I see, so you use stats to make a point but when it's pointed out that they are specious, we are supposed to move on and ignore that it ever happened. What a wonderful, magical world you inhabit.
I'd be happy with your email if you said: "In my opinion Jarvis is shite, but I accept that it Actim Index he's ranked as the 78th best player in the Premier League, allegedly wanted by several experienced managers of big clubs and is on the verge of the England squad. I would rather Wolves had 10m in the bank than a pacey attacking winger when we are fighting for survival and have next to no chance of attracing anyone of better quality than Jarvis." I'll say it again: It's good to be back. On 21 January 2011 21:36, Marcus Chantry <[email protected]>wrote: > Don't let stats get in the way of a good story. The simple matter is Jarvis > is shite and if someone is willing to give us decent money for 2 or 4 > assists from 21 games then show me the money. Hammill can't be any worse. > > ------------------------------ > *From*: [email protected] <[email protected]> > *To*: [email protected] <[email protected]> > *Sent*: Fri Jan 21 21:33:42 2011 > *Subject*: Re: Fwd: [BTMO] Hammill > > The comparable stats have Jarvis with 4 assists. It's only one goal > difference, which is hardly statistically significant. I note that the > Actim stats you use have Hahnemann in the Premier League team of the > season. They must be really good stats. > > On 21 January 2011 21:23, Marcus Chantry <[email protected]>wrote: > >> I'm sure the Actim Index doesn't factor is the quality of the opponent >> but I'm more than happy to flog Jarvis to the highest bidder. Aside from >> running around a lot I don't think Jarvis has added anything that Ward >> couldn't provide (and that's saying something). >> >> I don't see how you can compare 2 goals & 2 assists from 21 games against >> any of the 3 you have listed. Aside from Hleb who has mainly made substitute >> appearances, the others have better stats from less appearances. Just accept >> that Jarvis is pants and we could make £10 million quid if we can find some >> sucker willing to buy him. >> >> ------------------------------ >> *From*: [email protected] <[email protected]> >> *To*: nswolves <[email protected]> >> *Sent*: Fri Jan 21 21:17:00 2011 >> *Subject*: Fwd: [BTMO] Hammill >> >> >> And yet he got named in the provisional England squad at one point. We >> established some time ago that he got between you and Mick in Perth and >> that's why you hold a grudge. >> >> As for comparing his and Hammill's Actim Index numbers, does that take >> account of one playing against premier league opposition and one playing >> against Championship opposition. >> >> Jarvis is also ranked 78th in the Premier league, above great wingers such >> as Luk Modric. >> >> The stats I've got say it's 2 goals and 4 assists >> >> What have the other good wingers in lower ranked teams got >> >> Rodriguez (LIV) 16p 3g 1a >> Kuyt (LIV) 17p 4g 3a >> NZogbia (WIG) 18p 3g 3a >> Hleb (BIR) 14p 1g 1 a >> >> The last two are very highly rated footballers. Jarvis's stats are on a >> par. >> >> It's great to be back. There's nothing like that feeling of being right >> all the time. >> >> >> >> On 21 January 2011 18:25, Marcus Chantry <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Why sell Jarvis when he is one of our best player's? >>> No need at the moment, he is under contract and we can sell him if we go >>> down. >>> Another WUM! >>> 2 - 1 to the Wolves on Saturday! >>> He looks flash but adds nothing. 2 assists in 21 games and 2 goals from >>> 25 shots. That's not premier league quality (or England international >>> quality). >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From*: [email protected] <[email protected]> >>> *To*: [email protected] <[email protected]> >>> *Sent*: Fri Jan 21 18:23:06 2011 >>> *Subject*: Re: [BTMO] Hammill >>> >>> Sent via BlackBerry from Telstra >>> ------------------------------ >>> *From: * Steven Millward <[email protected]> >>> *Sender: * [email protected] >>> *Date: *Fri, 21 Jan 2011 18:08:06 +1100 >>> *To: *<[email protected]> >>> *ReplyTo: * [email protected] >>> *Subject: *Re: [BTMO] Hammill >>> >>> I don't see how you get much more reliable than a Wolves player. I know >>> which player it is too. >>> >>> On 21 January 2011 17:16, Marcus Chantry >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> Reliable source then. >>>> >>>> ------------------------------ >>>> *From*: [email protected] <[email protected]> >>>> *To*: [email protected] <[email protected]> >>>> *Sent*: Fri Jan 21 17:07:09 2011 >>>> *Subject*: Re: [BTMO] Hammill >>>> >>>> One of the Wolves teamgets his hair cut in a place next to the pub where >>>> my dad drinks. The rumour is that Jarvis is off toEverton for cash plus >>>> Ross >>>> Barkleyand the cash is being spent onLecott is coming back. >>>> >>>> On 21 January 2011 16:32, mark worrall <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Just a thought... but I wonder if rumours of other clubs coming in for >>>>> Jarvis and us buying another(potential replacement)winger are a cunning >>>>> plan >>>>> to make some $$$ ? