OK I can get on board with some of this, three different comments have been made: We take part in 10 % - his second assertion. This is surely unarguably true, I'd say this was objective. We influence 10% - brought up by others but then repeated by him. This is debatable, you could easily argue 5%, I'd say this is subjective. We play 10% - his original comment. I read it as meaning the amount we play in (which I think was his clear intention) so 10% would be correct, but agree that it could be read as meaning what part (or influence) we would have on the whole league so would be more like 5%. Not so much a maths question as a legal one I guess.
This is actually a common combinations question about people shaking hands in a room (Ten people each shake each others hands etc) and yes it is important you divide by 2 at the end as proven by Gauss back in the 19th century.
To clarify previous comments (going back years) I happen to be a qualified solicitor who has been a maths teacher for the last decade (honestly). I reckon I'm over qualified for this niche questioning here.
As much as I am enjoying this philosophical debate, I have to drive down from Blair Atholl to Yorkshire and I was supposed to leave 3 hours ago. Have fun everyone
So, if Nev drives from Blair Atholl to Yorkshire, at 60 miles and hour and he's 3 hours late, how much of a twat is Nev?
Those that can do …….. those that can’t teach unless they’re banned from working with kids then they become professors
200% 100% for being late and 100% for driving at 60mph while towing a caravan with a 3.5T truck and still maintaining a 60mph average when only 55% of the journey is on motorway.
I wouldn't volunteer either, I left 11 years ago (so couldn't practice now without some major revalidation steps) because I didn't like it. Still though, it's true so long as no one ever relies on me for anything.
