|
Post by mickmillslovechild on May 11, 2017 14:24:33 GMT
The number of registered users is 100% irrelevant if only about 1% of that total actually post! You could probably name all of the regular posters on here off the top of your head, and it's probably less than 1% of the total number of registered users.....so, no it isn't necessarily representative at all as you have no clue what the view of the other 17,000 registered members are as they don't fucking post. Sincerely hope your day job doesn't involve any kind of statistical analysis mate. You're obviously not very clued up on the ratios used for forecasting as representative samples. Hundreds of people regularly post on here out of our fanbase of thousands. Its a much more representative sample than is used to predict the outcome of elections and assess likely impact if product launches for example when a sample of a thousand or two is used to predict the opinion of millions. They've been a bit off recently Trump Brexit but thriughout the last few decades they've been proved to be a pretty accurate guide. I'll say it again the Oatcake is a fairly representative sample of our supporter base provided you stick to one user one opinion. If you can find the hundreds that are screaming for him to go then that'd be great thanks As i said (but you conveniently ignored), there aren't hundreds, there are about a dozen (20 or so at most) who are the same people saying the same things on every single thread i.e. if you say it's representative then you're NOT doing what you said in only taking one user one opinion at all). It's also important to note, this isn't a forecasting poll! Most political polls are very different in political allegiances are far more likely to be stuck to over years or even decades. Football is massively more fickle in terms of allegiances and loyalty towards players or managers. It's ludicrous to use the same method used in politics when it comes to football...you're using a poll designed to "forecast" in a particular field to try to substantiate "proof positive" in a completely different field. You can't just use stats/methodologies and transfer them between 2 entirely different fields AT ALL. It's ludicrous and doesn't stand up to any kind of analytical scrutiny at all . The methodologies used by statistical analysts are designed for specific purposes and take many factors into account that are specific to that purpose (most of which aren't transferrable between areas) NOT as general guidelines to be used for anything at any time.
|
|
|
Post by alster on May 11, 2017 14:26:17 GMT
And look what Waddo eventually went on to achieve. What he achieved after is irrellevant Je achieved more for our great club and deserved a longer honeymoon period than anyother manager as i say hughes onky got his because of the venom on this board against Pulis I really don't believe that. The reaction to Hughes appointment was muted/luke warm to say the least. His first two seasons earned him credit and got people onside. Its just that since then he's been putting people off side including many like myself who were most enthusiastic about his appointment in my own case at least two years before he was actually appointed.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 14:31:01 GMT
I really don't believe that. The reaction to Hughes appointment was muted/luke warm to say the least. His first two seasons earned him credit and got people onside. Its just that since then he's been putting people off side including many like myself who were most enthusiastic about his appointment in my own case at least two years before he was actually appointed. Enthusiastic about his appointment 2 years beforr his appointment ? Anyway cool.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 14:32:20 GMT
He had the honeymoon period he deserved. sadly no he didnt when when you consider what he achieved and Hughes' honeymoon period. We will agree to disagree friend, the beauty of message boards mate ! Sorry mate, you might have misinterpreted what I meant. I wasn't commenting on Waddo's honeymoon period as my start point as a Stokie was 1974, nearer to the end of his time here - I'd never ever say anything disparaging about him. My comment was about Hughes. It's hard to say when his honeymoon period ended - safe to say it's well and truly over now, but I don't think he'd done a lot wrong prior to the back-end of last season for the fans to have lost patience with him before then. Edit : Looking at your post again, I've probably misunderstood part of what you said as well. Yeah, the viciousness towards Waddo was heartbreaking. Ridiculous and uncalled for. Never understood it and no one's been able to explain the reasons for it since.
