|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 16:14:46 GMT
Year Pts Pos. FA. LC. EUR. 2008–09 45pts 12th R3 QF 2009–10 47pts 11th QF R4 2010–11 46pts 13th RU R4 2011–12 45pts 14th QF R4 Europa R32 2012–13 42pts 13th R4 R2 2013–14 50pts 9th R4 QF 2014–15 54pts 9th R5 R4 2015–16 51pts 9th R4 SF
2016-17 41pts 13th R3 R3
However this season ends, Hughes will have his lowest ever points tally. Should we lose our last 2, our lowest ever since the Prem era, we will also have our lowest ever final position in the prem era.
Round 3 in both cups - not good enough.
For me, grounds for sacking.
It's a results business, the results haven't been there.
Pulis departed following his worst points tally in the prem, Hughes should do the same.
|
|
|
Post by alster on May 11, 2017 16:16:37 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. The words of someone who still has fuck all to say.
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on May 11, 2017 16:17:22 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. Mate...it's using YOUR idea of why it's a representative sample and the poll figures that YOU brought up that have led to those calculations You're now saying that 17.5k IS a representative sample but the fact only 1.63% of that sample voted for him (and again, it was YOU that brought up that poll) to leave is kidding ourselves? You seem to be confusing yourself now! Even if 17.5k IS a representative sample of our support, only 2.3% of that fanbase seems passionate one way or the other according to the poll you cited. You can't now say that 17.5k is representative of the whole fanbase and that 400 people (i.e. the only ones who voted) are definitely a fair representation of those 17.5k as well...therefore we can use a poll of 400 people to say that represents everyone. As i said (on many occasions now) political polls take into account far more things than just numbers of those polled, that's why you can't really do any kind of analysis based on a poll of 400 people on here (who you have no idea of their age, how important the issues with the side is likely to be to them, preferred style of play, issues with transfer, issues with the manager in general etc. etc.) and presume it works the same way a political poll would. P.S the reason we're dwelling on the Hughes issue is kinda because it's a thread about Hughes that YOU decided to use those figures for in the first place (weird of us to dwell on that i know), the reason we're dwelling on figures like the 17.5k and the percentage of that number that voted in that poll are because YOU brought both of those things up (weird of us to dwell on those i know). Hope that clears things up
|
|
|
Post by GeneralFaye on May 11, 2017 16:18:51 GMT
Nah, Hughes is staying me thinks.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 16:20:26 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. 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. To be fair mate, it was the same with Pulis wasn't it? He lost the majority on here over the final 4 or 5 months, but at the home games at least, there was never any chanting against him or anything like that - admittedly I missed the Villa game where it started to look like we were in serious trouble.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 16:24:07 GMT
Wrong ..... but keep digging. The words of someone who still has fuck all to say. You wouldn't understand ...
|
|
|
Post by lordb on May 11, 2017 16:30:01 GMT
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. To be fair mate, it was the same with Pulis wasn't it? He lost the majority on here over the final 4 or 5 months, but at the home games at least, there was never any chanting against him or anything like that - admittedly I missed the Villa game where it started to look like we were in serious trouble. Yes that's true. Can't remember the last manager the crowd properly and irreversibly turned against. Jordan? Little got away with it because the board got it in the neck instead. Mick Mills got horrendous stick on and off for years. Essentially although it has to be accepted this is a negative season and plenty to moan about I think because anyone over 30 has experienced infinitely worse that people going off on one about Hughes just doesn't sit right with many. The critiscm needs to strike the right tone otherwise it weakens the argument.
|
|
|
Post by The Stubborn Optimist on May 11, 2017 16:31:29 GMT
There seems to be some confusion here between random samples and representative samples.
The poll on the Oatcake is a random sample. Oatcake posters were invited to vote on a poll of which 380 randomly decided to vote.
A representative sample would have reflected the proportional profile of Stoke's support base in terms of size, ages, male, female, season ticket holders, non season ticket holders, attendees, non attendees etc. etc. Once that sample had been constructed they would have responded to a carefully worded question.
