@MAGPIES1963 said in [Luke Brooks' Running game](/post/1054311) said:
@jirskyr said:
Statistics can be used to prove or disprove a point, they can be used in all sorts of ways. "position on ladder" is a fact and cannot be used for any other purpose than what it is. Therefore @fibrodreaming is 100% correct.
Have a great day jirskyr :relaxed:
Not even close mate, a statistic is:
* a characteristic of a sample. Generally, a statistic is used to estimate the value of a population (Stat Trek)
* any quantity computed from values in a sample, often the mean. Technically speaking, a statistic can be calculated by applying any mathematical function to the values found in a sample of data. (Wikipedia)
* a fact or piece of data obtained from a study of a large quantity of numerical data (Oxford dictionary)
* a quantity (such as the mean of a sample) that is computed from a sample (Merriam Webster)
The position on the premiership table is built upon:
* number of wins
* number of draws
* number of byes
* points for
* points against
That is 5 parameters which are combined to ascertain your "total premiership points" and corresponding position on the ladder. By whatever definition of "statistic" you choose to pick, table position is a value computed from several data samples, which provides an analytical characteristic of those samples.
So yeah, statistics can be used to prove or disprove points. Points such as "Tigers are ahead of Warriors on the current NRL table". Position on ladder is a fact, but all statistics are facts in and of themselves - the extent to which you can develop a further argument is where opinion and interpretation come into play.
Hence back to hobbo's post, where he submitted that Luke Brooks has a weak short kicking game, supported by evidence of "table position".
Also I didn't reply to fibro, I replied to hobbo. So yeah, I believe @fibrodreaming is 100% correct too.