|
|
|
Post by alster on May 11, 2017 14:34:20 GMT
You're obviously not very clued up on the ratios used for forecasting as representative samples. Hundreds of people regularly post on here out of our fanbase of thousands. Its a much more representative sample than is used to predict the outcome of elections and assess likely impact if product launches for example when a sample of a thousand or two is used to predict the opinion of millions. They've been a bit off recently Trump Brexit but thriughout the last few decades they've been proved to be a pretty accurate guide. I'll say it again the Oatcake is a fairly representative sample of our supporter base provided you stick to one user one opinion. If you can find the hundreds that are screaming for him to go then that'd be great thanks As i said (but you conveniently ignored), there aren't hundreds, there are about a dozen (20 or so at most) who are the same people saying the same things on every single thread i.e. if you say it's representative then you're NOT doing what you said in only taking one user one opinion at all). It's also important to note, this isn't a forecasting poll! Most political polls are very different in political allegiances are far more likely to be stuck to over years or even decades. Football is massively more fickle in terms of allegiances and loyalty towards players or managers. It's ludicrous to use the same method used in politics when it comes to football...you're using a poll designed to "forecast" in a particular field to try to substantiate "proof positive" in a completely different field. You can't just use stats/methodologies and transfer them between 2 entirely different fields AT ALL. It's ludicrous and doesn't stand up to any kind of analytical scrutiny at all . The methodologies used by statistical analysts are designed for specific purposes and take many factors into account that are specific to that purpose (most of which aren't transferrable between areas) NOT as general guidelines to be used for anything at any time. I've never actually mentioned about hundreds screaming for him to go. I was discussing the Oatcake as a representative sample. The numbers work it is a representative sample. On the subject of Hughes a recent poll on here voted by 60 odd percent he ahould be replaced at the end of the season around 400 people voted one person one vote again a representative sample. This proof positive yoy have bought up has been plucked from the air nobody whatsoever had mentioned that anything was proof positive of anything.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 14:39:02 GMT
sadly no he didnt when when you consider what he achieved and Hughes' honeymoon period. We will agree to disagree friend, the beauty of message boards mate ! Sorry mate, you might have misinterpreted what I meant. I wasn't commenting on Waddo's honeymoon period as my start point as a Stokie was 1974, nearer to the end of his time here - I'd never ever say anything disparaging about him. My comment was about Hughes. It's hard to say when his honeymoon period ended - safe to say it's well and truly over now, but I don't think he'd done a lot wrong prior to the back-end of last season for the fans to have lost patience with him before then. no need for apologies friend its a message board and most if us are adults ! I take on board what you say but personally i think end of season was the time for him to go and this season has reinforced that. If we had and god forbid had an even worse season then ........... ! Take care friend
|
|
|
Post by alster on May 11, 2017 14:40:24 GMT
Irrefutable I suggested we employ Hughes in Jan 2011 and many times subsequently. Therefore I do feel more let down than most by his management the last 2 seasons. Whereas previously I'd been very happy with him he was ballsy and quite cavalier god only knows whata gone wrong I rhink he's been possessed by Pulis.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 14:40:39 GMT
Sorry mate, you might have misinterpreted what I meant. I wasn't commenting on Waddo's honeymoon period as my start point as a Stokie was 1974, nearer to the end of his time here - I'd never ever say anything disparaging about him. My comment was about Hughes. It's hard to say when his honeymoon period ended - safe to say it's well and truly over now, but I don't think he'd done a lot wrong prior to the back-end of last season for the fans to have lost patience with him before then. no need for apologies friend its a message board and most if us are adults ! I take on board what you say but personally i think end of season was the time for him to go and this season has reinforced that. If we had and god forbid had an even worse season then ........... ! Take care friend Cheers Wayne. By the way, you might not have clocked my edit to my previous post.
|
|
|
Post by crownmeking on May 11, 2017 14:46:25 GMT
If you can find the hundreds that are screaming for him to go then that'd be great thanks As i said (but you conveniently ignored), there aren't hundreds, there are about a dozen (20 or so at most) who are the same people saying the same things on every single thread i.e. if you say it's representative then you're NOT doing what you said in only taking one user one opinion at all). It's also important to note, this isn't a forecasting poll! Most political polls are very different in political allegiances are far more likely to be stuck to over years or even decades. Football is massively more fickle in terms of allegiances and loyalty towards players or managers. It's ludicrous to use the same method used in politics when it comes to football...you're using a poll designed to "forecast" in a particular field to try to substantiate "proof positive" in a completely different field. You can't just use stats/methodologies and transfer them between 2 entirely different fields AT ALL. It's ludicrous and doesn't stand up to any kind of analytical scrutiny at all . The methodologies used by statistical analysts are designed for specific purposes and take many factors into account that are specific to that purpose (most of which aren't transferrable between areas) NOT as general guidelines to be used for anything at any time. I've never actually mentioned about hundreds screaming for him to go. I was discussing the Oatcake as a representative sample. The numbers work it is a representative sample. On the subject of Hughes a recent poll on here voted by 60 odd percent he ahould be replaced at the end of the season around 400 people voted one person one vote again a representative sample. This proof positive yoy have bought up has been plucked from the air nobody whatsoever had mentioned that anything was proof positive of anything. Wrong.
