The only question is whether or not we can get 100 points.

[Teddy]

But then they cease to be the team in third... It becomes a circular argument. But if you are a point above the team in 3rd you are at least 2nd. Because you can't be below a team that is on less points than you...

In your example, you are placing our hypothetical team a point above 4th, because your 'team in 3rd' are not the team in third once you insert 'us'?

Or as a seperate example

Team in first - 100 points
Teams in second - 95 points
Team in third - 90 points

If we finish a point above 3rd on 91 points. We finish 3rd

 

[BushBlade]

Yes but the team originally in 3rd drop down a place and we then occupy 3rd place

There were two teams above them before we went above them, meaning there are now 2 teams above us

If you are in a 100m sprint, and overtake the guy in 2nd, you go into 2nd place, not first

The OP has even admitted his fault buddy

No they don't. They'd be the fourth side if we did. If we finish one point above the third placed team, we are in the top two.

 

[northsomersetblade]

We will rip the heads off our puny rivals and shit down the holes that are left...you read it here first.

Champions, there is no other outcome.

 

[Bladesway]

I remember Harry Maguire saying we'd go a season unbeaten.

Then Hull called up and we let him go.

 

[Bladepicker]

Then we called Hull up and let him go.

Fixed it.

 

[Barney]

No they don't. They'd be the fourth side if we did. If we finish one point above the third placed team, we are in the top two.

 

[blade too long]

our target is and always should be 3 points from the next match
then see where we are in April

 

[GroovyBrad]

I'm lost for words mate

 

[GroovyBrad]

But then they cease to be the team in third... It becomes a circular argument. But if you are a point above the team in 3rd you are at least 2nd. Because you can't be below a team that is on less points than you...

In your example, you are placing our hypothetical team a point above 4th, because your 'team in 3rd' are not the team in third once you insert 'us'?

No, no they do not, its not a circular argument. They cease to be the team in third because we are a point above them, the whole reason this conversation is taking place.

No they don't. They'd be the fourth side if we did. If we finish one point above the third placed team, we are in the top two.

The only other way this can be explained or used in an example would be, the current league table, please see below, the top four teams, there names, and the amount of points they currently have.

1 Scunthorpe 28
2 Bradford 24
3 Bolton 22
4 Rochdale 21

If Sheffield United, have one more point, than the team in 3rd place, which is Bolton on 22 points, Sheffield United, would have 23 points. Leaving us in 3rd place, not 2nd place. When Bolton held 3rd place, there were two teams above them, so if Sheffield United, have one more point that Bolton, they leapfrog them, pushing Bolton down to 4th, and making Sheffield United then hold 3rd, with two teams above them.

Teddy, you say In your example, "you are placing our hypothetical team a point above 4th, because your 'team in 3rd' are not the team in third once you insert 'us'?"

Well yeah, of course the team are not in 3rd once I insert us, because we go 3rd as we are a point above them

There is a very similar conundrum here, on this fun brain teaser for you all - https://riddlesbrainteasers.com/passing-second-in-a-race/

 

[Trueblade]

our target is and always should be 3 points from the next match
then see where we are in April

Exactly...Shrewsbury tonight is a big game, everyone will expect a win but it is the type of game that often causes slip ups. Big test tonight let's stay grounded

 

[BushBlade]

No, no they do not, its not a circular argument. They cease to be the team in third because we are a point above them, the whole reason this conversation is taking place.



The only other way this can be explained or used in an example would be, the current league table, please see below, the top four teams, there names, and the amount of points they currently have.

1 Scunthorpe 28
2 Bradford 24
3 Bolton 22
4 Rochdale 21

If Sheffield United, have one more point, than the team in 3rd place, which is Bolton on 22 points, Sheffield United, would have 23 points. Leaving us in 3rd place, not 2nd place. When Bolton held 3rd place, there were two teams above them, so if Sheffield United, have one more point that Bolton, they leapfrog them, pushing Bolton down to 4th, and making Sheffield United then hold 3rd, with two teams above them.

Teddy, you say In your example, "you are placing our hypothetical team a point above 4th, because your 'team in 3rd' are not the team in third once you insert 'us'?"

Well yeah, of course the team are not in 3rd once I insert us, because we go 3rd as we are a point above them

There is a very similar conundrum here, on this fun brain teaser for you all - https://riddlesbrainteasers.com/passing-second-in-a-race/

What you're saying is if 'we finish a point above the team that was third before our final game'. What I am saying is that if we finish one point above the team that finishes third, we are in the top two.