From a statistical point of view you can't really draw any meaningful conclusions from the Oatcake poll and extrapolate the results to Stoke's fan base in its entirety.
Electoral polls are subject to some quite sophisticated statistical number crunching and really can't be compared to a random poll on The Oatcake.
|
|
|
Post by cheeesfreeex on May 11, 2017 16:37:39 GMT
Yeah but Al does do surveys at the ground too. Despite not talking to folk, and having empty seats around him.
All's not quite right in his world. Bangs it out on here.
Tedious superficial shite. Imo.
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on May 11, 2017 16:39:24 GMT
There seems to be some confusion here between random samples and representative samples. The poll on the Oatcake is a random sample. Oatcake posters were invited to vote on a poll of which 380 randomly decided to vote. A representative sample would have reflected the proportional profile of Stoke's support base in terms of size, ages, male, female, season ticket holders, non season ticket holders, attendees, non attendees etc. etc. Once that sample had been constructed they would have responded to a carefully worded question. From a statistical point of view you can't really draw any meaningful conclusions from the Oatcake poll and extrapolate the results to Stoke's fan base in its entirety. Electoral polls are subject to some quite sophisticated statistical number crunching and really can't be compared to a random poll on The Oatcake.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on May 11, 2017 16:47:04 GMT
There seems to be some confusion here between random samples and representative samples. The poll on the Oatcake is a random sample. Oatcake posters were invited to vote on a poll of which 380 randomly decided to vote. A representative sample would have reflected the proportional profile of Stoke's support base in terms of size, ages, male, female, season ticket holders, non season ticket holders, attendees, non attendees etc. etc. Once that sample had been constructed they would have responded to a carefully worded question. From a statistical point of view you can't really draw any meaningful conclusions from the Oatcake poll and extrapolate the results to Stoke's fan base in its entirety. Electoral polls are subject to some quite sophisticated statistical number crunching and really can't be compared to a random poll on The Oatcake. A poll could only be less representative than Oatcake if you were to stand outside a synagogue and asked who liked pork. A typical electoral poll is based on around 3000 opinions, not as many as many people think. Just as an aside, I once knew someone who was engaged on a poll with a friend and they got bored asking people who kept declining to be bothered, so they went to a cafe and filled in the forms themselves!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 16:48:19 GMT
To be fair mate, it was the same with Pulis wasn't it? He lost the majority on here over the final 4 or 5 months, but at the home games at least, there was never any chanting against him or anything like that - admittedly I missed the Villa game where it started to look like we were in serious trouble. Yes that's true. Can't remember the last manager the crowd properly and irreversibly turned against. Jordan? Little got away with it because the board got it in the neck instead. Mick Mills got horrendous stick on and off for years. Essentially although it has to be accepted this is a negative season and plenty to moan about I think because anyone over 30 has experienced infinitely worse that people going off on one about Hughes just doesn't sit right with many. The critiscm needs to strike the right tone otherwise it weakens the argument. Remember people chanting 4-4-2 at Gudjon - vicious! Great last points concerning striking the right tone.
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on May 11, 2017 16:50:44 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. 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. They've been stunned into silence?
|
|
|
Post by davejohnno1 on May 11, 2017 16:56:02 GMT
We currently stand on 41 points with Arsenal (H) and Southampton (A) to play. Were we to lose both then we would beat our previous Premier League low points total being 42 in the” Pulis P45” season of 2012/13 I know Sparky says we are always striving to achieve things the club has never done before but this would surely be an unwelcome 'achievement' and make things a bit awkward for the Board. Perhaps more importantly in terms of attracting new players I think the ‘3 consecutive top half finishes’ was as compelling a story as it could be for potential new recruits in the absence of European football. Oh well, we’ll see, we could really do with picking some points up before this turgid campaign reaches the mercy of its denouement but it will be fiendishly difficult I fear. Equally, were we to win them both, we'd match the best the previous manager coil muster...an achievement he was lauded for
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on May 11, 2017 17:03:29 GMT
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 me ans 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.