|
|
|
Post by alster on May 11, 2017 14:51:03 GMT
I've never actually mentioned about hundreds screaming for him to go. I was discussing the Oatcake as a representative sample. The numbers work it is a representative sample. On the subject of Hughes a recent poll on here voted by 60 odd percent he ahould be replaced at the end of the season around 400 people voted one person one vote again a representative sample. This proof positive yoy have bought up has been plucked from the air nobody whatsoever had mentioned that anything was proof positive of anything. Wrong. Go stalk somebody else you weirdo.
|
|
|
Post by alster on May 11, 2017 14:53:28 GMT
61.84% of 380 voters wanted him replaced at the end of the season.
|
|
|
Post by Will_75 on May 11, 2017 14:58:34 GMT
Mark Hughes never stood a chance mate ...infact whoever took over never stood a chance I can't believe we are now starting threads on hunches they have and not fact or newspaper rumours ....infact the OP stated its posted on another thread so why not answer that instead of all this It's bollocks 4 seasons never stood a chance. How do you come up with such tripe. very very few people were unhappy with Mark Hughes come the end of his second season. Everything from that point on he's bought on himself. Is it just me that finds this attitude really petulant? We arguably over-achieved in the first two seasons, or at least did pretty much as well we could, given that you can't win every game, what with it being a competitive sport and all. Last season we were wildly inconsistent but in the end we still finished 9th. This season, in that context, has clearly been as disappointment and lots of things have gone wrong, from Bojan becoming a liability, to Imbula never getting close to his form against Chelsea, Jack's injury keeping him out for most of seasons, Bony being wank, Berahino being slow to get off the mark etc etc etc, but this does happen in football. It's been a season to forget, no doubt, but no-one is going to be more frustrated than Hughes (apart from maybe you and Bayern) and surely to god he deserves another year a least. The argument that this is all his fault for doing so well in the first place just seems childish and spoilt to me. But maybe I spent too much time with demanding children, who knows?
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on May 11, 2017 15:10:53 GMT
If you can find the hundreds that are screaming for him to go then that'd be great thanks As i said (but you conveniently ignored), there aren't hundreds, there are about a dozen (20 or so at most) who are the same people saying the same things on every single thread i.e. if you say it's representative then you're NOT doing what you said in only taking one user one opinion at all). It's also important to note, this isn't a forecasting poll! Most political polls are very different in political allegiances are far more likely to be stuck to over years or even decades. Football is massively more fickle in terms of allegiances and loyalty towards players or managers. It's ludicrous to use the same method used in politics when it comes to football...you're using a poll designed to "forecast" in a particular field to try to substantiate "proof positive" in a completely different field. You can't just use stats/methodologies and transfer them between 2 entirely different fields AT ALL. It's ludicrous and doesn't stand up to any kind of analytical scrutiny at all . The methodologies used by statistical analysts are designed for specific purposes and take many factors into account that are specific to that purpose (most of which aren't transferrable between areas) NOT as general guidelines to be used for anything at any time. I've never actually mentioned about hundreds screaming for him to go. I was discussing the Oatcake as a representative sample. The numbers work it is a representative sample. On the subject of Hughes a recent poll on here voted by 60 odd percent he ahould be replaced at the end of the season around 400 people voted one person one vote again a representative sample. This proof positive yoy have bought up has been plucked from the air nobody whatsoever had mentioned that anything was proof positive of anything. Even using your poll on here it isn't representative........ there are roughly 17.5k registered members on here....only 2% of those 17.5k actually voted. So......less than 1.5% of the people on HERE think he should go (if you're basing it on the poll)...even less than that are actually vocal about it on the messageboard....but that's a general representation of the entire Stoke City Fanbase (including the tens if not hundreds of thosuands of Stoke fans that aren't even on this board)?????? It's not even a general representation of those Stoke fans who are registered on here mate. You're basically talking out of your arse by using a analytical basis specifcally designed for political purposes (which has completely different factors that have been incorporated into the calculation they use, that just aren't applicable within football). You can't on the one hand say "There are enough registered users on here to represent the general fanbase (17.5k)" then, when you provide the polls stats ignore