Where was the figure of 18 teams stated? You seem to be coming up with a figure yourself then calling it nonsense! Not just nonsense, but NONSENSE!
I assume you’ve a better idea of the actual figures, as I made quite clear that I was estimating. Not a bad estimate, as the range I gave includes 15th place, which would be the expected finishing position if you are more accurate with your estimate that around 14 teams finished above us last year.
I find it faintly amusing that people come on here, misquote (I assume deliberately), then try to ridicule something that only they have written. Do they really expect no-one to notice this?[/quote]<br><br>YOU quoted that of the current Unibond premier around 6 teams finished above witton last season and a dozen played in a higher league-- total 18 by my reckoning!!! maths clearly isn’t your strongest subject and for the record only around 7 (seven!) were in a higher leagiue last season.
I just knew you would come back with that! So predictable, and lamentably so utterly wrong. Clearly the English language is not your strongpoint. As for my struggling with maths, well, I wonder how I managed to get my degree in Maths and Physics?<br><br>Around six plus around a dozen is NOT 18. Period.<br><br>You have already stated that around 7 of the current division were playing in a higher division than Witton last year. Why repeat yourself?<br><br>Do yourself a favour, stop digging yourself further into a hole with your replies in this thread. You are already totally out of your depth. Consider your words carefully, and if you are going to quote, then quote, but do not paraphrase incorrectly then attempt to ridicule. This merely brings further ridicule upon yourself.
[quote]
Up to now I’d say the 3 visits of Workington, Whitby and Farsley have failed to collectivley bring half the ammount of travelling support we had at Ossett last week or about level to that we had at Spennymoor earlier in the season.[/quote]<br>Someone quoted 35 of you at Ossett Town.<br><br>There were 25 from Whitby last Saturday (I know I counted then ), which means that Workington and Farsley brought -7 people ;D
anyway back to the game, thought there were a few positives to take from the fixture, not many but a few<br><br>firstly the introduction of Spike into the team, he looked fairly sharp, seemed to have desire and a couple of decent touchs, bit disapointed he didnt get longer<br><br>also Yates seemed to be playing like a man not willing to give up his place in the team, lots of running, effort and desire - but yeh he should have scored that header!!<br><br>we also didnt seem to be the worse team, not saying we were better but we held our own for 89mins, bloomin wind<br><br>NG2 - 25? where were they?!
[quote]Peter (Dave?). Perhaps satisfied would have been a better word than happy, however my reasoning stands up. Witton were placed in a division consisting of half a dozen teams that finished above them last season (estimate, not looked up the actual figures), and around a dozen that played in a higher division last season. So if we take it that all teams would maintain their level, Albion would be expected to finish approximately 15th to 20th. So anything higher than this could be seen as an improvement. Personally I wouldn’t be very happy with a final league position in this range, but to finish in an upper mid table (not mid table, as you have attempted to imply I said) would show, on paper, an improvement.
I speak without any first hand knowledge of how the team have played or what the opposition have been like - I have yet to see a game this seaon as I live on a different continent. Nevertheless I continue to support the club financially, and will do through thick and thin. I trust you do the same.
Do yourself a favour. Try listening to ‘Always look on the bright side of life’ a few times. Lighten up. You come across on here in a very bad light. You have made some valid points in amongst what I would consider some severely flawed arguments, but the manner in which you express yourself needs to change significantly if you are to stop rubbing people up the wrong way. Please try to be constructive.[/quote]<br><br>Degree in maths and physics! your avin a laugh pal. The above thread states that witton were placed in a division with half a dozen teams that finished above them and around a dozen that played in a higher league, when I achieved my degrees that totalled 18!! but in any event is totally incorrect - the point is that only 7 clubs that are currently in the unibond prem played at a higher level than witton last season, the other 15 were from the Unibond 1 with 6 of them finishing above witton last season.<br>Your the one out of your depth MT just like witton, I think your making the right choice living on a different continent, think yourself fortunate not to have to suffer witton every week - ask PM!
