Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Evening Standard Tonight...

edited June 2009 in General Charlton
Pages 57 and 58. An annual poll of supporters of the 14 club's in London, 2000 fans in total comprising at least 100 from each club. Carried out by the Football Fans Trust, supporters were asked to score their satisfaction with their respective club's directors, manager, and players.

Charlton's results in poll as follows;

Favourable View on Directors- 14th [out of 14]

Favourable View on Players/Manager - 14th [out of 14]

In other words, our fans are currently the unhappiest of all London clubs with the performance of their directors, manager and players. An amazing 9% of Charlton fans in the poll said they were happy with their players. Who was that?

Fulham were top in the poll-not surprising given the job that Hodgson did there last season. Proof once again that a good manager can make all the difference. Hodgson inherited a shambles from Sanchez, kept them up and rebuilt them. P.P inherited a shambles from Pardew, signed Matthew Spring, and relegated us. He is now going to be our manager this season.

Thoughts?

Comments

  • Who got asked more importantly?

    Because I didnt - wasnt even aware it was taking place. 100 fans is not a very big sample size either is it considering we have sold over 8,000 STs.
  • bring back alan curbishley
  • [cite]Posted By: oohaahmortimer[/cite]bring back alan curbishley
    A london club has to come bottom of the polls - why not us?
  • Would be interesting to find out where they conduct these surveys wouldnt it...
  • Depends on who you ask, surely?
    If the question was asked on this board for example, I'm sure you'd get significant varying opinions.

    Otherwise it's like asking Conservative MP's their opinion of the present Government.


    Having said that, and as discussed on another thread, Charlton need to make an announcement soon, and to portray tthe club in the best light.
  • they probably made it up
  • But its true tho...
  • Amazed they even remembered us, the evening standard are a disgrace and their coverage of London football is piss poor at best, however with all that said I concur with the points raised by a survey that I'm sure most of us were unaware even happened!
  • [cite]Posted By: oohaahmortimer[/cite]bring back alan curbishley

    My dream of dreams.......
  • Does anyone know any of these "100" ?
  • Sponsored links:


  • [cite]Posted By: Miserableold-ish git[/cite]Does anyone know any of these "100" ?

    Ask the Evening Sub-standard who was asked in their survey - or where their questions were asked.
  • [cite]Posted By: pilchard[/cite]Amazed they even remembered us, the evening standard are a disgrace and their coverage of London football is piss poor at best, however with all that said I concur with the points raised by a survey that I'm sure most of us were unaware even happened!
    I thought it was an unwritten rule on here to refer to them as the Evening Substandard
  • [cite]Posted By: WSS[/cite]100 fans is not a very big sample size

    I'm not sure finding more than 100 respondents would change the results!
  • edited June 2009
    The Evening Gooner has been a disgrace for DECADES. The only service it did of note was help get rid of Red Ken. It should be banned from the valley for as long as there is a CAFC/Valley. We dont need their Gonershit piss taking.
  • [cite]Posted By: thai malaysia addick[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: WSS[/cite]100 fans is not a very big sample size
    I'm not sure finding more than 100 respondents would change the results!
    Maybe not but it just annoys me that things like this are coming over as gospel on such crappy marketing research.

    Like all those adverts on TV "98% of people love <<insert product>>"

    Then you look at the bottom of the screen and it says "32 people were asked who had bought this product before"
  • [cite]Posted By: WSS[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: thai malaysia addick[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: WSS[/cite]100 fans is not a very big sample size
    I'm not sure finding more than 100 respondents would change the results!
    Maybe not but it just annoys me that things like this are coming over as gospel on such crappy marketing research.

    Like all those adverts on TV "98% of people love <<insert product>>"

    Then you look at the bottom of the screen and it says "32 people were asked who had bought this product before"

    Bang on!

    The company that I do marketing for ....... I came across their training course brochure, which included the gem,
    "97% of delegates on the course said they were extremely happy with what they had learned".

    Fair enough. Except the course only takes a maximum of 8 delegates at one time.
    I couldn't work out the maths - 97% of 8 people.

    Do me a favour!
  • I heard that 66% of all facts are made up?
  • is that a fact ?
  • You can't tell me that if 100 Charlton fans were questioned that someone somewhere along the line would have posted this on here and we'd have got wind of it....a load of bollox if you ask me.
  • It's not exactly a surprise or anything interesting for that matter sounds like the substandard filling sapce as there is nothing to write about Man Utd or Liverpool (it still beggers belief that these clubs are even covered in a regional paper) so they're making space up. Is it filled by 2 pages of analysis also?

    Football team has rubbish season = fans don't like board & players. Football team has good season = fans like board and players. Football has middle of the road season = 50% of the fans like the directors and players 50% don't.
  • Sponsored links:


  • Whether they asked 100 fans or made it up, or whether they should have asked more fans or not is irrelevant, the fact is you'd be hard pushed to actually disagree with their 'results'.
    Look at the London clubs:
    Arsenal, Chelsea, Spurs, Fulham, West Ham, Palace, QPR, Millwall, Watford, Orient, Brentford, Dagenham and Barnet. Did any of those clubs fail to meet expectations worse than we did? Did any of them get relegated? Do any of them still not know who their manager is even though they've reported back for pre-season training? Are any of them at their lowest level for almost 30 years?

    No so therefore we're by far the worst performing, so whether they made it up or not, they're absolutely spot on.
  • [cite]Posted By: SoundAsa£[/cite]You can't tell me that if 100 Charlton fans were questioned that someone somewhere along the line would have posted this on here and we'd have got wind of it....a load of bollox if you ask me.

    Perhaps they just asked Nick Gray ..... 100 times?

    ;o)
  • [cite]Posted By: Goonerhater[/cite]The Evening Gooner has been a disgrace for DECADES. The only service it did of note was help get rid of Red Ken. It should be banned from the valley for as long as there is a CAFC/Valley. We dont need their Gonershit piss taking.

    No point. They don't come anyway.
  • The Standard's poll
    Is upside down
    The Standard's poll is upside down
    We love our Board and our Manager
    And Hodgson looks like a clown
  • edited June 2009
    [cite]Posted By: Salad[/cite]
    [cite]Posted By: pilchard[/cite]Amazed they even remembered us, the evening standard are a disgrace and their coverage of London football is piss poor at best, however with all that said I concur with the points raised by a survey that I'm sure most of us were unaware even happened!
    I thought it was an unwritten rule on here to refer to them as the Evening Substandard

    Frankly they weren't even worth pressing my caps lock key to put their tawdry name in capitals at the start of each word so no- three more letters was more than they are worth, but fair point and well made ;0)
  • For the statistically minded, the margin of error when you have a sample of 100 fans is as much as 10% either way. The sample should be 300-400, at least, for more robust data.
  • [cite]Posted By: Salad[/cite]they probably made it up

    Cynic

    ; )
  • A freind of mine used to work for TNS and basically said that surveys were "molded" to say whatever it was the people paying for them wanted them to say.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!