the fact only 2% of those 17.5k voted. If you're using the 17.5k as a general representative of the fanbase, then the 285 have to be a percentage of that 17.5k to back up your point (as that's the figure you're saying is a general representation) NOT just the 400 that could be arsed to vote in a pointless poll. Even when used politically, they use the polls they take and base it around the figure of those who are likely to vote (based on historical figures, current politcial appetite with the electorate etc.) and take those factors into account to get their percentages. Basically, when it comes to using stats to back up your ideas, you can't just pick and choose and chop and change which numbers you are/aren't analysing. it HAS to be consistent or it's 100% pointless and meaningless garbage. Cracking stuff mate And re: "Proof positive" i was referring to you using it as PROOF to back up your idea that it is a general representation....whichever way you look at it,it just isn't! I have no issue with your opinion of wanting him to go (as i said, i wouldn't be particularly arsed if he did), but for you to try to use stats as proof to back up your idea that it's a general concensus is just all over the place. If you want to look at the "one voice, one opinion allowed" idea, then looking at most threads i'd say the more likely concensus is that most fall into the "apathetic/willing to give him one last season to turn it around/willing to give him until Christmas to turn it around" camp, rather than "He has to go and he has to go NOW" camp. As said, those that do fall into the latter camp are very vocal and are the same people saying the same things on EVERY thread. There's about 12-20 of them at most (i.e. about 0.1% of the people registered on here...ignoring the hundreds of thousands who aren't on here)
|
|
|
Post by alster on May 11, 2017 15:19:52 GMT
4 seasons never stood a chance. How do you come up with such tripe. very very few people were unhappy with Mark Hughes come the end of his second season. Everything from that point on he's bought on himself. Is it just me that finds this attitude really petulant? We arguably over-achieved in the first two seasons, or at least did pretty much as well we could, given that you can't win every game, what with it being a competitive sport and all. Last season we were wildly inconsistent but in the end we still finished 9th. This season, in that context, has clearly been as disappointment and lots of things have gone wrong, from Bojan becoming a liability, to Imbula never getting close to his form against Chelsea, Jack's injury keeping him out for most of seasons, Bony being wank, Berahino being slow to get off the mark etc etc etc, but this does happen in football. It's been a season to forget, no doubt, but no-one is going to be more frustrated than Hughes (apart from maybe you and Bayern) and surely to god he deserves another year a least. The argument that this is all his fault for doing so well in the first place just seems childish and spoilt to me. But maybe I spent too much time with demanding children, who knows? I think you're maybe missing the root of my frustration. Its nothing to do with league position having slipped. Hughes management has changed in its nature from something I admire to something I detest. In his first 2 seasons he was positive, progressive and quite cavalier. Not only would he set out to win every game when he made changes they were generally positive intended to bring a game to an ultimate result. He'd push for the win even if it was at the cost of losing. Not only was it more productive in terms of league position the football was more exciting and we scored more goals. I don't care what anybody says this is a very different Mark Hughes we're dealing with the football has become slow and dull he's become very conservative in selection and his changes are more often than not of a negative nature designed to shut games down. If the first Mark Hughes was a reflection of what you want as our manager I can't see how you could be happy with the current version. Its a huge swing that is far deeper than a few positions in a league table.
|
|
|
Post by GoBoks on May 11, 2017 15:28:07 GMT
Of course the Oatcake is a representative sample of Stoke City's support it has enough registered users to be a very indicative sample of our overall supporter base. The number of registered users is 100% irrelevant if only about 1% of that total actually post! You could probably name all of the regular posters on here off the top of your head, and it's probably less than 1% of the total number of registered users.....so, no it isn't necessarily representative at all as you have no clue what the view of the other 17,000 registered members are as they don't fucking post. Sincerely hope your day job doesn't involve any kind of statistical analysis mate. And, it doesn't matter how many people are in the sample, it can still not be a representative sample if the membership is biased. E.g. ( not saying any of these are true of the Oatcake, just illustrating the point) Only fans with computers are members of Oatcake, or only fans who have a largely inflated opinion of their own point of view sign up, etc.