 

[GroovyBrad]

What you're saying is if 'we finish a point above the team that was third before our final game'. What I am saying is that if we finish one point above the team that finishes third, we are in the top two.

Its still the same outcome for either examples mate, just pretend the table example above is the final table, we just leapfrog them, with two teams above us.

If a team finishes third, there are still two teams above them, finishing a point above the team in third, just makes us overtake them in third place, the top two never get affected (unless of course they are on the same number of points as 3rd place, then goal difference comes into play)

 

[Bladesman]

 

[BushBlade]

Its still the same outcome for either examples mate, just pretend the table example above is the final table, we just leapfrog them, with two teams above us.

If a team finishes third, there are still two teams above them, finishing a point above the team in third, just makes us overtake them in third place, the top two never get affected (unless of course they are on the same number of points as 3rd place, then goal difference comes into play)

If we finish above the team that has finished third we are in the top two.

All the games are played at the same time so they finish at the same time. If Bradford finish third, there can only be two clubs above them or they wouldn't be finishing third. If there are only two clubs above them then we must be one of them because we have more points than Bradford.

I'm not posting again on this. But I appreciate you disagreeing with me without resorting to abuse or sarcasm.

 

[GroovyBrad]

If we finish above the team that has finished third we are in the top two.

All the games are played at the same time so they finish at the same time. If Bradford finish third, there can only be two clubs above them or they wouldn't be finishing third. If there are only two clubs above them then we must be one of them because we have more points than Bradford.

I'm not posting again on this. But I appreciate you disagreeing with me without resorting to abuse or sarcasm.

No problem Bush, abuse or sarcasm during a disagreement to me just shows recognition of defeat or lack of substance.

At the end of the day we just want United to get out of this bloody league, and no longer witness the scenes such as below

 

[Barney]

What you're saying is if 'we finish a point above the team that was third before our final game'. What I am saying is that if we finish one point above the team that finishes third, we are in the top two.

If you're in a running race and let's say the guy in 2nd is way ahead with 1st, if you overtake the guy in 3rd but not the guy in 2nd, you are in 3rd.

 

[LJBlade]

If you're in a running race and let's say the guy in 2nd is way ahead with 1st, if you overtake the guy in 3rd but not the guy in 2nd, you are in 3rd.

Both arguments are right, it just depends which way you think of the question.

If you are thinking in terms of over-taking the team in 3rd then yes we would be 3rd. But if you are thinking in terms of being the team which finishes 1 point above the team which finishes 3rd (which was the original point) then we are 2nd. i.e If Bolton (for example) finish 3rd and we get 1 more point then them we must have finished 2nd (or 1st I suppose)

 

[Teddy]

Both arguments are right, it just depends which way you think of the question.

If you are thinking in terms of over-taking the team in 3rd then yes we would be 3rd. But if you are thinking in terms of being the team which finishes 1 point above the team which finishes 3rd (which was the original point) then we are 2nd. i.e If Bolton (for example) finish 3rd and we get 1 more point then them we must have finished 2nd (or 1st I suppose)

I think this sums it up perfectly, which is what I meant by a circular argument. I agree that if you go past the team in 3rd, you are then the team in 3rd... but in the context of a fixed table there are only two teams with more points than the team in third, and those are the teams in 1st and 2nd.

I admit I didn't immediately get your point

 

[raimond]

Raight, let's giyoor with the University Challenge bollocks & get back on point.

No matter how many points we get, Wilder's started by building from the back, making us solid, and building up team spirit in the squad too. He's cut out the deadwood ability wise & presumably spirit wise, and he's got us going again.

We've a strong squad, we've settled into being an actual side now, and we're winning. All this with Billy not scoring, which he will. We're getting better and will continue to. It's on.

And for the first time in years it's enjoyable, there's summat to be excited about and there's even some atmosphere back at the Lane rather than moaners. He's given us our Blades back, so f*** maths, fair play Wilder & up the red and white wizards!!

 

[Darthblade]

If I could possibly interrupt the promotion party with a bit of ( cynical old bastard ) realism .........

We have a first eleven which, on its day, can compete with most in this division, subject to a reasonable performance from the officials ( that's the first problem !!!!! ).

However, we still have unresolved issues in the first team and regrettably, we also have little quality in depth to cover for injuries / suspensions / loss of form.

