Morph

@Aggy I believe you are correct. A portion of the available seats in the elected house are awarded to the locally elected MPs. The remaining portion is allocated based on the percentage of votes the party gets in the second vote. So two votes cast, one for the preferred local candidate, the second vote for the preferred party. Its the way the Scottish government is elected. Note the graphics showing a make up of parliament for the 2024 election simply use the percentage of all the votes that were cast to determine the extra seats in a PR system.

Question on switching to an AMS/MMP electoral system. Would that mean the number of constituencies would have to be reduced to take account of the seats now reserved for populace vote?

With PR you still throw out the government with an election. what hopefully changes with PR is the make up of Parliament is more reflective of the country’s opinion. You only have to listen to the talk shows in the lead up to the election, for many of the callers their vote was going to be wasted because they were picking an MP that wouldn’t win. How much voter apathy was there from people who knew their vote wouldn’t be heard. The stats on the Electoral Reform site do indicate that this election should have given more seats, rightly or wrongly, but they did get a large number of votes. The NZ system is MMP I believe. So you have two votes. One for your preferred constituency candidate and one for your preferred party. A certain number of seats are then selected based on the portion of votes for the party. I am not completely sure how the AMS system brings labour down to 211 seats, but the premise is that the Parliament is more reflective of the country’s view. Maybe you don’t get anything done, but could also lead to sensible compromise to get changes made. Less of this flip flop legislation we have The German PR system is described here… https://www.bmi.bund.de/EN/topics/constitution/electoral-law/voting-system/voting-system-node.html

This thread on the England performances bring us to the proverbial debate around style and/or substance. Do you just want them to win, no matter how ugly? Or would you rather they won with a sense of style, a swagger even? It is frustrating to watch - boring even (you may even say it’s pish) Foden and Bellingham seemingly wanting to always play in the same spaces on the pitch, with no natural interchange involved. Compound that with Kane wanting to drop into those spaces too - if Harry drops, Phil go long The other thing I note is the lack of variation in the pass. The defending team always know the England player is going to receive the ball in front of them. How often do we see a pass beyond the defender forcing them to turn? Why not play Palmer and Gordon and tell them to give the defenders something to worry about? Would love to hear from our more tactically astute posters about what they think is wrong with England.

I made a comment to a friend during the match that it was like watching a game of Over 60s walking football. My friend thought I was being unkind to over 60s footballers

Really good post @Barham Blitz England have been poor for the majority of the two games we’ve seen. Why can’t Southgate use the last game to experiment a little to see if he can’t solve the problems they have. Too many square pegs, round holes. been impressed with the two teams playing tonight, France v Holland

This worked for me too. The option to watch free in non UHD version appears on a link for the match tomorrow in the discovery+ TV app

@Parma Ham's gone mouldy Should we worry that he might last beyond the end of the season? What if he gets us promoted? What then?

@Parma Ham's gone mouldy if you were making those substitutions feeling you had to to save Sargent and Hernandez for other games would you have gone for like for like subs? Say Fassanacht and Van Hoojidonk? Was there even a need to change the approach? It seems odd, nay contrarian, to believe that Barnes can lead the line on his own. A different type of player to Sargent. Yet that’s the second game he’s made such a change.

How about the rule from rugby where dissent against an awarded infringement gets the ball moved forward five yards. Becomes interesting at the edge of the box of course

Removed the org chart I found as may not have been up to date….. Presumably the shadow board that Parma refers to is the supervisory board as it is described on several pages referring to the FC Bayern corporate structure

@Don J Demorr could you explain what power and responsibility a football person on the board might have over the football strategy being implemented by the club? Say City appointed a Director of Football (say @Parma Ham's gone mouldy or @Unthink road or @Barham Blitz) what would be their remit?

Actually @Fen Canary I think there is evidence to suggest that you need to adapt your style of play to survive on promotion. You can play your way out of the Championship, City did it twice and Burnley did it last season - Southampton may do it this season. However, several people have alluded or pointed out the fact that you can’t do that in the EPL with your Championship squad, so you need a more pragmatic way of playing. I think the suggestion is that the gegenpress quick transition style that Wagner wants to play could work at EPL level. I guess the question I’m left with is the club capable of identifying the need to switch styles on promotion and get the right additions to make it really work. @Parma Ham's gone mouldy could you see such an approach working?

So @Monty13 do you see the season as a right off whilst Knapper and Attanasio get their ducks in a row? Where then does it leave the club in terms of rebuilding with several over 30s on longish contracts?

Gosh @Parma Ham's gone mouldy I would have said that post was almost prescient. I was going to ask you, if Norwich could play like any team through history who would it be and why? Give us your top 3