|
|
|
Post by nott1 on May 11, 2017 15:29:28 GMT
61.84% of 380 voters wanted him replaced at the end of the season. PC won't take a blind bit of notice!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 15:29:37 GMT
Is it just me that finds this attitude really petulant? We arguably over-achieved in the first two seasons, or at least did pretty much as well we could, given that you can't win every game, what with it being a competitive sport and all. Last season we were wildly inconsistent but in the end we still finished 9th. This season, in that context, has clearly been as disappointment and lots of things have gone wrong, from Bojan becoming a liability, to Imbula never getting close to his form against Chelsea, Jack's injury keeping him out for most of seasons, Bony being wank, Berahino being slow to get off the mark etc etc etc, but this does happen in football. It's been a season to forget, no doubt, but no-one is going to be more frustrated than Hughes (apart from maybe you and Bayern) and surely to god he deserves another year a least. The argument that this is all his fault for doing so well in the first place just seems childish and spoilt to me. But maybe I spent too much time with demanding children, who knows? I think you're maybe missing the root of my frustration. Its nothing to do with league position having slipped. Hughes management has changed in its nature from something I admire to something I detest. In his first 2 seasons he was positive, progressive and quite cavalier. Not only would he set out to win every game when he made changes they were generally positive intended to bring a game to an ultimate result. He'd push for the win even if it was at the cost of losing. Not only was it more productive in terms of league position the football was more exciting and we scored more goals. I don't care what anybody says this is a very different Mark Hughes we're dealing with the football has become slow and dull he's become very conservative in selection and his changes are more often than not of a negative nature designed to shut games down. If the first Mark Hughes was a reflection of what you want as our manager I can't see how you could be happy with the current version. Its a huge swing that is far deeper than a few positions in a league table. This is a partially formed thought that might not stand up to scrutiny, but is it possible that the number of three and four goal drubbings from the end of last season through to the beginning of this one have pushed him into the negative camp? The two previous seasons when we went a goal behind, we had a go and 50% of the time we probably got it back to a draw or a victory. Because of deficiencies in the latest signings and/or set up, his attempts to pull games back more recently have led to humiliating results which couldn't continue. Maybe this skewed his mentality towards caution. This close season is his chance to put that right. Concentrate on the defence which he's said he'll do, and that might allow the more creative players to be used more freely without worrying about the massive gaps they're leaving in the middle. Maybe me taking too positive an outlook, but I'd like to think there may be some accuracy to it.
|
|
|
Post by GoBoks on May 11, 2017 15:30:46 GMT
Of course the Oatcake is a representative sample of Stoke City's support it has enough registered users to be a very indicative sample of our overall supporter base. Not sure it's representative. I don't know what the total number of board members is as a proportion of total Stoke fans or whether it's a representative sample. However what can be suggested is that the message board is a good example of the 80 / 20 rule (The Pareto Effect). In other words, generally speaking, 80% of posts will come from 20% of the members. Indeed, in some case there are members with a disproportionately high number of posts, one member can even lay claim to an astonishing 91k posts With some of the more controversial threads, i.e. should Mark Hughes be sacked, a similar effect will be found, 80% of the posts on that thread will come from 20% of the posters involved in the thread. Also the posters with the more strident views will more likely be the pro-active posters on the thread. Those with a more reasoned view will tend to be less active because basically they can't be bothered to argue against illogical opinions, often simply based on unsubstantiated rumours, suppositions and hysterical ramblings. A good example being the item on this thread about Hughes going to China this should be post of the year! Well said!
|
|
|
Post by alster on May 11, 2017 15:37:35 GMT
I've never actually mentioned about hundreds screaming for him to go. I was discussing the Oatcake as a representative sample. The numbers work it is a representative sample. On the subject of Hughes a recent poll on here voted by 60 odd percent he ahould be replaced at the end of the season around 400 people voted one person one vote again a representative sample. This proof positive yoy have bought up has been plucked from the air nobody whatsoever had mentioned that anything was proof positive of anything. Even using your poll on here it isn't representative........ there are roughly 17.5k registered members on here....only 2% of those 17.5k actually voted. So......less than 1.5% of the people on HERE think he should go (if you're basing it on the poll)...even less than that are actually vocal about it on the messageboard....but that's a general representation of the entire Stoke City Fanbase (including the tens if not hundreds of thosuands of Stoke fans that aren't even on this board)?????? It's not even a general representation of those Stoke fans who are registered on here mate. You're basically talking out of your arse by using a analytical basis specifcally designed for political purposes (which has completely different factors that have been incorporated into the calculation they use, that just aren't applicable within football). You can't on the one hand say "There are enough registered users on here to represent the general fanbase" then, when you provide the polls stats ignore the fact only 2% of those 17.5k voted. If you're using the 17.5k as a general representative, then the 285 have to be a percentage of that 17.5k NOT just the 400 that could be arsed to vote in a pointless poll. Basical;y, when it comes to using stats to back up your ideas, you cant' just pick and choose and chop and change which numbers you are/aren't analysing. it HAS to be consistent or it's 100% pointless and meaningless garbage. Cracking stuff mate And re: "Proof positive" i was referring to you using it as PROOF to back up your idea that it is a general representation....whichever way you look at it,it just isn't! I have no issue with your opinion of wanting him to go (as i said, i wouldn't be particularly arsed if he did), but for you to try to use stats as proof to back up your idea that it's a general concensus is just all over the place. If you want to look at the "one voice, one opinion allowed" idea, then looking at most threads i'd say the more likely concensus is that most fall into the "apathetic/willing to give him one last season to turn it around/willing to give him until Christmas to turn it around" camp, rather than "He has to go and he has to go NOW" camp. As said, those that do fall into the latter camp are very vocal and are the same people saying the same things on EVERY thread. There's about 12-20 of them at most (i.e. about 0.1% of the people registered on here...ignoring the hundreds of thousands who aren't on here) You haven't got a clue what you're talking about. On your basis for statistics you'd have to get a majority of all the people who've ever registered to vote to have a consensus. Hackett alone is about 500 of the 17.5K that you're quoting. Representative samples have absolutely nothing to do with politics and are usable for a wide range of forecasting. Your problem is you're focusing on a particular issue instead of the numbers involved, doesn't matter what the issue is the numbers work the oatcake is a representative sample of Stoke City's supporter base as a statistician would tell you.
