Plans for next season

[Guest TPAFKATS]

The players back reconstruction. 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52454127

A conclusive percentage out of those who responded. I do get annoyed though when these surveys don't tell you the total number of members that they have. Would be good to see it as a percentage of total members as well.

[Ayrshire Saints]

Hearts is why there is talk of reconstruction, you might remember them from your addiction days ?

Why is there even talk of reconstruction ? 
And what the feck has it got to do with the players or Fanny Wishart ?  

[Sonny]

Can find it on twitter, 
As said it's PFA one I found. Fan survey doesn't appear to have been published yet 

I've seen one fans' survey on twitter from our very own Div and that survey had the majority wanting no change. I saw another stupid survey that did not give an option for no change (don't know the outcome as the survey was flawed). I filled in a survey via an email from Supporters Direct but cannot find any reference to it on their site. And I havn't been aware of any other fans survey. So I am surprised that some conclusion has been reached as to what fans want.

[bazil85]

9 minutes ago, Sonny said:

1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

Can find it on twitter, 
As said it's PFA one I found. Fan survey doesn't appear to have been published yet 

I've seen one fans' survey on twitter from our very own Div and that survey had the majority wanting no change. I saw another stupid survey that did not give an option for no change (don't know the outcome as the survey was flawed). I filled in a survey via an email from Supporters Direct but cannot find any reference to it on their site. And I havn't been aware of any other fans survey. So I am surprised that some conclusion has been reached as to what fans want.

that B&WArmy one had 34% wanting the current structure, it was the favoured option out of the four but 66% of people voted for option with more teams. So it wasn't a majority wanting no change, it was a majority wanting a bigger league.  

Supporters Direct is the survey I meant, I thought that was the one published today. It was an honest mistake, I am not saying it has concluded. 

Edited April 28, 2020 by bazil85

[Sonny]

that B&WArmy one had 34% wanting the current structure, it was the favoured option out of the four but 66% of people voted for option with more teams. So it wasn't a majority wanting no change, it was a majority wanting a bigger league.  
Supporters Direct is the survey I meant, I thought that was the one published today. It was an honest mistake, I am not saying it has concluded. 

I'm not having a go at you. I am very interested in what fans think so want to know any sources as too many just utter 'facts' with no evidence. And Div's poll had a clear winner.

[antrin]

2 minutes ago, Sonny said:

15 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

that B&WArmy one had 34% wanting the current structure, it was the favoured option out of the four but 66% of people voted for option with more teams. So it wasn't a majority wanting no change, it was a majority wanting a bigger league.  
Supporters Direct is the survey I meant, I thought that was the one published today. It was an honest mistake, I am not saying it has concluded. 

I'm not having a go at you. I am very interested in what fans think so want to know any sources as too many just utter 'facts' with no evidence. And Div's poll had a clear winner.

Relax, sonny.

 

I'm sure bazil will respond...

… whether you want him to, or not. 

 

[bazil85]

13 minutes ago, Sonny said:

27 minutes ago, bazil85 said:

that B&WArmy one had 34% wanting the current structure, it was the favoured option out of the four but 66% of people voted for option with more teams. So it wasn't a majority wanting no change, it was a majority wanting a bigger league.  
Supporters Direct is the survey I meant, I thought that was the one published today. It was an honest mistake, I am not saying it has concluded. 

I'm not having a go at you. I am very interested in what fans think so want to know any sources as too many just utter 'facts' with no evidence. And Div's poll had a clear winner.

Yep as why I corrected myself, I thought the one announced today was the fan one. My fault for quick glancing it. 

It had an option that got more votes than the other three. The clear message on Div's one  though, is an appetite for bigger leagues. The three options for bigger leagues is always going to dilute that message but roughly 2/3 of respondents favouring more teams shows (in that circle anyway) a majority of fans don't want status quo. 

Also not having a go, just pointing out what the actual majority was, it wasn't for a 12 team league. 

[munoz]

https://www.stmirren.com/all-news/3674-covid-19-week-7-update-28th-april-2020

[shull]

1 hour ago, Ayrshire Saints said:

Hearts is why there is talk of reconstruction, you might remember them from your addiction days ?