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 1:13 PM, LEESE Matthew < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> I'm deflated as right now. Villa spend 24 million on Darren Bent and >>>>>> we get Adam Hammill for half a mil. Where's our ambition eh? Surely if we >>>>>> just spent 24 million on a striker (and played him up front) we'd be well >>>>>> clear of this relegation fight we find ourselves in. We obviously didn't >>>>>> realise Bent was available but every player has his price. I reckon if we >>>>>> offered Chelsea 24 million for Drogba they'd sell. We'd stay up then. >>>>>> Definitely. >>>>>> ------------------------------ >>>>>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] >>>>>> *On Behalf Of *mark worrall >>>>>> *Sent:* Friday, 21 January 2011 2:01 PM >>>>>> >>>>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [BTMO] Hammill >>>>>> >>>>>> Yet another debatable signing from a team lower than us. Sigh. >>>>>> >>>>>> We need another Paul Ince right now. :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Marcus Chantry < >>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Ive had a look at the Actim Index numbers for both players and >>>>>>> Hammill scores much higher than Jarvis. Could be a good signing. Jarvis >>>>>>> return of 2 goals and 2 assists in 21 matches is very poor. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] >>>>>>> *On Behalf Of *Steven Millward >>>>>>> *Sent:* Friday, 21 January 2011 1:43 PM >>>>>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [BTMO] Hammill >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <http://www.google.com.au/imgres?imgurl=http://hubba-u.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/sad_face.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.sodahead.com/living/what-is-your-worst-blizzard-nightmare/question-1412429/%3Fpage%3D3&usg=__3cMaLjwuQ-f8KP60I2R9ch3_z6o=&h=271&w=241&sz=16&hl=en&start=13&sig2=LrP9CYjXd-MPYwbut51nWA&zoom=1&itbs=1&tbnid=jyamnE_afC0bTM:&tbnh=113&tbnw=100&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dmiserable%2Bface%26hl%3Den%26gbv%3D2%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=qfI4TamoDoTyvQPvu4CMCg> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 21 January 2011 12:43, Marcus Chantry < >>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Lets hope he can cross a ball and shoot better than Jarvis. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] >>>>>>> *On Behalf Of *Steven Millward >>>>>>> *Sent:* Friday, 21 January 2011 12:35 PM >>>>>>> *To:* nswolves >>>>>>> *Subject:* [BTMO] Hammill >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Seems like a good signing. Super Mick strikes again. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Boo! Thick Mick Out! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The information contained in this email is confidential. If you are >>>>>>> not the intended recipient, you may not disclose or use the information >>>>>>> in >>>>>>> this email in any way and should destroy any copies. Macquarie does not >>>>>>> guarantee the integrity of any emails or attached files. The views or >>>>>>> opinions expressed are the author's own and may not reflect the views or >>>>>>> opinions of Macquarie. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Boo! Thick Mick Out! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Boo! Thick Mick Out! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Boo! Thick Mick Out! >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Boo! Thick Mick Out! >>>>>> Before printing, please consider the environment. IMPORTANT NOTICE: >>>>>> This e-mail and any attachment to it are intended only to be read or >>>>>> used by >>>>>> the named addressee. It is confidential and may contain legally >>>>>> privileged >>>>>> information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any >>>>>> mistaken transmission to you. The RTA is not responsible for any >>>>>> unauthorised alterations to this e-mail or attachment to it. Views >>>>>> expressed >>>>>> in this message are those of the individual sender, and are not >>>>>> necessarily >>>>>> the views of the RTA. If you receive this e-mail in error, please >>>>>> immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You must >>>>>> not >>>>>> disclose, copy or use any part of this e-mail if you are not the intended >>>>>> recipient. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Boo! Thick Mick Out! >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Boo! Thick Mick Out! >>>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Boo! Thick Mick Out! >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Boo! Thick Mick Out! >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Boo! Thick Mick Out! >>> >>> -- >>> Boo! Thick Mick Out! >>> >>> -- >>> Boo! Thick Mick Out! >>> >> >> >> -- >> Boo! Thick Mick Out! >> >> -- >> Boo! Thick Mick Out! >> > > -- > Boo! Thick Mick Out! > > -- > Boo! Thick Mick Out! > -- Boo! Thick Mick Out!