JUST FOR THE RECORD 4 CLUBS FINISHED ABOVE US IN UNIBOND 1 LAST SEASON AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE TABLE BELOW<br><br>Unibond Division One <br>Pos Team P W D L F A GD Pts <br>1 Hyde United 42 24 8 10 79 49 30 80 <br>2 Matlock Town 42 23 7 12 78 51 27 76 <br>3 Farsley Celtic 42 20 14 8 78 56 22 74 <br>4 Lincoln United 42 20 11 11 73 53 20 71 <br>5 Witton Albion 42 17 12 13 61 56 5 63 <br>6 Gateshead (-4) 42 21 4 17 65 68 -3 63 <br>7 Workington 42 17 11 14 70 58 12 62 <br>8 Leek Town 42 16 13 13 56 47 9 61 <br>9 Guiseley 42 16 12 14 66 54 12 60 <br>10 Bamber Bridge 42 16 12 14 64 53 11 60 <br>11 Bridlington Town 42 16 10 16 70 68 2 58 <br>12 Prescot Cables 42 16 10 16 63 65 -2 58 <br>13 Bishop Auckland 42 14 13 15 61 64 -3 55 <br>14 Ossett Town (-3) 42 15 10 17 62 73 -11 52 <br>15 Rossendale United 42 13 12 17 53 62 -9 51 <br>16 Colwyn Bay 42 14 9 19 56 82 -26 51 <br>17 North Ferriby United 42 13 11 18 64 70 -6 50 <br>18 Chorley 42 13 10 19 54 70 -16 49 <br>19 Stocksbridge Park 42 12 12 18 57 69 -12 48 <br>20 Belper Town 42 9 15 18 44 58 -14 42 <br>21 Kendal Town 42 11 7 24 53 79 -26 40 <br>22 Kidsgrove Athletic 42 10 9 23 45 67 -22 39 <br><br>SO ORIGINALLY THE TOP 13 IN THIS DIVISION PLUS THE BOTTOM 09 FROM THE PREM WERE TO FORM THE NEW PREMIER DIVISION. HOWEVER WITH THE DEMISE OF TELFORD THE TOP 14 IN THIS DIVISION PLUS THE BOTTOM 8 FROM THE PREMIER FORMED THE NEW UNIBOND PREMIER.<br><br>SO TODAYS MATH LESSON TO YOU ALL IS 4 TEAMS FINISHED ABOVE US AND WE PLAY IN A DIVISION THAT CONTAINS 8 TEAMS (BLYTH,WHITBY,RADCLIFFE,BURSCOUGH,SPENNYMOOR, MARINE,WAKEFIELD,FRICKLEY) THAT PLAYED AT A HIGHER LEVEL. SO BASED ON THIS INFORMATION 13TH IS WERE WE SHOULD BE AROUND. <br><br>THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AND NEITHER IS 10TH WERE WE ARE CURRENTLY SITTING IN MY OPINION WHICH ON CURRENT STANDINGS IS AN IMPROVEMENT ON PAPER ONLY.<br><br>
NG2 - 25? where were they?![/quote]<br><br>Scattered around. You don’t have to wear a scarf, replica shirt or sing to be a fan you know, so that’s why you don’t notice the majority of our away following.<br><br>[smiley=banane.gif]
Degree in maths and physics! ?your avin a laugh pal. The above thread states that witton were placed in a division with half a dozen teams that finished above them and around a dozen that played in a higher league, when I achieved my degrees that totalled ?18!! but in any event is totally incorrect - the point is that only 7 clubs that are currently in the unibond prem played at a higher level than witton last season, the other 15 were from the Unibond 1 with 6 of them finishing above witton last season.
Your the one out of your depth MT just like witton, I think your making the right choice living on a different continent, think yourself fortunate not to have to suffer witton every week - ask PM![/quote]<br><br>You are making exactly the same mistake again, despite it being pointed out to you. You just haven’t a clue, have you?<br>
[quote]And you have!!!?[/quote]<br><br>Consider an estimated value a, subject to an uncertainty x. Consider also another unrelated estimated value b, subject to an uncertainty y.<br><br>Let us define c as the sum of a and b. c will also be subject to an uncertainty. Call this z. As this is a simple addition, then z = x + y.<br><br>Therefore a + b = c plus or minus z.<br><br>I trust this makes things perfectly clear.<br><br>As for the other repeated errors you have made, I think your inadequacies have been obvious to all, and I shall spare you the embarrassment of going through them one by one.
This forum appears to be full of a lot of people who are always waiting to have a go! why are we having lessons in maths? why are there so many people who only come on here to have a go at witton? we all(or most of us) support a small club in a small town! however I am sure that the true majority of red and white fans dream of glory just as much as any premiership fan, lets face it its a long way off but you never know. (all we need is six numbers and we are off). ;D
Consider an estimated value a, subject to an uncertainty x. Consider also another unrelated estimated value b, subject to an uncertainty y.
Let us define c as the sum of a and b. c will also be subject to an uncertainty. Call this z. As this is a simple addition, then z = x + y.
Therefore a + b = c plus or minus z.
I trust this makes things perfectly clear.
As for the other repeated errors you have made, I think your inadequacies have been obvious to all, and I shall spare you the embarrassment of going through them one by one.[/quote]<br><br>What a bitter little pilloc you are, no I’m not the best keyboard operator but frankly I couldn’t care less. You come on this message board making approximate estimates and then cannot handle the truth. One of your players has made it clear to you that TWELVE teams finished above or played in a higher league than witton last year NOT the drivel you mentioned earlier. Face facts sunshine, if you’re going to ‘sit on the fence’ with your posts then someone has to try and make sense of what you mean and come to a exact figure, ok I may have got my figures wrong( but closer than yours)I don’t follow witton, you do and you should know basic facts that are only 9 mnths old. N
), which means that Workington and Farsley brought -7 people ;D