Come off it Millsy, now you're doing exactly what you've just been accusing alster of.
You haven't got a clue if 97% of the Stoke fanbase don't actively want him gone.
Just because they didn't take part in a vote on a football fan website doesn't then mean that they ALL (each and every one of them) don't actively want him gone.
|
|
|
Post by trickydicky73 on May 11, 2017 17:04:10 GMT
We currently stand on 41 points with Arsenal (H) and Southampton (A) to play. Were we to lose both then we would beat our previous Premier League low points total being 42 in the” Pulis P45” season of 2012/13 I know Sparky says we are always striving to achieve things the club has never done before but this would surely be an unwelcome 'achievement' and make things a bit awkward for the Board. Perhaps more importantly in terms of attracting new players I think the ‘3 consecutive top half finishes’ was as compelling a story as it could be for potential new recruits in the absence of European football. Oh well, we’ll see, we could really do with picking some points up before this turgid campaign reaches the mercy of its denouement but it will be fiendishly difficult I fear. Equally, were we to win them both, we'd match the best the previous manager coil muster...an achievement he was lauded for Under totally different circumstances! I can't stand Pulis but that's grasping at straws.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on May 11, 2017 17:12:37 GMT
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. To be fair mate, it was the same with Pulis wasn't it? He lost the majority on here over the final 4 or 5 months, but at the home games at least, there was never any chanting against him or anything like that - admittedly I missed the Villa game where it started to look like we were in serious trouble.
Indeed.
However weren't the 'poll' results at the time, actually pretty similar to the ones on Hughes' tenure now?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 17:23:47 GMT
Katherine Jenkins, also Welsh, sums it up perfectly...
|
|
|
Post by mickmillslovechild on May 11, 2017 17:25:38 GMT
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 me ans 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.
Come off it Millsy, now you're doing exactly what you've just been accusing alster of.
You haven't got a clue if 97% of the Stoke fanbase don't actively want him gone.
Just because they didn't take part in a vote on a football fan website doesn't then mean that they ALL (each and every one of them) don't actively want him gone.
Bad choice or phraseology basically Paul.That's why i said "Actively" (i.e. they had the chance to be passionate one way or the other in the poll and didn't "Act" one way or the other....only way i could think of to phrase it really). As you rightly say, we have no idea what their thoughts are, but if we're using the poll merely as a guideline to presume/infer/guess (as alster is) then it's points more towards general apathy than backing up any idea it's a general feeling that most want him gone. The simple fact alster seems to be missing by using a representative sample and then the way electoral polls work is that, if a constituency has say 100k people and they poll 10k people as a representative sample then fine as their sample is 10k people that have all given their opinion. However, alster seems to think that 17.5k members on here is a representative sample (fine no problem with that) but is ignoring the fact that it is only a representative sample if all of those 17.5k actually vote in that poll. He's saying one minute 17.5k is enough, but then using the outcome of a poll that only 2% of that figure voted in. No polling company would ever say "Stoke have a fanbase of 200k people, we'll use 17.5k as a representative sample then. Oh, we only actually have the opinions of 400 people in total? Fuck it, we'll use that then"
|
|
|
Post by ParaPsych on May 11, 2017 17:27:20 GMT
Apart from some booing we don't really get massive anti-manager or whatever hate filled chants at Stoke and haven't for a long time.
Despite the usual dickheads on here making out we have the worst set of fans in the world I don't think we've really seen anything particularly venomous directed at anyone since the Birmingham 7-0.
Even when Pulis came back and the infamous red or yellow or whatever colour card it was thing was happening, I wouldn't call the chants of you don't know what you're doing a particular concerted or impassioned cry from a majority to get rid of some anti-christ figure. That's not to say a lot of people were not unhappy, I just feel there are too many who would rather be supportive despite their feelings, for that sort of stuff to really take hold.
