Re: Wheldon Road - Retail Planning Application! : Fri Jun 03, 2011 11:25 pm  

Tricky2309 wrote:

Didnt we finish 5th in 2009? You need to practice what you preach about getting the facts right

Sorry, yes, slip of the finger! Can't apologise enough. Now let's have a look at the overall stats in the light of this mistake...

Cas: Average 9th
Wakey: Average 10.6th

Re: Wheldon Road - Retail Planning Application! : Fri Jun 03, 2011 11:48 pm  

Tricky2309 wrote:

Surely though the calculation is flawed as having been in a lower division for 2 seasons should earn some sort of penalty against your average place finish. Afterall if its about contribution to the competition you can't contribute if your not in it.

Fully wrote:

The penalty would be equal though, considering we've both spent two years out of Super League. Even if they do not count, I'd guess Cas would still be ahead. Besides, IA has made an invalid point anyway originally. It's not about who has actually contributed over the past 15 years but the last licensing period in which case Cas have finished 7th and 9th and Wakey 5th and 11th = EQUAL FINISH.

Can I just say that Cas were in a lower division in 2005 and 2007. Wakey were in a lower division in 1996, 1997 and 1998, so any penalty for this would adversely affect Wakey more than Cas. That's why I did it that way, to try to stop any accusations of bias.

I know that a new licence only takes into account how we feature during the previous licensing period, but I was trying to reply to the point made which was about the relative performances of Cas and Wakey during the whole of Super League. I've been accused in the past of springing too readily to the defence of Cas against people trolling on here which is why I've been more reluctant to post over the last couple of months, but this business is just getting out of hand - and in trying to set the record straight I seem to have touched a raw nerve again (partly due to the fact I mistyped a number into my spreadsheet, for which I sincerely apologise). For anyone who's interested, the 6th position I quoted was simply a typo, because when I checked it in my records (and double checked on the SL site) Wakey were indeed 5th.

Re: Wheldon Road - Retail Planning Application! : Sat Jun 04, 2011 12:54 pm  

Inflatable Armadillo wrote:

Wakefield have a better on field record over the SL era than Cas, never been relegated and have an average finishing position of 8th to Cas's 9th I think.

Having looked at this in more detail, I fail to see at all where the figures come from.

(1) Relegation

While it's true Wakefield have never been relegated, they spent the first three years outside Superleague. Cas have only spent 2 years outside Superleague.

(2) Average Finishing Position

In the Superleague Era, as I've already posted, Cas's average finishing position is 9th, Wakefield's is 10.6th.

In Superleague alone (i.e ignoring any seasons spent in lower leagues), the average finishing positions are Cas on 8.3 and Wakefield on 9.25. In all leagues since Wakefield entered Superleague (i.e 1999 and afterwards), the average finishing positions are Cas on 9.17 and Wakefield on 9.25.

The only time that anything like your figures would apply would be if you averaged the three years 2008-2010 inclusive, with Cas on 9.3 and Wakefield on 8.3, which doesn't really fit the description "over the Super League Era"

(3) Overall Performance on the Field

According to my records, Cas have played 346 games in SL, winning 143 of them (41.3%) drawing 12 (3.5%) and losing 191 (55.2%).
Compared with this, Wakefield have played 334 games in SL, winning 120 of them (35.9%) drawing 4 (1.3%) and losing 210 (62.9%).

Cas have reached the playoffs on 4 occasions, Wakefield have done it on 2 occasions.

(These figures are to the end of the 2010 season)

In conclusion, it's difficult to say that Wakefield "have a better on field record over the SL era than Cas" because the figures just don't bear it out.

Re: Wheldon Road - Retail Planning Application! : Sat Jun 04, 2011 8:51 pm  

So after all that, what's your conclusion Georgie?

Re: Wheldon Road - Retail Planning Application! : Sat Jun 04, 2011 9:18 pm  

Fully wrote:

So after all that, what's your conclusion Georgie?

Soz, Fully, I'm not allowed to draw conclusions any more because some people take me to task for it, (or accuse me of being anti-Wakefield).

TBH, I'm in a huge dilemma over this one because it's absolutely crystal clear that there are two very persuasive sides to this argument. All I can do is try my best to present the information as accurately as I can, hoping not to type the wrong number here and there, and let people draw their own conclusions.

Re: Wheldon Road - Retail Planning Application! : Mon Jun 06, 2011 11:41 am  

Georgie Best on a Bloomer wrote:

Soz, Fully, I'm not allowed to draw conclusions any more because some people take me to task for it, (or accuse me of being anti-Wakefield).

TBH, I'm in a huge dilemma over this one because it's absolutely crystal clear that there are two very persuasive sides to this argument. All I can do is try my best to present the information as accurately as I can, hoping not to type the wrong number here and there, and let people draw their own conclusions.

Can I refer you to your quote as follows -

You may find it difficult to believe, but I think that SL should have both clubs, that Cas vs Wakefield derbies are ones that get the pulse racing and no matter where either club is in the table, you can never call the result. Nothing wrong with Wakefield, although their trolls can be a pain in the butt at times.