We all know why there is reconstruction talk.

That's my whole point.

The Game is fecking corrupt and many in Scottish Football are complicit.

Anyway, who made you read my post  ? 

[buddiecat]

2 hours ago, shull said:

We all know why there is reconstruction talk.

That's my whole point.

The Game is fecking corrupt and many in Scottish Football are complicit.

Anyway, who made you read my post  ? 

The game is completely corrupt, the SPFL are only interested in the clubs that command the biggest TV audiences, everyone else is just cannon fodder.

 

[djchapsticks]

5 hours ago, shull said:

The Forum is marvellous and makes me laugh. 

I have decades of St Mirren to share on here and my wisdom of football in general to contribute. 

Aye, free speech.

My changes for St Mirren and football are positive.

Never negative.  

[Guest TPAFKATS]

The players back reconstruction. 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52454127

Full survey here. An interesting approach, not sure it would pass the standards that political polling needs to meet.
https://pfascotland.co.uk/items/PFA-News/pfa-scotland-survey-on-league-reconstruction

[Hendo]

The problem with a 14 team league is the split will come early, after 26 games. Potentially you could have one or two sides in the bottom half missing out on the top half on goal difference, but being well clear of the teams at the bottom, so having nothing to play for during the last third of the season.

[linwood buddie]

46 minutes ago, Hendo said:

The problem with a 14 team league is the split will come early, after 26 games. Potentially you could have one or two sides in the bottom half missing out on the top half on goal difference, but being well clear of the teams at the bottom, so having nothing to play for during the last third of the season.

If it's not The Rangers or their Glasgow neighbours then it won't matter bud.

[shull]

 

[bazil85]

8 hours ago, Hendo said:

The problem with a 14 team league is the split will come early, after 26 games. Potentially you could have one or two sides in the bottom half missing out on the top half on goal difference, but being well clear of the teams at the bottom, so having nothing to play for during the last third of the season.

Think that's a concern in any bigger league regardless of a split. If you look at 20 team leagues for example, it gets to a point where mid range teams have little to play for and that generally happens before the last quarter. For me bigger leagues have still proven to be exciting and interesting throughout in many countries. 

Could also say this issue exists in the 12 team format. Depending, teams like Killie, Hibs, St Johnstone of Livi might have little to play for in last five getting in the top six or ending up in bottom six. 

[Guest TPAFKATS]

Think that's a concern in any bigger league regardless of a split. If you look at 20 team leagues for example, it gets to a point where mid range teams have little to play for and that generally happens before the last quarter. For me bigger leagues have still proven to be exciting and interesting throughout in many countries. 
Could also say this issue exists in the 12 team format. Depending, teams like Killie, Hibs, St Johnstone of Livi might have little to play for in last five getting in the top six or ending up in bottom six. 

Isn't the prize money by placing supposed to be the incentive for teams to have something to play for in most games?

[bazil85]

31 minutes ago, TPAFKATS said:

1 hour ago, bazil85 said:

Think that's a concern in any bigger league regardless of a split. If you look at 20 team leagues for example, it gets to a point where mid range teams have little to play for and that generally happens before the last quarter. For me bigger leagues have still proven to be exciting and interesting throughout in many countries. 
Could also say this issue exists in the 12 team format. Depending, teams like Killie, Hibs, St Johnstone of Livi might have little to play for in last five getting in the top six or ending up in bottom six. 

Isn't the prize money by placing supposed to be the incentive for teams to have something to play for in most games?

Yep

[Sonny]

16 hours ago, bazil85 said:

Yep as why I corrected myself, I thought the one announced today was the fan one. My fault for quick glancing it. 

It had an option that got more votes than the other three. The clear message on Div's one  though, is an appetite for bigger leagues. The three options for bigger leagues is always going to dilute that message but roughly 2/3 of respondents favouring more teams shows (in that circle anyway) a majority of fans don't want status quo. 

Also not having a go, just pointing out what the actual majority was, it wasn't for a 12 team league. 

