Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Juggy

Next manager odds - strange occurance

Recommended Posts

"The accounts are published so are available just not summarised. Very

little guess work and where there is we know there is a very strong

correlation between relative wages so very little guess work just those

denying a reality which inconveniently does not fit their prejudices"
And you have read the accounts of all 20 clubs and compiled this data have you?You wouldn''t mind sharing it with us then would you?A few hours ago you said it was McNally who had claimed we were 18th in the league on playing budget, now you are claiming to have read and analysed the annual returns of every club in the league and worked it out for yourself. Make your mind up!Great to hear that you have spent your time compiling this information for our benefit though, probably time for you to copy and paste it so that we don''t need to wait for The Guardian to publish it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No I think that are wages will have gone up relative to turnover and relative to other clubs this year as we no longer have major debt repayments. All I''ve said is we performed very well compared to wages last year and better than wages this year unless we get relegated. CH critics are just in psychological blame and denial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you are basing this solely on a 100% complete guess without any basis whatsoever, yet alone a sound one? Without being able to offer a single number of any sort?Well thanks for clearing that up. At least we know not to take you seriously. Not that I was anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="BigFish"]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="BigFish"]Posters are confusing statistics with a predictive diagnostic science. Statistically, over a period of time there is a clear direct correlation between expenditure by clubs on the football side (wages, agents and transfer fees). That doesn''t mean on any given day you can predict the result but over a period of time you can. Therefore the difference between our performance this year and last year is not statistically significant. That is not a get out of jail free card for Hughton though, just science. If we stay up, he will have broadly achieved within expectations. If we down with Purple''s analysis of less debt and better players he will have under performed. Until we are in a position to pay for a top 10 team that will remain the case.[/quote]BigFish, I well understand that, and certainly over a period of years there is a strong - albeit not an absolute - link between wages and performance.The problem with your wage-link explanation as far as the directors of NCFC are concerned is that it really only makes sense if last season, finishing on 44 points, was a freak. In other words we did freakishly well. And this season is the norm.But then the season before, under Lambert with 47 points, would have to be even more of a freakish success!So we have a situation in which, out of the three PL seasons, we did best in the season in which we should have done worst and we are doing worst in the season in which we should be doing best...If I was a director of NCFC I would bear the wage link in mind, but I would also very much wonder why we are on course to drop from 47 points in 2011-12 to around 38 points this season. Why are we on course for the worst season out of the three when when I and my fellow directors have done our best to ensure at least parity with previous seasons.[/quote]

Ricardo put it best when he said (and I paraphrase) we are likely, at some point in the future to get relegated again as we have done in the past due to the nature of the club. Of course it is right for the directors to examine all criteria in an effort to eke out marginal advantage across a number of factors (staff deployed included) to avoid or postpone this. To describe the last two league finishes as "freak" results is to misunderstand or misrepresent statistics. WBA and Fulham are similar clubs with longer Prem track records and there current position is an illustration of this.

[/quote]BigFish, my view is the same as ricardo''s, that any season for us in the PL is a struggle against relegation and that eventually it will be a losing one.  I confess to not being a statistician[:(] but I think I did understand the point you are making. Perhaps freakish was the wrong word. What I meant was a departure from the statistically likely norm. Ie, what over a course of several seasons will happen more often than not.In other words the norm will be a close escape from relegation, or relegation, and any season (such as the last two) in which we avoid relegation with several points to spare will be the exceptions to that statistical norm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''ve already put my analysis on here previously. I suspect Guardian gets the summary from the Deloitte report. Not very difficult to get the points table for last season and not very difficult to Google published accounts and dig out the key figures. Feel free to do it yourself if you doubt me- it does not take very long to find and process the figures. The outcome is hardly shocking and highly logical if you are not in denial

