To me this became a debate about semantics. Some people arguing over averages for events, others for games. In the end I got tired of it, so if your discussing averages do it here, I don't imagine it will be very popular, once people have an option to avoid it. viewtopic.php?f=2&t=560730&tsmp=1383055182

To me this became a debate about semantics. Some people arguing over averages for events, others for games. In the end I got tired of it, so if your discussing averages do it here, I don't imagine it will be very popular, once people have an option to avoid it. viewtopic.php?f=2&t=560730&tsmp=1383055182

No you didn't. You can't choose to pay for each game, it's not your choice. You can either pay for both or neither.

I'd missed that people had took to arguing averages elsewhere.

I can't watch it all day, but if I find em, I'll move em.

Is this all you do now? Create exaggerated strawman arguments to argue with?

There's no point in arguing with that as you know full well that isn't what I said.

It's good to see that despite not seeing your post at all until you merged the threads, we've come to the same agreement (see my post earlier).

I still say you buy a ticket for an event.

Plenty of clubs play academy games as a warm up to a match. You don't have to play extra to watch the academy, it's all part of the same event.

It's either a 26 event competition or a 28 game competition.

You either count the total number at each event and divide by the number of events.
Or you count the total number watching each game and divide by the total number of games.


You don't in any world of maths take the total at each event and divide by the number of games.
Or the total at each game and divide by the number of events.

If there are games at half time are we going to include those in the mix too. Jes!

And he chose to pay for both, Not one, not the other, not neither but both. He bought a ticket for two things, not one thing, not zero things, but two things.

He bought a ticket for one event that included two games. He did not have a choice to pay for one game or they other. People that only had the intention of watching one game didn't have the choice to pay half price, so it can't be argued that you can pay £20 for one and £20 for the other.

It's one event.

Were the two previous threads on this not enough?

Is this what you do know? Dance around facts that don’t agree with you and pretend they are straw men?

You are ignoring the Wales V Italy game. You are not including it in your dataset. The same with the 2nd semi-final. Your dataset would show there were only 26 samples, yet we know there will be 28 games. It would show that whilst we knew there were 4 teams at the semi-final stage and 2 at the end of the semi-final stage only 1 game was played.

There is no straw man, no exaggeration it is actually what you are doing, choosing to strip out 2 samples from your data because you don’t like the results.

I can show you that right now, 5 games have been played and I can provide you with the 5 attendances for those games. Can you provide any evidence whatsoever to counteract the reported fact that over 45k people attended the England v Australia game and 45k people attended the Italy v Wales game?