Paranoid Android was trying to present an argument, like you, that I have this massive anti-Cas bias, and he used a thread on SouthStander to try and highlight this bias. I think he was maybe been a little disingenuous himself because the primary thrust of this thread (if you bothered to read it?) was about Crusaders v Wakey and doesn't mention Cas. In response to some intimations by other posters that Wakey were the club to drop I did try and play devils advocate (I even say that it was I was doing in the post!!!) and try to show that maybe things are closer between Cas and Wakey than people think and go to great lengths to say that I was being deliberately disingenuous and had no problems with Cas staying in SL. I did take something someone else had posted about the average finishing positions of both sides as being correct, when clearly it wasn't (and I can take this on the chin), but the point was never to create a Cas v Wakey argument but just show how stupid and paper thin things had become.

Then, what do you pyeman and Fully do... you spend two pages running me and one of the facts down (which you are 100% right about and I am 100% wrong about) because of this post and the irony of doing just that is totally lost on you!!! You accuse me of bias but claim you aren't, even though I expect you to be (nothing wrong with supporting your team) and then you go and continue to turn this into a Cas v Wakey penis measuring contest... yet again!

My argument remains the same, I think that the current consensus view among RL fans (and even journalists) is that Cas are in front of Wakefield and this is primarily because of the stadium issue (I know there are other things, such as administration etc), I think that is grossly unfair and have posted information which I believe to be true, factual and of course 'of my opinion', based on these things. You say this is me being anti-Cas but I say (and know) that this is me presenting something that clearly Cas fans would like NOT like to hear, because by definition it seeks to shed light on what I think is Cas's overstated and over estimated position in the stadium race. You then all say, why not just keep your mouth shut then because this news is not positive and even negative towards Cas, and the answer is clear, I think both clubs should stay in SL and while this news is hard for you guys to hear, it does present what I believe to be the fairest possible picture. A picture and argument that not one of you has come close to challenging with any real level of information based debate. I think the RFL have made this about all about stadiums, because if it wasn't, why are Salford not being dragged into this argument... lets face it, we know their on-field record, junior development, crowds etc, etc are worse than both Wakey and Cas... by a reasonable distance (cue Salford fans now I expect? ). The RFL have made this about Stadiums (which I think is wrong in the case 'between' Wakefield and Cas) and you are and Wakefield are both in the same boat and that is why you should both get more time. You think I am biased because you don't like the news... well once again... tough!

Re: Wheldon Road - Retail Planning Application! : Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:08 pm  

Inflatable_Armadillo wrote:

... More condescending bullcrap

Whatever dude, am still trying to figure out why you are so popular on the Wakey board and yet you are so vilified on here. Must be your neutrality that so offends/pleases people.

Re: Wheldon Road - Retail Planning Application! : Mon Jun 06, 2011 12:24 pm  

ParanoidAndroid wrote:

Whatever dude, am still trying to figure out why you are so popular on the Wakey board and yet you are so vilified on here. Must be your neutrality that so offends/pleases people.

Right, must go after this post... I occasionally have to do some work and have a plane to catch!

I have just told the truth on there too but of course I am actively supporting Newmarket because I live close to the site and of course, the previous Wakey regime was guilty of understating and under-presenting Newmarket, and I don't want to get into a RW bashing argument again, so lets just say Cas have been much better at presenting the positives...

I know why some posters don't like me, because they don't like the news, it does challenge the perception of most Cas fans and that is the issue... but that is just how it is... I can't change that!

I have some more information coming in and also another theory, but might not share those yet without some more cross-checking of the information!

Re: Wheldon Road - Retail Planning Application! : Mon Jun 06, 2011 2:05 pm  

We love you IA, we do!
We love you IA, we do!
We love you IA, we do!
Oh...... IA we love you!!

(from ALL the WMDC district!)

Have a good flight bud!

Re: Wheldon Road - Retail Planning Application! : Mon Jun 06, 2011 2:18 pm  

In all fairness some of your posters had no problem with highlighting the potential problems with NM (fully you were a key player in this. I had the PM's to prove it!).

It might not just be IA who finds the sudden change into being "pro development" suddenly staggering when 3 months ago the vast majority of you weren't- how many of you (honestly) signed either of our petitions?

Sad fact is that (like IA is saying if you give him the chance) we should have stood togther on this issue. If you had supported our bid/petition on mass I'm sure you would have got a large chunk of WT fans that were more than willing to reciprocate. As we stand now..... what do you think?

I had the option of signing at work today (a colleague who petitioned against NM is collecting)... Needless to I'm pro-development in 99% of occasions but this.... Well lets just say I'd rather know more details first.. Then maybe you can have my signature (for a hefty price).

In all honesty good luck & maybe if things were put across differently 12/16 months ago maybe, but after NM and the wide support in got in the east of our region... thanks, but no thanks.

For the record I completely support CT (and the WT derby) in SL.