[Archived] Michael Appleton - New Rovers Manager

[Boner]

It's an increase of 50%. Stop embarrassing yourself.

[imy9]

tut tut,

the point is Appleton got 9 points from a similar number of games as Berg got 6 points, 9 points is 3 points more than 6, which is and increase of a third

so Appleton is 33.33% better than Berg was, not 50% stop making him out to better than he actually is,

somebody call the education secretatary, its not my job to educate the great unwashed in basic maths

I dont really care if its 33% or 50%, its not good enough at the moment, thats the bottom line.

Don't know about the Maths but someone should call the Education Secretary about your basic literacy

[LeChuck]

tut tut,

the point is Appleton got 9 points from a similar number of games as Berg got 6 points, 9 points is 3 points more than 6, which is and increase of a third

so Appleton is 33.33% better than Berg was, not 50% stop making him out to better than he actually is,

somebody call the education secretatary, its not my job to educate the great unwashed in basic maths

I don't care what it says about Berg and Appleton. Why even bother dealing with percentages when the figures are 6 and 9?

http://www.percentagecalculator.net/

Have a play about with that, get some of those lazy synapses firing.

[yoda]

I dont really care if its 33% or 50%, its not good enough at the moment, thats the bottom line.

Don't know about the Maths but someone should call the Education Secretary about your basic literacy

already admitted to that one, you are a bit late, what is an extra d between friends anyway.

the maths is correct though,

as you say the real point is, it is not good enough

It's an increase of 50%. Stop embarrassing yourself.

read the point again, it is a comparison so you use the product figure.

Kemp used to be a good book for maths

[imy9]

already admitted to that one, you are a bit late, what is an extra d between friends anyway.

the maths is correct though,

as you say the real point is, it is not good enough

read the point again, it is a comparison so you use the product figure.

Kemp used to be a good book for maths

I was actually talking about the random commas and general lack of punctuation but yes what's a D between friends hey?

[yoda]

I don't care what it says about Berg and Appleton. Why even bother dealing with percentages when the figures are 6 and 9?

http://www.percentagecalculator.net/

Have a play about with that, get some of those lazy synapses firing.

Excellent, it proves correct

I was actually talking about the random commas and general lack of punctuation but yes what's a D between friends hey?

it was a "d" actually if you want to be picky

[LeChuck]

Excellent, it proves correct

What do you mean?

The third box titled "What is the percentage increase/decrease from"...put 6 and 9 into there and it tells you 50%.

[yoda]

What do you mean?

The third box titled "What is the percentage increase/decrease from"...put 6 and 9 into there and it tells you 50%.

you are inputting it the wrong way round, product number 1st, basic rules really

use the second input line and ask 6 is what % of 9

[imy9]

Excellent, it proves correct

it was a "d" actually if you want to be picky

If I really wanted to be picky I'd ask you if you knew what a capital letter and a full stop was... by the way your name, are you deliberately trying to be ironic?

[LeChuck]

you are inputting it the wrong way round, product number 1st, basic rules really

Wow. I give up. I can only assume you're sticking with your troll routine to cover your tracks earlier.

[yoda]

If I really wanted to be picky I'd ask you if you knew what a capital letter and a full stop was... by the way your name, are you deliberately trying to be ironic?

been doing it for nearly as long as the site has been running, used another at 1st, then had to change when some dingle inbred hacked the account and found my home address and tried to get a posse together, then they banned me for life from clarets mad and I think it was ranoff westwood that asked if I was from another planet, so I chose a suitable name in response,

happy days

Wow. I give up. I can only assume you're sticking with your troll routine to cover your tracks earlier.

try reading the book I quoted above

[Stuart]

This thread is a real education.

I'm glad we don't have mods any more, I'd have missed out.

Keep it up boys. Next week, Pythagarus.

[PAFELL]

Same was said before the recent FOUR defeats in 5.

How come Berg didn't get another 10 games seeing as he 'only' got 3 points less than Appleton, but never had the opportunity to bring in his own signings?

Appleton has had the chance to change the squad (with a bunch of dollopers) and it has changed nothing.

At what point will some realise we are in dire straits and this manager has not got the ability to change anything?

A manager, a manager. My kingdom for a manager!!

Some may be getting the impression I don't rate Appleton one bit

One thing Appleton does appear to have done that berg didn't do is, he has shut shebby up. Last we heard, they still hadnt met or spoken to each other.

Another thing is Appleton seems to have the control and is not influenced, pressured by shebby.

Before this club can grow again it needs the mess clearing up. That will take time. It is not just things on the pitch that are a mess, but the whole club. Appleton appears to have been given the go ahead to clean the mess up. That will take time.

We all know about certain players not pulling their weight. Other managers just appeased those players wth plaudits and rubbish. Appleton has spoken out about them. Which is a good thing in itself.

[yoda]

This thread is a real education.

I'm glad we don't have mods any more, I'd have missed out.

Keep it up boys. Next week, Pythagarus.