The majority vote was to keep things the same. As in any vote the option that gets the most votes is the winner Checkout the general election - more people voted against the Tories but they won - that is how voting works. There were 4 choices on the ballot and not 2. Those that did not vote for the winning option could not agree a consensus and was split into rival camps hence the winning vote gets the mandate. How would the voting look if one of the other options was now off the table? No-one knows until it is done. Anything else is conjecture.

Anyway I do not intend to go round in circles on this. I merely asked you to provide backup to your claim and you cannot. I cited the only poll result I had seen (1009 voters). Case closed.

[W6er]

19 hours ago, shull said:

I am sure our fans paid thirty two pounds for one Scottish Cup Tie this Season. 

Sheep 

That Motherwell game was worth £100! One of the most entertaining, and nail-biting matches I can remember for a while. 

[shull]

Just now, W6er said:

That Motherwell game was worth £100! One of the most entertaining, and nail-biting matches I can remember for a while. 

The Directors of both Clubs will have taken notice of your post, for future reference. 

The fans deserve everything they get. 

 

[shull]

6 minutes ago, W6er said:

That Motherwell game was worth £100! One of the most entertaining, and nail-biting matches I can remember for a while. 

Or maybe entry to all matches should be  free. 

Then Supporters could, on their way out of match pay exactly what they think it was worth to them. 

100 pounds in your case. 

Edited April 29, 2020 by shull

[bazil85]

1 hour ago, Sonny said:

The majority vote was to keep things the same. As in any vote the option that gets the most votes is the winner Checkout the general election - more people voted against the Tories but they won - that is how voting works. There were 4 choices on the ballot and not 2. Those that did not vote for the winning option could not agree a consensus and was split into rival camps hence the winning vote gets the mandate. How would the voting look if one of the other options was now off the table? No-one knows until it is done. Anything else is conjecture.

Anyway I do not intend to go round in circles on this. I merely asked you to provide backup to your claim and you cannot. I cited the only poll result I had seen (1009 voters). Case closed.

You can cut it anyway you want because the vote ultimately doesn't mean anything but you can't have a majority without... well a majority. A majority of people voting in that survey didn't back a single option so the vote doesn't have an overall majority. If you want to compare the government,  in that scenario the UK would either form a minority government (like elections before last). Or they could form a coalition government, in this case, given 2/3 of respondents agreed they wanted a bigger league, my view is that would be the likely majority collation. It's clear the options split the vote. If BAWA had done two options. 12 team league or a bigger league, the bigger league option would have won in a landslide given the evidence we have. 

As for the remainder of this point, I would personally do it over two votes if this was the way it was to be done. 

Vote one - keep the same structure or present a structure with bigger numbers. 

If the majority wanted a bigger league (which looks likely) we move onto option two 

Vote on preferred bigger league option, That option wins.

This way you don't have an option that 2/3 of people didn't want winning by default. This can't work in politics because all party options are equal, whereas in this scenario you have three options that are closely aligned. You might get someone who's choices are 16-10-10-10, 14-10-10-10, 14-14-14 and they favour all of them over remaining the same, this would make this option unfair for those voters (I include myself in this opinion and wouldn't be surprised if that was significant to the 2/3) 

It's one of the reasons devo max wasn't an option in Scottish independence vote, it would dilute the voting options. 

Anyway like you say no need to go round and round, I'm sure we can at least agree. Any way you cut it, the evidence points to most responding fans wanting a bigger league (66%)

 

On your other point I admitted I was wrong and was looking at the wrong vote. I would hope anyone would accept someone putting their hands up to being wrong on here & not continuously bring it up. Oh well. 

[shull]

Comatosed 

[WeeBud]

1 hour ago, Sonny said:

The majority vote was to keep things the same. As in any vote the option that gets the most votes is the winner Checkout the general election - more people voted against the Tories but they won - that is how voting works. There were 4 choices on the ballot and not 2. Those that did not vote for the winning option could not agree a consensus and was split into rival camps hence the winning vote gets the mandate. How would the voting look if one of the other options was now off the table? No-one knows until it is done. Anything else is conjecture.

Anyway I do not intend to go round in circles on this. I merely asked you to provide backup to your claim and you cannot. I cited the only poll result I had seen (1009 voters). Case closed.

Good luck with that!!!