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="T"]I''ve already put my analysis on here previously. I suspect Guardian gets the summary from the Deloitte report. Not very difficult to get the points table for last season and not very difficult to Google published accounts and dig out the key figures. Feel free to do it yourself if you doubt me- it does not take very long to find and process the figures. The outcome is hardly shocking and highly logical if you are not in denial[/quote]Thats not how the burden of proof works, if you make a claim the onus is on you to provide the evidence. Given that the 12/13 figures are not out, presumably you''ve used the 11/12 ones, what did you do for the promoted teams with championship wage bills?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="BigFish"]

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="BigFish"]Posters are confusing statistics with a predictive diagnostic science. Statistically, over a period of time there is a clear direct correlation between expenditure by clubs on the football side (wages, agents and transfer fees). That doesn''t mean on any given day you can predict the result but over a period of time you can. Therefore the difference between our performance this year and last year is not statistically significant. That is not a get out of jail free card for Hughton though, just science. If we stay up, he will have broadly achieved within expectations. If we down with Purple''s analysis of less debt and better players he will have under performed. Until we are in a position to pay for a top 10 team that will remain the case.[/quote]

BigFish, I well understand that, and certainly over a period of years there is a strong - albeit not an absolute - link between wages and performance.

The problem with your wage-link explanation as far as the directors of NCFC are concerned is that it really only makes sense if last season, finishing on 44 points, was a freak. In other words we did freakishly well. And this season is the norm.

But then the season before, under Lambert with 47 points, would have to be even more of a freakish success!

So we have a situation in which, out of the three PL seasons, we did best in the season in which we should have done worst and we are doing worst in the season in which we should be doing best...

If I was a director of NCFC I would bear the wage link in mind, but I would also very much wonder why we are on course to drop from 47 points in 2011-12 to around 38 points this season. Why are we on course for the worst season out of the three when when I and my fellow directors have done our best to ensure at least parity with previous seasons.
[/quote]

Ricardo put it best when he said (and I paraphrase) we are likely, at some point in the future to get relegated again as we have done in the past due to the nature of the club. Of course it is right for the directors to examine all criteria in an effort to eke out marginal advantage across a number of factors (staff deployed included) to avoid or postpone this. To describe the last two league finishes as "freak" results is to misunderstand or misrepresent statistics. WBA and Fulham are similar clubs with longer Prem track records and there current position is an illustration of this.

[/quote]

BigFish, my view is the same as ricardo''s, that any season for us in the PL is a struggle against relegation and that eventually it will be a losing one.  I confess to not being a statistician[:(] but I think I did understand the point you are making. Perhaps freakish was the wrong word. What I meant was a departure from the statistically likely norm. Ie, what over a course of several seasons will happen more often than not.

In other words the norm will be a close escape from relegation, or relegation, and any season (such as the last two) in which we avoid relegation with several points to spare will be the exceptions to that statistical norm.

[/quote]

No Probs Purps [:)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''ve published my proof and I''m travelling - you can checks my posts if you don''t believe me. I will check against the guardian report but I generally used the source documents, the actual accounts or where not public reports on accounts which generally indicate wages including promoted clubs. This information is already available. It is only the guardian summary which has not been published. We know the NCFC wages. I''m a shareholder and have the accounts and took 12/13 to annualise. We know NCFC fiished 11th last season and we know that we had 20m debt repayments last season and we know NCFC is not subsidised by wealthy owners so it is hardly a shocking revelation that we had a very high points to wages ratio last season. As I say if you don''t believe me do the analysis yourself but it seems the desire to discredit CH is very desperate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Not very difficult to get the points table for last season and not very

difficult to Google published accounts and dig out the key figures. Feel

free to do it yourself if you doubt me- it does not take very long to

find and process the figures"

You want me to go and pay money to download accounts from companies house, and then spend hours trawling through data to prove that information that you claim to have found and analysed yourself but refuse to share to be incorrect? Errrrmmm..... no.It would be much easier for you to copy and paste your analysis. At least it would if you had any data to share, which you don''t. So yes in answer to an earlier question I am calling you a liar. Now prove me wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="nutty nigel"]

Seems to me that you''re arguing about whether points or places are more important. First season we finished 12th with 47 poionts. Last season we finished 11th but with 44 points. One position better but 3 points less. Which was better? There''s little in it is there?   

