy continue in the morning, if you're going to wrangle this squabble into the early hours.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

If you think stating that 'many will submit', backed by absolutely no evidence, is a compelling argument then you are as geniused as Razor.

You should invest in an education.

If you think I was interested in swaying your opinion, you are going to be disappointed. I expressed my opinion as you did yours.

 

[Snoop]

If you think I was interested in swaying your opinion, you are going to be disappointed. I expressed my opinion as you did yours.

No, you went beyond that. You claimed 'many' agree with your opinion. Perhaps you'll claim that it is your opinion that many others agree with your opinion but that would negate your original intent of giving your opinion weight.

So whichever way you look at it you're just a plain old Manly hater which is severely clouding your intellect.

 

[salivor]

A big congratulations must go to Matt Orford and Manly for winding down the clock on their line dropout. Sportsmanship at it's finest.

Come on Frank, if that's the case then every team in the competition is guilty of poor sportsmanship including us. It happens every week in nearly every game. It's exactly the same as 2 sides taking their time to pack a scrum with about 30 seconds to go knowing the result has been decided, happens every week.

We'd lost the game and were happy for it to be over just as much as the Sea Eagles. If we'd showed our urgency towards the referee he would've stopped the clock. Bringing something like this up after a convincing loss reeks of sour grapes.

 

[t-ba]

I do thank you again for the concern, but it is unwarranted. My original point quite clearly expresses my opinion that a poll on this forum will not provide any empirical evidence (as in - discovered by experiment. A poll on this forum is a farce rather than an experiment).

It can still be empirical of nature. Empirical also relates to that which is observed, such as giving meaning to an internet poll, no matter how crap it is.

You've been caught wandering into an argument you don't understand, trying to make a point, and you've been made to look rather sheepish by having to go over my post again and then re-hash your original (and really quite petty to be honest) point about spelling.

I don't actually care about the original argument. I care about people throwing around words as though they are king sh*t to try and weasel their way out of stupid holes of their own devising...The boat that contained the victors to your initial argument sailed long before I decided to indulge in some pedantry, and I'll tell you what-You didn't even get on the dock.

Despite the cute spelling mistake, your old post was raised to show that you weren't arguing what you later stated you were. Empirical is not exclusively related to experimentation.

Anyway, it's after 5 and the family life calls. But I'll be happy continue in the morning, if you're going to wrangle this squabble into the early hours.

Can't help myself really. As long as you've now got a better understanding of both the meaning and the spelling of the word in question, I feel my inner pedant has done its job.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

It can still be empirical of nature. Empirical also relates to that which is observed, such as giving meaning to an internet poll, no matter how crap it is.

I believe the very nature of any empirical data is exactly that. Data. And I still firmly believe that any poll performed within this forum would not provide data. I do agree that an internet poll in a wider and more open environment could provide true empirical data. But for the purposes of this new argument, I will concede that perhaps the term should have been used in conjunction with the word "useful".

I don't actually care about the original argument. I care about people throwing around words as though they are king sh*t to try and weasel their way out of stupid holes of their own devising...The boat that contained the victors to your initial argument sailed long before I decided to indulge in some pedantry, and I'll tell you what-You didn't even get on the dock.

Ah, the ad hominem argument - the calling card of desperation. Bring us down to personal attacks if you must, but I will draw the line. I don't pretend to know what you are thinking, but I have never expected the same latitude around these parts. I am completely unconcerned with your analysis of my original argument.

Despite the cute spelling mistake, your old post was raised to show that you weren't arguing what you later stated you were. Empirical is not exclusively related to experimentation.

No, despite the misplacement of two vowels, my old post was raised to point out that the notion of a poll on this forum proving or disproving what is essentially an opinion held by myself and others with whom I have discussed the topic, is ridiculous at best. Empirical data is reliant on data gained from objective experimentation or observation, and a poll on this forum could never provide such data.

Can't help myself really. As long as you've now got a better understanding of both the meaning and the spelling of the word in question, I feel my inner pedant has done its job.