My favorite

the sum of the squared knowledge of the two Rao brothers is equal to the root knowledge of the sister = ZERO

[broadsword]

you are inputting it the wrong way round, product number 1st, basic rules really

use the second input line and ask 6 is what % of 9

What are you blathering on about? Product figure? A product is one number multiplied by another.

An increase of 6 to 9 represents a 50% increase. Berg's 6 points is the baseline figure.

I don't know what books you've been reading, but you've been greatly misinformed. I have to say, you could do with perhaps reassessing your knowledge. I'm not going to trot out my academic credentials, but suffice to say, I *do* know what I'm talking about, and you don't.

[yoda]

What are you blathering on about? Product figure? A product is one number multiplied by another.

An increase of 6 to 9 represents a 50% increase. Berg's 6 points is the baseline figure.

I don't know what books you've been reading, but you've been greatly misinformed. I have to say, you could do with perhaps reassessing your knowledge. I'm not going to trot out my academic credentials, but suffice to say, I *do* know what I'm talking about, and you don't.

ffs how thick are you if you compare do it right

9 is 33.33% greater than 6 that is the measure of how much better Appleton is than Berg, not 50% better and that is the point that is being debated, is Appleton's record better and by how much

What are you blathering on about? Product figure? A product is one number multiplied by another.

An increase of 6 to 9 represents a 50% increase. Berg's 6 points is the baseline figure.

I don't know what books you've been reading, but you've been greatly misinformed. I have to say, you could do with perhaps reassessing your knowledge. I'm not going to trot out my academic credentials, but suffice to say, I *do* know what I'm talking about, and you don't.

As the post above is 9 33.33% greater than 6, that is the measure of how much better, both records are @#/? though, try using your academic record to stop a table rocking

[broadsword]

Be careful who you refer to as thick, sonny, particularly if you can't handle basic maths. Does it not strike you as strange that no-one's backed you up?

I think what you mean to say is that 9 is 1.5 times as big as 6. Appleton's record is therefore 50% better. The increase from Berg to Appleton is 50%.

But still, you obviously have a problem admitting you've dropped a ricket, so we'll leave it there.

[yoda]

Be careful who you refer to as thick, sonny, particularly if you can't handle basic maths. Does it not strike you as strange that no-one's backed you up?

I think what you mean to say is that 9 is 1.5 times as big as 6. Appleton's record is therefore 50% better. The increase from Berg to Appleton is 50%.

But still, you obviously have a problem admitting you've dropped a ricket, so we'll leave it there.

I am going to save your post as I know it will come back to bite you lol

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

Christ Yoda, this "product number 1st" business is total codswallop. The answer is entirely dependent on the number you're taking a percentage of.

If you say:

"9 is X% greater than 6".

Then that statement defines 6 as the number the percentage is being taken from.

It is the word equivalent to the equation: (9/6)*100 = 150%.

Just as if you say:

"6 is X% less than 9"

Then that statement defines 9 as the number the percentage is being taken from.

Which is the word equivalent to the equation: (6/9)*100 = 66.67%

[Majiball]

I don't know if its just since the whole Kean fiasco or I'm just noticing it more now but it feels like Rovers fans have become more entitled.

almost to the point where we are retrospectively proving other teams fans and clueless pundits right about what they said about us back then

People just seem to be expecting instant results after all that has gone on, it's not going to happen.

[yoda]

Christ Yoda, this "product number 1st" business is total codswallop. The answer is entirely dependent on the number you're taking a percentage of.

If you say:

"9 is X% greater than 6".

Then that statement defines 6 as the number the percentage is being taken from.

It is the word equivalent to the equation: (9/6)*100 = 150%.

Just as if you say:

"6 is X% less than 9"

Then that statement defines 9 as the number the percentage is being taken from.

Which is the word equivalent to the equation: (6/9)*100 = 66.67%

Thank you for confirmation, 100% is the whole ie , 66.67 from 100 is 33.34 so that is the increase in percentage terms, you got there in the end

[Stuart]

People just seem to be expecting instant results after all that has gone on, it's not going to happen.

Don't insult our intelligence, Maj. We don't want instant results.

We want 50% better instant results.

Possibly multiplied (or divided) by the square root of pi. (Yoda is just checking).

Thank you for confirmation, 100% is the whole ie , 66.67 from 100 is 33.34 so that is the increase in percentage terms, you got there in the end

Aaaaaaaaaaarrrrrggghhhhh.

*click*

*BANG*

*thud*

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

Ok, my last attempt. If it doesn't work then good luck with your business and go easy on your accountant/taxman when you're arguing about something they've got right.

1. There is no set rule.

2. It depends how the statement is worded. Its a mathematical statement, you can't change the terms and you can't put them in a different order and get the same answer.

3. You intially worded it as "9 is a 33.33% improvement (i.e. greater than) 6".

4. That statement, by definition, has used 6, and not 9, as the number you are taking a percentage from. 9 is 3 greater than 6. 3 is 50% of 6.

[Tom]

Thread now 44.7% less full of crap

Last word on it

Ps - Yoda was clearly wrong

[Stuart]

Thread now 44.7% less full of crap

Last word on it

Ps - Yoda was clearly wrong