 

 

 

[/quote]Nutty, of course points and places are inextricably linked, but with the wild card that the position depends on how other teams are doing. In isolation I would agree that there is not much to choose between our 12th on 47 and 11th on 44. You get examples of this with other clubs. In 2010-11 Fulham under Hughes finished in 8th on 49 points and the next season under Jol in 9th on 52!And the Fulham case is instructive. Having achieved what I think was a record PL points total for the club that year, Jol did markedly worse in the 2012-13 season.. They only dropped three places to 12th, but the points tally slumped to 43. I don''t think there is any doubt that a major factor in Fulham sacking Jol this season was the fear that the regression from 52 points to 43 was carrying on on and would lead to relegation if nothing was done.Back to us and looking at our three seasons in the PL then that supposedly insignificant (albeit financially productive) 3-point drop needs to be seen in the context of what has happened since. If we stay up but finish, as the statistics suggest, on 38 points we will have dropped under Hughton from 47 to 44 to 38 (and almost certainly to a lower place than 11th or indeed 12th). The three-point drop starts to look more significant than the fact that we actually moved up a place last season. We will have gone from 1.236 points per game to 1.157 ppg to 1.0 ppg.In any company - not just with football - that measurable falling-off in performance would be looked at by the directors in deciding whether to keep or sack the executive responsible. To be clear I am not arguing that Hughton should be sacked under those circumstances. Only that the directors would be remiss if they did not weigh that regression in the balance with all the other arguments for and against.[/quote]

 

Purple, I didn''t really mention this season because it''s not over yet. I talked about two seasons with complete data. This season we could finish on anything from 32 to 50 points. And any position from11th downwards. Realistically I think we will end up at the lower end of that scale and the stats would have to be contrived to show anything but regression. Of course the board will then look at that and the managers performance. It may well be that they decide Hoot''s record is not good enough and make the change. (In fact if that''s the case they''ve probably already made that decision because I believe it would be detrimental if replacing him drags out into the transfer window.).

 

However I''m confident that the board can recognise contrived stats and piffle. Tumbleweeds stat about substitutes not having scored is one such thing. It''s repeated parrot fashion because it sounds shocking but what is it when put into context? How does it compare to other clubs? Of course firstly it''s wrong because Elmander scored a couple of weeks ago. And secondly that Elmander goal meant Hughton''s subs have now scored the same amount of goals as Lambert''s at Villa. The same Lambert who is thought of as a genius when using subs. Then we had the stat about not winning a game after falling behind. This was repeated parrot fashion as shocking but what did it mean? When put into context how did it compare? Well we''ve come from behind to win one game now which is the same as 5 other clubs while 4 clubs have still yet to win a game after falling behind.

 

All these things will be taken into account by the board when they consider our performance. They will measure us against others with the relevant statistics and information. And they won''t look at perceived failings in isolation to other clubs in the same league.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''ve posted my analysis previously, Nothing sinister just can''t repost as travelling and can''t copy analysis from smart phone. You don''t need to go to companies house as most of the accounts or a report on those accounts has been posted on the Internet. I will check my calculations and post them when the guardian/telegraph report is out but generally I have used the source documents as there are a few errors in the newspaper summary previously. I doubt if the conclusions will change though as most of the figures were already public and it really is a confirmation of the obvious. The only thing that surprised me when I did it for the last 3 seasons is the correlation between wages and points is stronger than expected. It seems that people really are desperate not to give CH credit for an obvious reality. It is easy to check my figures so why should I make them up. I use the league table and published financial info. People are just upset because there is a dissonance between reality and their subjective perceptions. That''s human nature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you can''t post the data why not find the post where you have apparently posted it all previously? Seems like a smart phone would be more than capable of doing that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dandy - it was a while back when I did the data drawl and posted the results and quite frankly I''ve got better things to do than search back on a BB. There were some estimates in there as where the accounts were not available yet I extrapolated from prior year accounts as I said at time but was comfortable with assumptions as I have the data for a few years and the correlation between relative wages is 95pc. I did not know the outcome when I did the analysis, sorted the data and CH came out second behind Swansea but hardly surprising given our league position and the 20m debt repayment last season. I will update and post when the summaries are published but don''t expect any surprises. Every season if you sort the club''s by wage bill it looks very like the final league table.Relative wages don''t change much as the revenues and wages are based on long term contracts so you would expect figures to be similar each year.ManC wages jumped above Chelsea after the cash injection but otherwise no significant year on year differences. No doubt our wages will increase this year due to debt repayment so NCFC estimate hard for this season is not reliable unless club has given some indications at agm and also wages for all other clubs will have jumped in equal proportion due to new TV contract so best estimate of relative position is McNallys comment who benefits from m inside knowledge unless people are also suggesting that McNally is also lying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well after today I hope you are happy T