Towards the end of Pulis I just got the impression that, while the majority were getting fed up of him and wanted a change, most of those were more sad about things than blisteringly angry.
Go in the bogs after the games though and it sounds much closer to what you get on here.
|
|
|
Post by TexasPotter on May 11, 2017 17:34:20 GMT
I have a sneaky feeling it's 50/50 depending on whether Mr. Coates has decided to back him for a re-build, if he does then depending on how the next season progresses with such a re-build, that will be the telling. Either way, real Russian roulette for me looking from the outside in going into next season, new manager or Hughes splashing cash. Just hope we don't get another Imbula signing and we pull off a Southampton and find a few gems.
|
|
|
Post by hoofmagic on May 11, 2017 17:35:32 GMT
FINGERS CROSSED he WALKS.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 17:44:20 GMT
To be fair mate, it was the same with Pulis wasn't it? He lost the majority on here over the final 4 or 5 months, but at the home games at least, there was never any chanting against him or anything like that - admittedly I missed the Villa game where it started to look like we were in serious trouble.
Indeed.
However weren't the 'poll' results at the time, actually pretty similar to the ones on Hughes' tenure now?
I found it a few weeks ago. It's still swashing around on the back pages somewhere. It finished 384 to 186 in favour of Pulis leaving. Currently 236 to 145 in favour of Hughes leaving.
|
|
|
Post by NassauDave on May 11, 2017 17:55:40 GMT
I think another poster may have mentioned it in another thread. It wouldn't surprise me if he left at end of season by mutual consent. I am not sure all is right behind the scenes at the moment? Fingers crossed.
|
|
h3nd0
Youth Player
Posts: 331
|
Post by h3nd0 on May 11, 2017 18:00:58 GMT
for me it just all points to something aint right in the hughes/stoke camp.. whether hughes has just had enough n fancy's a break or just lost his way is yet to be be seen but some of his decision making in squad changes are highly questionable, loaning out bojan and wolly n joselu then signing bony, imbula n not playing them.. tactics this season have been a joke at best.
im not a hughes out man just yet but i think he has just lost his way. stoke is an amazing club to be a manager of n has great potential with coates behind the team. he should be lucky to have such a backing from the top. we have great money to spend but will it all end up like all the great signings we had this season. come play for a few games dropped then loaned out. its all a waste of time n potential n thats what so frustrating being a stoke fan is at the min as we can all see the making of a great squad but the plan is all wrong.
|
|
|
Post by boskampsflaps on May 11, 2017 18:11:09 GMT
He's had one bad season in 4. If it becomes (or looks like becoming) 2 in 5 then get rid. For now, I'd prefer us to stick with what we have and give a previously successful manager the chance to get back to what he'd previously done well. Its been more than one season.
|
|
|
Post by cheeesfreeex on May 11, 2017 18:11:17 GMT
Apart from some booing we don't really get massive anti-manager or whatever hate filled chants at Stoke and haven't for a long time. Despite the usual dickheads on here making out we have the worst set of fans in the world I don't think we've really seen anything particularly venomous directed at anyone since the Birmingham 7-0. Even when Pulis came back and the infamous red or yellow or whatever colour card it was thing was happening, I wouldn't call the chants of you don't know what you're doing a particular concerted or impassioned cry from a majority to get rid of some anti-christ figure. That's not to say a lot of people were not unhappy, I just feel there are too many who would rather be supportive despite their feelings, for that sort of stuff to really take hold. Towards the end of Pulis I just got the impression that, while the majority were getting fed up of him and wanted a change, most of those were more sad about things than blisteringly angry. Go in the bogs after the games though and it sounds much closer to what you get on here.Yeah blokes full of piss and vinegar. Agree totally with yer post.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on May 11, 2017 18:16:39 GMT
We currently stand on 41 points with Arsenal (H) and Southampton (A) to play. Were we to lose both then we would beat our previous Premier League low points total being 42 in the” Pulis P45” season of 2012/13 I know Sparky says we are always striving to achieve things the club has never done before but this would surely be an unwelcome 'achievement' and make things a bit awkward for the Board. Perhaps more importantly in terms of attracting new players I think the ‘3 consecutive top half finishes’ was as compelling a story as it could be for potential new recruits in the absence of European football. Oh well, we’ll see, we could really do with picking some points up before this turgid campaign reaches the mercy of its denouement but it will be fiendishly difficult I fear. Equally, were we to win them both, we'd match the best the previous manager coil muster...an achievement he was lauded for Yes except I'd say we are likely to lose both and have fuck all chance of winning both. And I'm not sure its really fair to compare the achievements of the jim-crack operation we had in those wild and windy days early days of our Prem-hood with the expensively assembled array of galatica we have on parade today.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on May 11, 2017 18:19:15 GMT
Come off it Millsy, now you're doing exactly what you've just been accusing alster of.