I wouldn't call you a pedant based on all of the above, the term is usually administered as an insult, and I believe it would be foolish to form an opinion and label someone after reading only a few lines of text, but if you feel that you must label yourself, then by all means go ahead. I feel we could go back and forth providing example and counterexample for quite some time, but my understanding of the term and its use is as strong as it ever was. I do understand your attempt at education, but I think it is misguided.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

No, you went beyond that. You claimed 'many' agree with your opinion. Perhaps you'll claim that it is your opinion that many others agree with your opinion but that would negate your original intent of giving your opinion weight.

So whichever way you look at it you're just a plain old Manly hater which is severely clouding your intellect.

I provided you with an insight as to the discussions I've had with others regarding the topic. What you do with that insight is completely up to you. I will concede that many a team would be found guilty of winding down the clock and it is probably more the rules that are to blame. I guess the look on Matt Orford's face as he strolled back to the line with the ball made this case just more blatant. That, and probably the fact that the Manly fans were booing Shane Perry when he took more than ten seconds to attempt his line dopout in the first half.

What is interesting is that now, all of a sudden, you have converted your argument from name calling and abuse to mature discussion. Do you expect me to take you seriously now?

 

[Snoop]

What is interesting is that now, all of a sudden, you have converted your argument from name calling and abuse to mature discussion. Do you expect me to take you seriously now?

You've been a pompous arse the whole time and I've still taken you seriously.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

You've been a pompous arse the whole time and I've still taken you seriously.

And thus ends my discussion with you. Have a nice day.

 

[Clock watcher]

Frank have you ever been to a live league game? Even beter havve you ever been to a game at Brookvale? The reason the crowd sound like they are louder than any other, is the size of the ground and the closeness to the playing field. I have been to every ground accept NZ, and can garantee you that the Manly home crowd is not even close to the most biased or vocal. If anything the eagles fans can be a little fickle. Newcastle and Brisbane fans are by far the most vocal and parochial. This however is not a bad thing, rather a passion for a sporting team. On the time wasting issue I watched the 2006 grand final thismorning, and Brisbane are absolute experts in the field, so if they copped it on monday night, it was possibly karma.

 

[Frank_Grimes]

Frank have you ever been to a live league game? Even beter havve you ever been to a game at Brookvale? The reason the crowd sound like they are louder than any other, is the size of the ground and the closeness to the playing field. I have been to every ground accept NZ, and can garantee you that the Manly home crowd is not even close to the most biased or vocal. If anything the eagles fans can be a little fickle. Newcastle and Brisbane fans are by far the most vocal and parochial. This however is not a bad thing, rather a passion for a sporting team. On the time wasting issue I watched the 2006 grand final thismorning, and Brisbane are absolute experts in the field, so if they copped it on monday night, it was possibly karma.

I've been to many a live game, two of them at Brookvale. I even sat among some Manly fans and they were absolute gents to me. I've been there and heard the crowd, so I'm not basing my judgement on the proximity of the crowd to the television microphones. I have several friends who regularly attend games at Brookvale, and are of the same opinion as me.

If you had read my previous posts you would have known that I've voiced my opinion that I dislike time-wasting in general and would be equally distressed had Brisbane run down the clock that way. My displeasure lies in the fact that Matt Orford had his team two tries ahead, and had the game sewn up, yet still felt the need to wind the game down. Granted, the Broncos may have wanted an early finish also.

 

[MSIH]

You're a gronk.

End of discussion.

 

[Clock watcher]

Maybe everyone was tired after a very defence orientated game, and both sides were happy just to run the clock down. I agree that this is possibly not the most spectator friendly thing to do, but after bashing each other for 78 minutes or 40 minutes (if halftime). It is want all 26 players wanted and needed. I mst admit I hate the fact that sides run the clock down aswell. I judt didn't agree with the fact that the Brookvale crowd are the worst, but maybe I misunderstood your claims??