CH has performed and put us about where, according to you, is expected.

Sadly I think now he will underachieve the "Norm" and taking statistics against believing your eyes will relegate us.

There is no pleasure in that statement, I''m just gutted, despondent and frankly alarmed.

 

OTBC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="The Butler"]

Well after today I hope you are happy T

CH has performed and put us about where, according to you, is expected.

Sadly I think now he will underachieve the "Norm" and taking statistics against believing your eyes will relegate us.

There is no pleasure in that statement, I''m just gutted, despondent and frankly alarmed.

 

OTBC

[/quote]TB, you don''t have to believe one or the other! In the wake of

yesterday''s game the key indicators of performance are as follows, with last season''s

in the first set of brackets and those for the Lambert Season in the

second set of brackets:Points per game: 0.96 (1.157) (1.236).Goals scored per game: 0.787 (1.0789) (1.36).Goals conceded per game: 1.575 (1.526) (1.73).If carried on exactly we will finish on 37 points (44) (47) with a goal difference of -30 (-17) (-14).In

other words with all these indicators bar one there has been a

continuing regression from the Lambert Season to the First Hughton

Season to the Second Hughton Season. Only with Goals Conceded has there

been an improvement, from Lambert to Hughton One. This season there has

been a regression but we would need to concede 14 goals in the last five

matches for the ratio to get as bad as in the Lambert Season.As

far as the most important indicator, points/points per game, is

concerned we are on course to finish 10 points down the Lambert Season. A

five-point drop for each Hughton Season. I have seen some bizarre ideas

on this message-board (some of them from me) but the notion that the

NCFC directors would take no notice of such a slide in deciding whether

to keep Hughton on for next season is up there with the weirdest.Statistics

aside, moving on to the evidence of one''s own eyes, I only get to see

half a dozen games a season, so change can seem starker to me. If I

hadn''t known, I simply would not have believed that the sophisticated

performance at home to a very good Arsenal side last season and

yesterday''s clueless shambles against a poor West Brom team involved the

same manager on our side in charge (for the latter) of a significantly

improved squad.This post is quite long enough without pondering

the reasons for such a regression. It is enough that the statistics and

what fans see are in accord. We regressed in Hughton''s first season and

barring some very odd results we will end up regressing in this. Even if

we stay up, which is possible, it would be an unwarranted gamble to

hope this slide would not carry on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course I''m not happy we lost. We substantially outperformed the last 2 seasons and relegation is the most likely outcome each season so relegation would be a par performance and not unexpected regardless of the manager. Comparisons with previous seasons are irrelevant as it ignores that football is a competitive sport so it is comparison with other clubs that matters. We are merely reverting to the mean which is the most likely outcome each season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="T"]Of course I''m not happy we lost. We substantially outperformed the last 2 seasons and relegation is the most likely outcome each season so relegation would be a par performance and not unexpected regardless of the manager. Comparisons with previous seasons are irrelevant as it ignores that football is a competitive sport so it is comparison with other clubs that matters. We are merely reverting to the mean which is the most likely outcome each season.[/quote]

 