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_Shawjosh on May 11, 2017 15:37:48 GMT
I hope he stays, that's all I'm saying.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on May 11, 2017 15:39:20 GMT
Let's hope this is true.
It will be best for all parties and will save the ignominy of him being sacked.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 15:39:24 GMT
I hope he stays, that's all I'm saying. That cuts through a lot of shit.
|
|
|
Post by alster on May 11, 2017 15:44:41 GMT
The number of registered users is 100% irrelevant if only about 1% of that total actually post! You could probably name all of the regular posters on here off the top of your head, and it's probably less than 1% of the total number of registered users.....so, no it isn't necessarily representative at all as you have no clue what the view of the other 17,000 registered members are as they don't fucking post. Sincerely hope your day job doesn't involve any kind of statistical analysis mate. And, it doesn't matter how many people are in the sample, it can still not be a representative sample if the membership is biased. E.g. ( not saying any of these are true of the Oatcake, just illustrating the point) Only fans with computers are members of Oatcake, or only fans who have a largely inflated opinion of their own point of view sign up, etc. What you mean like the type of people who are used for all other forms of statistical forecasting. I'm sure you're right they should get out and speak to people without phones or housing, the deaf and the mute but face facts they don't and they still manage to predict the outcome of most things. well up until last year they did anyway and they did get the Scot independence vote and French election pretty close, so somehow they still work even if they do only talk to people who are up their own arse.
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on May 11, 2017 15:53:08 GMT
Even using your poll on here it isn't representative........ there are roughly 17.5k registered members on here....only 2% of those 17.5k actually voted. So......less than 1.5% of the people on HERE think he should go (if you're basing it on the poll)...even less than that are actually vocal about it on the messageboard....but that's a general representation of the entire Stoke City Fanbase (including the tens if not hundreds of thosuands of Stoke fans that aren't even on this board)?????? It's not even a general representation of those Stoke fans who are registered on here mate. You're basically talking out of your arse by using a analytical basis specifcally designed for political purposes (which has completely different factors that have been incorporated into the calculation they use, that just aren't applicable within football). You can't on the one hand say "There are enough registered users on here to represent the general fanbase" then, when you provide the polls stats ignore the fact only 2% of those 17.5k voted. If you're using the 17.5k as a general representative, then the 285 have to be a percentage of that 17.5k NOT just the 400 that could be arsed to vote in a pointless poll. Basical;y, when it comes to using stats to back up your ideas, you cant' just pick and choose and chop and change which numbers you are/aren't analysing. it HAS to be consistent or it's 100% pointless and meaningless garbage. Cracking stuff mate And re: "Proof positive" i was referring to you using it as PROOF to back up your idea that it is a general representation....whichever way you look at it,it just isn't! I have no issue with your opinion of wanting him to go (as i said, i wouldn't be particularly arsed if he did), but for you to try to use stats as proof to back up your idea that it's a general concensus is just all over the place. If you want to look at the "one voice, one opinion allowed" idea, then looking at most threads i'd say the more likely concensus is that most fall into the "apathetic/willing to give him one last season to turn it around/willing to give him until Christmas to turn it around" camp, rather than "He has to go and he has to go NOW" camp. As said, those that do fall into the latter camp are very vocal and are the same people saying the same things on EVERY thread. There's about 12-20 of them at most (i.e. about 0.1% of the people registered on here...ignoring the hundreds of thousands who aren't on here) You haven't got a clue what you're talking about. On your basis for statistics you'd have to get a majority of all the people who've ever registered to vote to have a consensus. Hackett alone is about 500 of the 17.5K that you're quoting. Representative samples have absolutely nothing to do with politics and are usable for a wide range of forecasting. Your problem is you're focusing on a particular issue instead of the numbers involved, doesn't matter what the issue is the numbers work the oatcake is a representative sample of Stoke City's supporter base as a statistician would tell you. Any statistician would be laughing his bollocks off at you mate...... And no, my criticism of your idea is based precisely around how political polls are carried out. It's YOUR idea that would be based simply on numbers (pick and choose which ones to suit as and when the argument changes seemingly) and think "That'll do". The polls that are taken for political purposes take into account historic trends of those who are likely to vote, the areas/class/prosperity of those who have been polled, age, poll results taken re: specific areas of concern and most important issues likely to affect voting outcomes for people in those demographics etc. etc. etc. (none of which you have carried out but all of which are necessary and weighted differently in polling calculations in order for them to come to the conclusions of the forecasts they come up with). They don't just