Jump to content

Morph

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    513

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Morph

  1. Posted · Edited by Morph

    52 minutes ago, Aggy said:

    Yes my understanding is that the local one is FPTP and second is PR? 
     

     

    @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.

    • Like 1

  3. Posted · Edited by Morph

    13 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

    How can we throw out the current government (or the previous one) outside of elections? What changes in this regard with PR? 

    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

    • Like 1

  4. Posted · Edited by Morph

    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.

  8. Posted

    @Parma Ham's gone mouldy 

    Quote

    He has played such a ‘siege mentality card’ here that it smacks of a quite short term ploy. I suppose he has only to the end of the season whatever, so he is using things to create tighter and tighter harmony via ‘us against the world’ internal strategies with the players?

    Should we worry that he might last beyond the end of the season?

    What if he gets us promoted? What then?

  9. Posted

    @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.

  13. Posted

    5 hours ago, Fen Canary said:

    I could be wrong here, but are you suggesting Webber should have doggedly stuck to the same method of playing and recruitment, even though it had failed twice spectacularly at a higher level?

    I do find the contradiction baffling at times. The club is criticised for a lack of ambition, yet a number of the same people also then criticise the club for moving away from a system which to me had clearly hit a ceiling.

    They appear to say the club should have been happy to play a system designed to yo-yo between the leagues (although to me without Buendia I think it’s unlikely we’d have pulled it off a third time anyway), whilst also being critical of the club not wanting to stabilise themselves in the top flight 

    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?

  14. Posted

    12 minutes ago, Monty13 said:

    Getting to the point of starting to undo those years I think? Which is, I hope, about to start given the dominoes that are being set up in terms of Attanasio and Knapper. 

    I’m relatively patient personally because you can start to see it. Might be a bit more annoyed if we get to the end of January without any obvious signs of what’s to come. However I don’t see the point in getting overly frustrated with Wagner continuing to Wagner right now.

    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?

  16. Posted

    Not wishing to be negative on this excellent thread given the preponderance of those in the forum, but we have a number of knowledgeable posters on here identifying issues with the setup of the playing side of the organisation yet such issues, and potential remedies seem to not be apparent to the people in post.

    Where are the checks and balances against such an oversight?

    Do we have a dogged adherence to one way of playing that ignores its shortcomings in light of the players we have available?

  17. Posted

    @Parma Ham's gone mouldy excellent post.

    In this SD HC operation is the style of play a collaborative decision or an edict passed down by the SD that all HCs should follow if they work for the club?

    Furthermore, who is responsible for addressing those questions you raise, and those points others have pointed out about players positions and roles? Knapper or Wagner?

    Who determines how the young talent is developed and gets game time? Warner, Rowe et al

    From what you’ve seen is Wagner addressing any of those questions himself. His whole team selection, in game changes et al just seem random, like he’s throwing a D20 for any decision and choice he makes. For many supporters no rhyme or reason in what he’s doing.

    • Thanks 1

  18. Posted

    4 hours ago, BigFish said:

    Yes @ricardo, that is the truth that underpins this thread. 🙂

    @BigFish your comment sadly suggests that the selection of a suitable manager is somewhat of a lottery too, with football history littered with stories of managers successful at one club who fail time and again to reproduce said success.

    sounds like Wagners replacement, if it happens, is someone with a good background that has lived in the shadow of someone known for success.

  19. Posted

    @BigFish you highlight a very important point about football supporters in that they defy any logic or reason around brand loyalty. The only phrase I can think of to sum it up is “If you cut us do we not bleed yellow and green”

    Does it ever mean that they desert the terraces when things are bad? Those years tumbling into League One did the fan numbers decrease?

    • Like 1

  20. Posted

    @Don J Demorr this has been one of the best threads on the forum and I thank you for your insights.

    i do have question / comments. Forgive my naivety and lack of business insight.

    Question I have is whether the club can be considered a successful business without success on the pitch? Is the football success a pre-requisite for business success?

    Could City be a successful business outside the top flight?

    The primary source of revenue from top flight football is TV revenues, but that income only really comes from having success on the pitch, to get to the EPL and stay there.

    What are the other sources of income?

    • Gate receipts
    • Player sales
    • Other club revenues 

    Are there other income streams that haven’t been identified and exploited?

    Expanding the ground to take in more revenue does that require the club to be in the EPL? I have no idea as to whether or how big a season ticket waiting list is. If the club is a middling Championship team could it survive on turnover of supporters?

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  22. Posted

    A rhetorical question for our posters with coaching experience that comes from comments made in Connor Southwells review of yesterday: is the average age of your side important? Apparently an average age of 29.8 in the starting lineup yesterday.

    whats the peak age for a player? 26?

    If you are an U21 player watching that yesterday do you feel there’s a path for you to first team football in the club?

    How does this current makeup fit with any long term strategy? If, that’s a massive if, that team got promoted how many of those aging players would you want to consider for the next season?

  23. Posted · Edited by Morph

    @Parma Ham's gone mouldy your eloquence far exceeds my own, but there are times when  I read one of your posts and feel like I’m trying to read the tea leaves at the bottom of my teacup. Football really has got itself into a ****e state if money is all there is.

    Can City be self sustaining or is that a myth promoted early on by Webber to try and prove he was some kind of messiah or was he just simply a very naughty boy when he later screwed the proverbial pooch with his profligate behaviour.

    Should we dream to be self sustaining or is there really no other way than to have a rich sugar daddy to survive in todays football world.

    I would love to think/believe that moneyball will work for us.

  24. Posted

    Quote

    Have a clear defined playing style that the fanbase enjoys even if it's not completely suitable for what would work for a club trying to survive in the PL. That's pretty much priority number one for a club who's fans called Dean Smith's football 'hoofball' so the club doesn't have much of a choice there. Bring through young players but try to keep them here for a few years and build around them, if you have to sell one or two occasionally that's fine but don't build the model around selling. Supplement with loans from top clubs but only if the player is an improvement not just to demonstrate that we're a good club to develop players at and try to make use of stat based scouting and clever recruitment to get value for money. So basically what we were doing in Webber's first few years but aided by a bit of investment to keep players and a more modern scouting approach that other smaller clubs have had success with. It might not lead to us finishing 17th every year, it might not get us promoted either but I think that's an approach that if communicated well would get the fans onside and would allow us to build something.

    Can I ask how would the posters on here, and the fans in general feel if the club adopted the approach put forward in the excellent @Christoph Stiepermann post?

    would you be happy to the club periodically make it to the top table but invariably came down? Or would you rather City strived for more?

    I see so many posts from certain posters on here bemoaning the lack of money injected by D&M, but I think we can all agree thatches don’t have it and it doesn’t guarantee success. Gone are the days of City sitting in 4th Place in the Premier League.

    I think what many would hope is that the methodology was stuck to through good and bad in the vain hope that it’s a repeated cycle with the occasional successful lengthy stay in the promised land.

×
×
  • Create New...