There is that ugly term springing up again which, quite frankly, I have a distinct dislike for. Whether others like my analogy or not it''s like being outside under an umbrella and pretending it''s not raining.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="T"]Of course I''m happy we lost. We substantially outperformed the last 2 seasons and relegation is the most likely outcome each season so relegation would be a par performance.[/quote]No, not given we share the league with sides like Hull, Crystal Palace, Fulham, Swansea, Cardiff, Stoke and West Brom.  There are plenty of small sides in the division, with at least three of those never having paid £8.5 million for a player.This squad has not overperformed and that is the important measure when judging the manager

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"]TB, you don''t have to believe one or the other! In the wake of

yesterday''s game the key indicators of performance are as follows, with last season''s

in the first set of brackets and those for the Lambert Season in the

second set of brackets:Points per game: 0.96 (1.157) (1.236).Goals scored per game: 0.787 (1.0789) (1.36).Goals conceded per game: 1.575 (1.526) (1.73).If carried on exactly we will finish on 37 points (44) (47) with a goal difference of -30 (-17) (-14).In

other words with all these indicators bar one there has been a

continuing regression from the Lambert Season to the First Hughton

Season to the Second Hughton Season. Only with Goals Conceded has there

been an improvement, from Lambert to Hughton One. This season there has

been a regression but we would need to concede 14 goals in the last five

matches for the ratio to get as bad as in the Lambert Season.As

far as the most important indicator, points/points per game, is

concerned we are on course to finish 10 points down the Lambert Season. A

five-point drop for each Hughton Season. I have seen some bizarre ideas

on this message-board (some of them from me) but the notion that the

NCFC directors would take no notice of such a slide in deciding whether

to keep Hughton on for next season is up there with the weirdest.Statistics

aside, moving on to the evidence of one''s own eyes, I only get to see

half a dozen games a season, so change can seem starker to me. If I

hadn''t known, I simply would not have believed that the sophisticated

performance at home to a very good Arsenal side last season and

yesterday''s clueless shambles against a poor West Brom team involved the

same manager on our side in charge (for the latter) of a significantly

improved squad.This post is quite long enough without pondering

the reasons for such a regression. It is enough that the statistics and

what fans see are in accord. We regressed in Hughton''s first season and

barring some very odd results we will end up regressing in this. Even if

we stay up, which is possible, it would be an unwarranted gamble to

hope this slide would not carry on.
[/quote]Whether or not sacking Hughton now is a good idea, in the real world that sharp regression, carefully itemised above earlier today, before the announcement, would have done for him soon enough.There is some validity in the argument that this season might in part represent an understandable slipping back to some kind of mean, but the figures over nearly two seasons indicate a deeper and longer-term problem with Hughton as a manager.Under what were almost exclusively favourable circumstances this season for consolidation, a regression to a mean - if there was to be one at all -  should have been much less severe than it has been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you think that then you don''t understand what I''ve been saying. There is some evidence for the new manager bounce so I would have probably have made the same decision given the money at stake. Long term all the evidence is that we will get relegated at some point regardless of the manager. PL and CH did an excellent job to keep us up the last 2 seasons. It is miserable, ignorant and ungrateful to think otherwise. I certainly take no pleasure in the situation but it was inevitable at some point. If anyone thinks that someone else will come in and do better long term then the evidence is that this will not happen. The culture of ignorance and abuse from some on here is disappointing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="T"]If you think that then you don''t understand what I''ve been saying. There is some evidence for the new manager bounce so I would have probably have made the same decision given the money at stake. Long term all the evidence is that we will get relegated at some point regardless of the manager. PL and CH did an excellent job to keep us up the last 2 seasons. It is miserable, ignorant and ungrateful to think otherwise. I certainly take no pleasure in the situation but it was inevitable at some point. If anyone thinks that someone else will come in and do better long term then the evidence is that this will not happen. The culture of ignorance and abuse from some on here is disappointing.[/quote]That is true. And all sensible fans know and accept that. But there are also occasions when clubs such as ourselves, always fighting an uphill battle because of a lack of finance, get relegated needlessly precisely because of the manager.All the undeniable hard evidence of statistics and the evidence of what fans were seeing on the pitch pointed to that being the case here with us. For no good reason that would explain it away, Hughton''s performance as manager was worse this season than last and was threatening an unnecessary fall into the Championship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just out of interest purple, what are the figures if you take away the variables in terms of teams played?