count fucking numbers and say "There you go" you muppet. It's not a case of "We polled 10,000 people in an area of 100,000 people , 68% voted Tory so therefore we'll presume 6.8k of every 10,000 people in the country will vote Tory". They use FAR FAR more than just that But.....using YOUR idea of simple numbers......17.5k registered on here, 285 voted for him to go so that's 1.63% (rounded up) of people who want him to go. So that backs up the idea that the general representation of the fanbase want him to go yeah? As i said you CANNOT use the number of the registered members on here when it suits you (i.e. "that means it's a general representation") but then just use the percentage of those who voted when it suits you (because it then gives a high percentage to back up your opinion). The ONLY way you can use just that 285 number would be if you were saying that the 400 that voted in total form a general representation of the entire fanbase (which isn't what you said at the outset at all). You're intentionally mismatching stats to suit your own purpose and it's ludicrous! Also, i feel i may have said a few times, you CAN'T use the way a political poll works and just use that method on The Oatcake in a completely different field to politics!!!! You still insist on doing so, you still insist on ignoring the fact that professional statisticians take FAR more factors into account than just numbers and you still keep swapping which numbers around you want to use. This isn't a poll to show who will or won't "Win" in a FPTP system, where people have seen the other option and know what it will bring. It's entirely different! If anything, the only stat you can really come up with from that poll is that out of the 17.5k registered users (your idea of using that figure to show it's a general representation remember...although you seem to be changing that now saying "That doesn't count cos Hackett's about 500 of them"), is that 97.72 of the registered members are either apathetic towards the poll or apathetic towards the question asked. Basically, the number of registered members may be enough to form a general representation, however the number that talk about wanting him gone and the number that voted to say they want him gone are a TINY percentage therefore of that general fanbases opinion therefore over 97% of the Stoke fanbase don't actively want him gone at all.
|
|
|
Post by metalhead on May 11, 2017 15:53:39 GMT
I think we should just do what those fuck tards on the bandit forum do.
One thread named Hughes In for people to post bollocks.
One thread named Hughes Out for people to post bollocks.
Would make this place a lot more interesting.
|
|
|
Post by cheeesfreeex on May 11, 2017 16:03:32 GMT
Even using your poll on here it isn't representative........ there are roughly 17.5k registered members on here....only 2% of those 17.5k actually voted. So......less than 1.5% of the people on HERE think he should go (if you're basing it on the poll)...even less than that are actually vocal about it on the messageboard....but that's a general representation of the entire Stoke City Fanbase (including the tens if not hundreds of thosuands of Stoke fans that aren't even on this board)?????? It's not even a general representation of those Stoke fans who are registered on here mate. You're basically talking out of your arse by using a analytical basis specifcally designed for political purposes (which has completely different factors that have been incorporated into the calculation they use, that just aren't applicable within football). You can't on the one hand say "There are enough registered users on here to represent the general fanbase" then, when you provide the polls stats ignore the fact only 2% of those 17.5k voted. If you're using the 17.5k as a general representative, then the 285 have to be a percentage of that 17.5k NOT just the 400 that could be arsed to vote in a pointless poll. Basical;y, when it comes to using stats to back up your ideas, you cant' just pick and choose and chop and change which numbers you are/aren't analysing. it HAS to be consistent or it's 100% pointless and meaningless garbage. Cracking stuff mate And re: "Proof positive" i was referring to you using it as PROOF to back up your idea that it is a general representation....whichever way you look at it,it just isn't! I have no issue with your opinion of wanting him to go (as i said, i wouldn't be particularly arsed if he did), but for you to try to use stats as proof to back up your idea that it's a general concensus is just all over the place. If you want to look at the "one voice, one opinion allowed" idea, then looking at most threads i'd say the more likely concensus is that most fall into the "apathetic/willing to give him one last season to turn it around/willing to give him until Christmas to turn it around" camp, rather than "He has to go and he has to go NOW" camp. As said, those that do fall into the latter camp are very vocal and are the same people saying the same things on EVERY thread. There's about 12-20 of them at most (i.e. about 0.1% of the people registered on here...ignoring the hundreds of thousands who aren't on here) You haven't got a clue what you're talking about. On your basis for statistics you'd have to get a majority of all the people who've ever registered to vote to have a consensus. Hackett alone is about 500 of the 17.5K that you're quoting. Representative samples have absolutely nothing to do with politics and are usable for a wide range of forecasting. Your problem is you're focusing on a particular issue instead of the numbers involved, doesn't matter what the issue is the numbers work the oatcake is a representative sample of Stoke City's supporter base as a statistician would tell you. Nah mate at best it's a skewed sample of the Stoke taliban. Hughes in for me etc.