In short; reality says that if we can stay in touch with the top 6 until January and then Tufty can manage to squeeze some money out of the "ambitious" Board to strengthen the squad at the start of January ....... then maybe we may have an exciting run-in to the end of season.

However ....... I shall not be holding my breath just yet

UTB & FTP

 

[BushBlade]

If I could possibly interrupt the promotion party with a bit of ( cynical old bastard ) realism .........

We have a first eleven which, on its day, can compete with most in this division, subject to a reasonable performance from the officials ( that's the first problem !!!!! ).

However, we still have unresolved issues in the first team and regrettably, we also have little quality in depth to cover for injuries / suspensions / loss of form.

In short; reality says that if we can stay in touch with the top 6 until January and then Tufty can manage to squeeze some money out of the "ambitious" Board to strengthen the squad at the start of January ....... then maybe we may have an exciting run-in to the end of season.

However ....... I shall not be holding my breath just yet

UTB & FTP

I'd say we're vulnerable in three positions; Moore - Long's OK but I wouldn't want to have to rely on him for a run of games and I don't know if Ramsdale is ready yet.
Coutts - didn't expect to be posting this at the start of the season but the only player who might be able to do what he's doing at the moment is Reed. And he's patchy. Maybe we can get away with Bash, Fleck and Duffy.
Wright - his organisation and leadership is important.

I suppose you could argue we haven't got much cover for Duffy either but Scougall might be an option and Brooks looks promising.

That said, I'm pretty confident that CW would find answers to these problems if they arise. If we were unlucky enough to lose all three we could be in bother.

 

[wizadry]

I'd say we're vulnerable in three positions; Moore - Long's OK but I wouldn't want to have to rely on him for a run of games and I don't know if Ramsdale is ready yet.
Coutts - didn't expect to be posting this at the start of the season but the only player who might be able to do what he's doing at the moment is Reed. And he's patchy. Maybe we can get away with Bash, Fleck and Duffy.
Wright - his organisation and leadership is important.

I suppose you could argue we haven't got much cover for Duffy either but Scougall might be an option and Brooks looks promising.

That said, I'm pretty confident that CW would find answers to these problems if they arise. If we were unlucky enough to lose all three we could be in bother.

How could you forget about 'footlong', BB? We could do without losing him mate.

 

[BushBlade]

How could you forget about 'footlong', BB? We could do without losing him mate.

Because I think Wilson is decent cover. And he's got Semple behind him if he needs competition to motivate him. Or Brown.
Losing EEL wouldn't be ideal but it shouldn't de-rail us.

 

[wizadry]

Because I think Wilson is decent cover. And he's got Semple behind him if he needs competition to motivate him. Or Brown.
Losing EEL wouldn't be ideal but it shouldn't de-rail us.

To be honest I'd be glad to get rid, I'm sick of seeing the twat in my bed, wearing my pyjamas with his monty python dangling out of them.

On a more serious note, fair enough but i personally feel the other centre backs are feeding off his presence, we don't want to lose him, it's ages since i said that about one of our CBs'.

 

[BushBlade]

To be honest I'd be glad to get rid, I'm sick of seeing the twat in my bed, wearing my pyjamas with his monty python dangling out of them.

On a more serious note, fair enough but i personally feel the other centre backs are feeding off his presence, we don't want to lose him, it's ages since i said that about one of our CBs'.

Personally I think Wright is more important but I know what you're saying.

 

[wizadry]

Personally I think Wright is more important but I know what you're saying.

They're both very important but they could both lose their importance when not played together along with O'Connell. The only acid test is when the situation arises, hopefully whoever plays will swim with the tide so to speak for all our sakes because it's looking really good at the minute.

 

[BushBlade]

They're both very important but they could both lose their importance when not played together along with O'Connell. The only acid test is when the situation arises, hopefully whoever plays will swim with the tide so to speak for all our sakes because it's looking really good at the minute.

Did you really need to say that? Look what you've done.

 

[Leonardo Green]

 

[grafikhaus]

Reality check:

 

[1danewhitehouse]

We are an injury to Ebanks-Landell from struggling for the rest of the season, think about that for a moment then think about 100 pts again.

I don’t necessarily agree with that. He would be missed but Fleck’s upturn in form frees Basham from midfield meaning he could cover EEL like he did for O Connell last night. He’s quite good as one of the flanking centre halves in a 3 as he showed under Adkins last season. We also have James Wilson as further cover. I’ll not say too much about Reece Brown given his performance in the chuckaturd trophy.