Or to put another way if you only count point from teams we have played in all three seasons (this is not a rhetorical being a nob question, I have no idea of the answer and am too lazy to do it myself)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Zachariah Lovespoon"]Just out of interest purple, what are the figures if you take away the variables in terms of teams played?

Or to put another way if you only count point from teams we have played in all three seasons (this is not a rhetorical being a nob question, I have no idea of the answer and am too lazy to do it myself)[/quote]I don''t know. I haven''t calculated that. For two reasons. Firstly - and this is subjective but I suspect true - I don''t think there has been a great change in quality of teams between these seasons. For example, I wouldn''t say Cardiff, Hull and Palace coming up were on paper any stronger than Wigan, QPR and Reading going down. Secondly, all teams play everyone anyway. If the division is tougher one season it is tougher for our rivals in the fight against relegation as well as for us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Zachariah Lovespoon"]Just out of interest purple, what are the figures if you take away the variables in terms of teams played?

Or to put another way if you only count point from teams we have played in all three seasons (this is not a rhetorical being a nob question, I have no idea of the answer and am too lazy to do it myself)[/quote]I don''t know. I haven''t calculated that. For two reasons. Firstly - and this is subjective but I suspect true - I don''t think there has been a great change in quality of teams between these seasons. For example, I wouldn''t say Cardiff, Hull and Palace coming up were on paper any stronger than Wigan, QPR and Reading going down. Secondly, all teams play everyone anyway. If the division is tougher one season it is tougher for our rivals in the fight against relegation as well as for us.[/quote]Zachariah, since you are plainly a discerning fan who loves my statistics[8-|] I will throw another one into the mix.  Last season we four times came from behind in an away game to get a result. Four 1-1 draws, with us equalising. This season? Not so much. We have not once come from behind away from home to get a result. If we have gone behind we have lost.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="PurpleCanary"][quote user="Zachariah Lovespoon"]Just out of interest purple, what are the figures if you take away the variables in terms of teams played? Or to put another way if you only count point from teams we have played in all three seasons (this is not a rhetorical being a nob question, I have no idea of the answer and am too lazy to do it myself)[/quote]

I don''t know. I haven''t calculated that. For two reasons. Firstly - and this is subjective but I suspect true - I don''t think there has been a great change in quality of teams between these seasons. For example, I wouldn''t say Cardiff, Hull and Palace coming up were on paper any stronger than Wigan, QPR and Reading going down. Secondly, all teams play everyone anyway. If the division is tougher one season it is tougher for our rivals in the fight against relegation as well as for us.

[/quote]

Zachariah, since you are plainly a discerning fan who loves my statistics[8-|] I will throw another one into the mix.  Last season we four times came from behind in an away game to get a result. Four 1-1 draws, with us equalising. This season? Not so much. We have not once come from behind away from home to get a result. If we have gone behind we have lost.

[/quote]

 

That shows to me an inability to make a change when needed. I can''t think of any circumstances, save possbily at home to Hull, where a change made the difference. It simply could not go on. Mel set his team up, CH had absolutely no productive answer.

 

And away from home you imagine the Driver starting the bus when the home team scored. Dire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes T no doubt AT SOME TIME we will be relegated, we expect that, with money being the master in this league.

What I hope is that if we do go down we go down fighting and with a bang not a whimper.

The way our squad had slowly lost faith and with them the fans, can only be attributed to the ex management team.

I desperately wanted CH to succeed, for all our sakes but for sometime it has been obvious to the fans that his standards/methods were not good enough.

It had very little to do with money more in method. Therefore to say that it was inevitable was wrong and would have/will be needless

I am sure you will join me in hoping that the board have, at last, got it right and Neil will let us "fight anotherday"

Let the dice roll and that Lady Luck smiles before her fat sister sings[:D]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...