You haven't got a clue if 97% of the Stoke fanbase don't actively want him gone.
Just because they didn't take part in a vote on a football fan website doesn't then mean that they ALL (each and every one of them) don't actively want him gone.
Bad choice or phraseology basically Paul.That's why i said "Actively" (i.e. they had the chance to be passionate one way or the other in the poll and didn't "Act" one way or the other....only way i could think of to phrase it really). As you rightly say, we have no idea what their thoughts are, but if we're using the poll merely as a guideline to presume/infer/guess (as alster is) then it's points more towards general apathy than backing up any idea it's a general feeling that most want him gone.
The simple fact alster seems to be missing by using a representative sample and then the way electoral polls work is that, if a constituency has say 100k people and they poll 10k people as a representative sample then fine as their sample is 10k people that have all given their opinion. However, alster seems to think that 17.5k members on here is a representative sample (fine no problem with that) but is ignoring the fact that it is only a representative sample if all of those 17.5k actually vote in that poll. He's saying one minute 17.5k is enough, but then using the outcome of a poll that only 2% of that figure voted in. No polling company would ever say "Stoke have a fanbase of 200k people, we'll use 17.5k as a representative sample then. Oh, we only actually have the opinions of 400 people in total? Fuck it, we'll use that then"
With respect mate (and you do know that ordinarily I have the greatest of respect for your posts) I think you're still doing what you were accusing alster of doing earlier.
The only 'apathy' it is demonstrating, is apathy towards making a mark on the poll of an internet website. It demonstrates nothing at all with regard to their feelings towards the position of the current manager.
FriendCalledFive has just posted the final figures for the Oatcake poll on the tenure of Tony Pulis as, 384 to 186.
Just because a piddly total of 570 out of the entire Stoke City fan base voted at that time, do you think, that that in itself also demonstrated that there was a general apathy across the entire fan base towards the future of Tony Pulis at the time?
I'd say on reflection (and without the aid of any science ), that a ratio of about 2:1 wanting TP gone across the whole supporter base would probably have been just about right, if you'd had canvassed each and every supporter.
I think the Oatcake does provide a pretty representative reflection of the entire fan base.
Maybe you didn't actually say that it didn't but rather you were taking umbrage with alster over his methodology, so please don't think I'm suggesting that you did.
Talking of 'apathy'. More and more I'm seeing people saying that they're not actually bothered if he stays or if he goes. I (obviously) don't know what the percentages are but I would suspect if you took the people who aren't bothered if he continues or if he leaves and then added them to the people who definitely do want him gone, then I'd be surprised if that didn't turn out to be a rather large percentage of the total out there.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on May 11, 2017 18:22:54 GMT
He's had one bad season in 4. If it becomes (or looks like becoming) 2 in 5 then get rid. For now, I'd prefer us to stick with what we have and give a previously successful manager the chance to get back to what he'd previously done well. Its been more than one season. I know plenty of people agree with you mate. Generally managers are judged on how they've performed and the points haul at the end of each season. I've put my thoughts on why I think it's one bad season out of four on my other posts to save me repeating myself.
|
|