|
|
|
Post by lordb on May 11, 2017 16:11:40 GMT
The number of registered users is 100% irrelevant if only about 1% of that total actually post! You could probably name all of the regular posters on here off the top of your head, and it's probably less than 1% of the total number of registered users.....so, no it isn't necessarily representative at all as you have no clue what the view of the other 17,000 registered members are as they don't fucking post. Sincerely hope your day job doesn't involve any kind of statistical analysis mate. You're obviously not very clued up on the ratios used for forecasting as representative samples. Hundreds of people regularly post on here out of our fanbase of thousands. Its a much more representative sample than is used to predict the outcome of elections and assess likely impact if product launches for example when a sample of a thousand or two is used to predict the opinion of millions. They've been a bit off recently Trump Brexit but thriughout the last few decades they've been proved to be a pretty accurate guide. I'll say it again the Oatcake is a fairly representative sample of our supporter base provided you stick to one user one opinion. So why hasn't there been wide spread dissent in the stands? Why no Hughes out chants? Hughes out banners? E.t.c. ? Not saying the crowds are happy as Larry however there is a marked difference between the crowds and the mood on here.
|
|
|
Post by alster on May 11, 2017 16:12:09 GMT
You're obviously not very clued up on the ratios used for forecasting as representative samples. Hundreds of people regularly post on here out of our fanbase of thousands. Its a much more representative sample than is used to predict the outcome of elections and assess likely impact if product launches for example when a sample of a thousand or two is used to predict the opinion of millions. They've been a bit off recently Trump Brexit but thriughout the last few decades they've been proved to be a pretty accurate guide. I'll say it again the Oatcake is a fairly representative sample of our supporter base provided you stick to one user one opinion. Read more: oatcakefanzine.proboards.com/thread/268231/sneaky-feeling-hughes-walk-season?page=3&scrollTo=5548424#ixzz4gmpZqqLg That was my initial post on the subject of the representative sample discussion as you will see it was not concerning the subject of Mark Hughes which you have become obsessed with at all. Its a simple observation that enough Stoke City fans use the Oatcake for it to be considered a representative sample. I can't help it if you chose to try to minimise the level of support for an issue that you chose to involve in the discussion. If you want to dwell in cloud cuckoo land where only 1.1586534% of Stoke fans think he should be replaced crack on, you're kidding only yourself.
|
|
|
Post by rawli on May 11, 2017 16:13:03 GMT
Sneaky feeling? We really are in the realms of fantasy now. What do the runes say? The Magic 8 Ball says "It's a possibility" Pine cone is open. Think that means he's staying.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 16:13:33 GMT
You're obviously not very clued up on the ratios used for forecasting as representative samples. Hundreds of people regularly post on here out of our fanbase of thousands. Its a much more representative sample than is used to predict the outcome of elections and assess likely impact if product launches for example when a sample of a thousand or two is used to predict the opinion of millions. They've been a bit off recently Trump Brexit but thriughout the last few decades they've been proved to be a pretty accurate guide. I'll say it again the Oatcake is a fairly representative sample of our supporter base provided you stick to one user one opinion. Read more: oatcakefanzine.proboards.com/thread/268231/sneaky-feeling-hughes-walk-season?page=3&scrollTo=5548424#ixzz4gmpZqqLg That was my initial post on the subject of the representative sample discussion as you will see it was not concerning the subject of Mark Hughes which you have become obsessed with at all. Its a simple observation that enough Stoke City fans use the Oatcake for it to be considered a representative sample. I can't help it if you chose to try to minimise the level of support for an issue that you chose to involve in the discussion. If you want to dwell in cloud cuckoo land where only 1.1586534% of Stoke fans think he should be replaced crack on, you're kidding only yourself. Wrong ..... but keep digging.
|
|